The Sharia Pool

Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff reported on Monday about a little culturally enriched incident at her local public swimming pool. Since then she and some of her fellow swimmers spoke to the municipal authorities, but to no avail.

Here’s her follow-up report, taken from the comments on the earlier post:


Both my friend and my neighbor called the municipality in charge of the pool. The lady on the other end of the phone line could/would not tell my friend how many complaints she has received, but between the lines she let it be known that her day’s fun was limited. However, the gist is: tough luck, it’s allowed. Non-Muslims are not allowed to swim in clothes (shorts and t-shirt), but the Islamic clothes (i.e. hijab, leggings, tunica shirt) are permissible.

So this is how far we’ve come. The non-Muslim population must adhere to hygienic rules while the Islamic population need not. This is the new equality before the law.

How inclusive our new society has become!

I don’t need to tell our regular readers that this is an example of sharia law in action…

The municipal authorities of Vienna are applying one set of rules to Muslims, and another set to everyone else. In other words: there is no equality under the law. The laws that apply to you depend on your religion.

This is the basis of the Sharia State, in which Muslims are privileged, and non-Muslims have lesser rights under the law. In this case, non-Muslims have less freedom about what they may or may not wear when they swim in municipal pools.

The original rationale behind this particular set of rules concerns hygiene: public health is compromised when people swim in their street clothes. Yet believing in Allah does not change the hygiene of the situation, regardless of what the believers may think. How do the health officers of the Vienna city government intend to deal with any problems of illness and contagion brought on by these exceptions to the rules? Do they have a way to override the biological reality of the spread of bacteria via the water in swimming pools?

None of that matters. Multicultural concerns trump everything else, including biology. Perhaps the Viennese powers-that-be have converted to Islam, and now believe that Muslims may ignore the rules of hygiene without any biological consequence — insh’allah.

For a complete listing of previous enrichment news, see The Cultural Enrichment Archives.

36 thoughts on “The Sharia Pool

    • Takuan: I always look for your writings and ideas, as well as Fjormann’s and Wilders and a few others at this site for insight, clarification of my ideas. A pitiful “enriched” Continent only less than 20 people have normal brains: namely not subservient to Islam.

    • The emphasis on revenge is misguided.

      Hitler has NO capacity for revenge.

      God has NO need for revenge.

      An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind.

  1. When I see a hijab swimmer, I would get my T-shirt out of the locker and jump into the pool, too. When the clerk then calls me out of the pool, I would say that I’m a muslim too. When more and more people do it the same way, let’s see what the authorities do…

  2. “”So this is how far we’ve come. The non-Muslim population must adhere to hygienic rules while the Islamic population need not. This is the new equality before the law.””

    So this is how far we’ve come. The non-Muslim* population must adhere to animal welfare rules while the Islamic population need not. This is the new equality before the law.

    * Note how we have been placed in a position where we now define ourselves in terms of whether one is or is not a Muslims.

    • This is a HUGELY important point – and one that hinges on the fact that people REFUSE to define themselves as white Western Christians – and thus white Western Christians have NO personal identity and NO tribe.

      Christians in the neutered West have lost the ability to apply the tenets of Christianity to the NEW non-Christian Rule of Law.

      • My tribe includes all decent people, Egghead. I don’t even exclude Christians.

        I think Jesus would have liked my tribe more than yours.

        • Well, Mark, you might be on to something here. Jesus was known for including people in his tribe – e.g., Samaritans and tax collectors – that others found offensive.

          Must admit I find the tax collector difficult myself, especially in their current American guise.

        • Having a tribe is like having citizenship. It CANNOT work if some people have only one citizenship while other people have two or three citizenships (e.g. German Muslims of Turkish origin, British Muslims of Pakistani origin, etc.). We in the West are about to learn that hard lesson firsthand.

          While YOU may count ‘everyone decent’ in YOUR tribe, the fact is that ‘everyone decent’ does NOT count you in their tribes – which you will find out when the going gets tough in the near future – and people stratify into tribes even more starkly than now.

          You will be classified by others by your race and religion, and your treatment will reflect the fact that YOU have NO white Christian tribe to defend yourself and your position under the law.


          • As an example, I just read about two girl wonders in science who are truly amazing. Obviously, the girls have won a lot of honors that are open to all. But, since the girls are of Hispanic origin, they also enjoy many honors that are reserved for Hispanics.

            If a white Christian European were to have the EXACT same resume as these girls, the white Christian European girl would NOT be able to receive honors and benefits reserved for white Christian Europeans BECAUSE Hispanics have a tribe whereas white Christian Europeans do NOT have a tribe.

            Before anyone mentions that Spain is a European country, I already know. The point still stands that Hispanics STILL have their own tribe that excludes white Christian Europeans (except Spaniards) – and the primary purpose of the Hispanic tribe is to secure as many benefits as possible for its tribe members.


          • So you’re saying that some of your fellow-“Christians” may behave in an unchristian manner? Or what are you saying?

            Regarding the Spanish item, a link would be helpful.

          • What I am saying is that GoV allows atheists like you to criticize Christians – but hesitates to allow Christians to criticize atheists which is a double standard. (My criticism of you was that you are hypocritical to quote Jesus considering that you have made it clear that you do NOT believe in Jesus. Thus, you are REALLY just importuning your own opinion dressed up as that of Jesus.)

            The same double standard exists with minorities who hold that the ‘majority’ MUST include them in every instance, but who, in turn, exclude the ‘majority’ whenever possible – with white European Christians being deemed the ‘majority’ when it is clear that white European Christians are NOT the ‘majority’ of people worldwide and will soon be despised minorities in their own countries – without the current minority benefit of dual citizenship and a REAL homeland to which to return.

            The USA is rife with scholarships, jobs, honors, and opportunities reserved for minorities only – no white European Christians need apply. If white European Christians excluded minorities from the same, white European Christians would be severely punished in a variety of meaningful ways.

            I gave a specific example of the two Hispanic girls to describe the current reality that these girls have MORE opportunities and honors than a white European Christian girl would have BECAUSE Hispanics are allowed and encouraged to reward their tribe members. But, you seem to want me to show you that one example so that you can pick that one example apart. Thus, it would be a waste of my time to go back to find the link. It was just one example of a much larger picture.

          • Egghead, your original comment was redacted because you chose to criticize Mark’s beliefs in an insulting, name-calling fashion. I don’t object to the content of your criticism, but simply to the manner in which it was delivered.

            I enforce civility in these comments. People who fail to be civil must endure redaction and/or deletion.

            Mark has made sure to address you in a civil manner. I’m certain that you are capable of reciprocation.

          • Hi Baron,

            At times, I feel that you and Dymphna mischaracterize me in your responses.

            Here is the redacted portion:

            [redacted again]

            Even Jesus ‘insulted’ those who mocked God….

          • Egghead —

            Jesus said any number of things that are relevant to Mark H.

            One of them was the parable of the Good Samaritan. Although his religious beliefs were considered vile and anathema to Jews, the Samaritan’s actions towards an individual in need were kind and generous. In other words, he acted more in accordance with the moral precepts of the Torah than did many Jews.

            Jesus made much the same point when He said: “By their fruits ye shall know them.” That is, it is one’s deeds rather than one’s words, or professed beliefs, or tribe of origin, that matter. By that standard, Mark H, atheist rogue though he may be, is more Christian-like than many Christians I know.

            Jesus also advised His followers to pray in the closet, rather than ostentatiously on street corners like the Pharisees. “Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.” (Matthew 6:5-6)

            Public contests about who is more obviously and ostentatiously “righteous” in the eyes of God are pointless, not to mention counterproductive. Neither you nor I possess the eyes of God, and it is not granted to us to judge who “mocks God”, and who honors Him. That sort of judgment is left to God alone.

            “What goes into someone’s mouth does not defile them, but what comes out of their mouth, that is what defiles them.” (Matthew 15:11)

          • Hi Baron,

            I am grateful that you published my latest comment.

            I understand if you need or want to redact portions of my comments. The thing that concerns me is when you redact portions and then provide a judgmental (!) commentary upon that redaction that (to me, unfairly) insinuates that the redacted portion was perhaps worse than it really was. As you know, I thoughtfully consider and stand by ALL of my comments in anticipation of a time when my comments may generate more interest (in a good way). Of course, I am a big girl, and I will soldier on. 🙂

            Unless you know Mark personally, which I rather doubt, the ONLY way that you know Mark is from his words – and words ARE deeds.

            Since you brought it up, let’s quote John 1 from the King James Bible:

            1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

            Theologically speaking, unless an atheist believes in the divinity and supremacy of Christ, then an atheist is logically precluded from being ‘more Christian-like than many Christians I know.’ Your argument appears to promote a works-based idea of ‘goodness’ (for lack of a better term) which is what Catholics (and I say that as a Catholic) are often criticized for promoting. It is usually Protestants who support the idea that once a person is ‘saved,’ then works are irrelevant because ‘once saved is always saved.’

            Here we go to John 14 from the King James Bible:

            5 Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way? 6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. 7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

            The idea that Christians are precluded from judging sinful, immoral and evil acts is incorrect. In fact, faithful Christians are to judge others based on The Ten Commandments (in essence and in summary). Need I emphasize that this judgment is THE basis for the Judeo-Christian law that created Western Christian culture – and that is being replaced by Sharia Law by people who fail to understand the HOLY importance of The Ten Commandments?!



            And so, in Matthew 22 from the King James Bible, Jesus fully explains the first commandment to the Pharisees:

            34 But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together. 35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, 36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law? 37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

            But, as Ann Barnhardt explains, love should be practiced in a non-contingent (her term) manner.


            A Christian who 1) loves God, and 2) loves his neighbor as himself MUST attempt to bring his neighbor to Christ – at which point, his neighbor will be Christ-like which is INFINITELY better than either liking a Christian or being like a Christian. 🙂

          • Egghead —

            Unless you know Mark personally, which I rather doubt, the ONLY way that you know Mark is from his words – and words ARE deeds.

            No, I’ve never met Mark personally. I know him only through extensive correspondence, and have assessed his character from his words, which, as you say, are his deeds. Those deeds are in general kind, thoughtful, and considerate of others, which are traits I value.

            …an atheist is logically precluded from being ‘more Christian-like than many Christians I know.’

            This is faulty logic. Atheism was all but unknown at the time the Bible was written down. Virtually everyone back then believed in a deity or deities of some sort.

            Therefore, to evaluate what the Bible might have said about atheism, had it existed in those days, one must look at what it said about religious beliefs that were considered beyond the pale by the Jews. Two examples from the New Testament come to mind: the parable of the Good Samaritan (which I mentioned earlier) and the Canaanite woman who was healed by Jesus, despite the fact that He initially referred to His action as “throwing bread to the dogs”. That is, those are two lessons that describe (1) how a follower of a despised faith, through his deeds, may be more worthy than hypocrites who ostensibly follow Jewish traditions, and (2) how God’s grace may be merited by someone whose religious beliefs are considered beyond the pale.

            The idea that Christians are precluded from judging sinful, immoral and evil acts is incorrect.

            I never referred to “judging”. Reread what I said.

            Judging is not the issue, behavior is. “By their fruits ye shall know them” and “what comes out of their mouth, that is what defiles them”, as I mentioned earlier. This is the standard Christ sets for us. Jesus repeatedly made that clear throughout His ministry. He loathed ostentatious piety, and reminded His audience that piety is best demonstrated by one’s actions towards others — and, yes, those actions include words.

            In this venue, the comments section of Gates of Vienna, those are the fruits by which ye shall know them.

          • Egghead- The Baron and Dymphna have defended me, below, with courtesy and generosity (“atheist rogue” notwithstanding!), so I don’t need to add to that. Please read on, though.

            I have a brother, born in Vancouver and now living there, who keeps British (through our parents) and Canadian passports. Our other siblings and I think he should make his mind up, but there is no doubt about his commitment to Western civilisation and values; don’t get bogged down in minutiae.

            You may regard my quoting Jesus as hypocritical, but I was calling you out on your apparent failure to live up to the standards he asks us to embrace. There are “aggressive” secularists who see little value in religious belief (Pat Condell comes to mind, but he often comes up with useful ammunition against Islamists). I’m more of the Tim Minchin school; religion should be mocked until it’s absent from government and education, ie a private matter between the individual and his/her God. Since the belief system most opposed to this standpoint is Islam, we ought to be able to sing from the same hymn sheet, as they say.

            I’m sure you recall the civil wars in former Yugoslavia. Leaving the Muslims (Bosnian or Kosovan) aside, the Croatians (mainly Catholic) and Serbs (mainly Orthodox), all European “Christians”, found enough reasons to hate one another, some based on history as recent as WW2, which possibly made them an embarrassment to the EU and NATO- hence the belated intervention. I’d suggest this civil war was as “tribal” as Rwanda- or Nazi Germany.

            Here’s an idea for you to consider. The Protestant Reformation, with its proposition that all “men” (well, this was the 16th Century) are equal before God, led to the 18th Century Enlightenment, and the idea that all people, including non-Europeans, non-believers and even women- shock horror!- were equal before one another. Hence the (partial) abolition of slavery, emancipation of women, spread of secular ideas, and freedom of speech- yours and mine.

            This may be an over-simplification, but I’d suggest that it’s no accident that the Nazis enjoyed their strongest support in Bavaria, Austria and other predominately Catholic territories, or that anti-semitism has (mainly) been less prevalent in Protestant lands than Catholic or Orthodox ones. Likewise racism against Blacks and Asians has been especially, though not exclusively, apparent in colonies settled by Europeans before the Enlightenment, eg South Africa (note the difference in attitude between the Boers and the later Brits) and the American South. There are exceptions; the French mixed better with their colonial subjects than the Brits, but the Dreyfus affair happened there, not here.

            These things are rarely simple. I’d like to believe in your Christ, but have major problems with his Dad. At least my mind is relatively open- why is your vision apparently so limited?

  3. Do you believe that in muslim countries under so-called “dictators” muslims and muslimas are not thus reckless and provocative. It’s human nature that “people” enjoy torturing others and being a thorn in their side when they dare not remove that thorn. Muslims in the west exploit this cowardly western attitudes towards muslims to the full. Hijab and beard are used to intimidate the jellyfish of the west.

    A huge disease: With no cure until . . . etc. you guessed it.

  4. Four ideas for asserting our own culture and seeing if the “multi” holds or is just a smokescreen for obliterating whitey. All four are to be performed in the immediate proximity of a Muslim institution:

    1. “Miss Bikini” contest for women 40+ (was done in Australia)
    2. Piggy race (was done in Texas)
    3. A juried dog show
    4. A public BBQ — offering the delicious pork cuts from large pink pig-shaped BBQs
    (I’ve seen several in various American cities)

    • You reckon it be ok to pee on the kerb and/or leave some bakon bitz in the proximity?

    • With all due respect Takuan, all those 4 point are not very helpful. It is like protesting the building of a mosque here or there, while importing muslims by millions. The “democracies” show no signs of halting muslim immigration. If anything they are facilitating their importation and creating new ways for them to lure the, while the indigenous people watch helplessly. If muslims come like this in millions, they will have their no-go-zones, mosques, sharia, fights. With the help of democratically elected LIARS they will build their Islamic States on our ruins. That is very easy when the LIARS side with them as they are doing now.
      We have no faith in anything to guide us. We have unlimited freedom for muslims to act and oppress the indigenous people with impunity. We have zero tolerance to criticize muslim atrocities. The governments and the media collude to hide their ugly deeds and demonize their opponents.

      People dread to think about mobilizing against a deadly enemy. Having been living in luxury, partying, sports, be positive not negative, see no evil, be optimistic, see the glass half full. Western people have been conditioned to a negative, passive one-sided lifestyle that they think if they ignore horrible things no harm will come to them. They look upon the warner and revealer as a bringer of bad omen and kill the messenger.

      LIARS must be given lecture on human nature. In a “democracy” there is neck-break competition and bitterness among the political parties. That’s why muslims thrive here. There will be and there is acrimonious and bitter corrosive attitudes between muslims and non-muslims simply because they elevate themselves as superior, especially after coming here and seeing and feeling, that the west is nothing but hares and chicken, who pretend that they have values but actually have nothing.

      LIAR’s tolerance of Islam does not come from noble feelings: but they don’t care, and they have found a staunch ally to fight Judeo-christianity.

  5. Elisabeth Thank you.. It’s just as bad seeing them at a beach covered head-to-toe in their black ugly garb..You take care and thanks again..

  6. In Egham in my parish I complained about Moslems harrassing church goers. I complained to the police -“Nothing can be done!”…..

    Only two days ago in Slough, also part of my parish a Moslem in a burka pushed past an entire queue in a supermarket and pushed another customer’s shopping away from the till where it was being packed and paid for and without a word put her shopping on the till instead. The till boy remonstrated but she started shouting at him. He called for assistance.

    This Moslem woman had two huge companions with big balck beards and they started to abuse the boy and the manager. You can guess the rest- 12 other people were put out so a Moslem and her men could barge in front of the waiting queue. The poor boy had to cancel the bill of the woman he was serving- She was a Pole and there are lots of them in Slough- and serve the savages.

    In all my years I have seen much arrogance from cultural enrichers but this takes the proverbial biscuit. Being me and my blood up I remostrated too producing my Church ID with “Bishop” easily seen. I asked “How does this help Community Cohesion?” I asked. God I hate these terms. I carried on…

    “Do you not consider how other Moslems will be affected by your utter rudeness?” The reply..

    “Lissen mate, do yer not see the news mate!? This is Islam’s day and yew kaffir bette get used to it eh? Behave yerself!”

    I was left seething and had to stop myself giving this oik a well deserved right-hook! I then tackled the manager.

    “Bishop this happens of late almost every other day! They think they are kings and the Police do nothing! If we try to intervene they accuse us of racism- then the Police will act and if they don’t the Moslems will. We are in a town full of them and we need their custom!”

    Sharia in UK too.

    • If ALL of the English people in the store had acted together as a tribe, the Muslims would have had to wait in line.

      The problem is that the Muslims have a cohesive tribe whereas the English act as individuals.

    • “We are in a town full of them and we need their custom!”

      Does this mean that they don’t need the Poles’ custom?! In which case, why don’t the Poles boycott this supermarket, and make their reasons clear? Egghead is right – infidels don’t act as a “tribe”, hence situations like this in Slough…

    • Bishop, your story of events in Slough reminds me of something that happened to me in nearby Windsor about five years ago. I was with my wife, my Iranian neighbour and her young daughter and we had driven there from our home in Hayes. We left the car in the Riverside car Park and were walking up the hill opposite the Castle when I noticed a car parked outside a takeaway kebab shop. The rear passenger door was open and a man “of Asian appearance” was unloading what looked like parcels.

      The pavement was narrow at that point making it necessary for us to walk in single file and the open car door completely blocked the access. As we approached I uttered the usual “excuse me please” and was ignored as the man carried on with his unloading so I asked him again. This time he looked up, his features contorted with rage as he screamed “wait!” as though we were some sort of Untermenschen. So we did for the few minutes more it took for him to finish what he was doing. Like you, my first reaction was to hit him hard for his insolence but, I was 65 years old at the time and I had two ladies and an infant with me so brawling in the street with a paki was not a good idea but I was tempted.

  7. I know of a pool in Leeds where Muslimas were allowed to swim whilst covered AND they had a separate area allocated solely for them in the changing rooms. Whether it still goes on, or it was stopped I don’t know. The policy attracted a huge number of complaints, from other women using the swim session.

  8. The Islamification of the world continues ! We must bend and accommodate Islamic culture . Islamic culture of course ignores and over rides other cultures ! Take for example the toning down of the Christian celebration of Christmas in the UK .Especially in schools ! Yet Muslim pupils will still be allowed to celebrate Eid and practice Ramadam. Equality ? Don`t complain or you`ll be labelled racist !

    • Not only that, Mr. Green, but you will have to observe the strictures of Islamic law, as brick by brick British Common Law is taken down and replaced with a barbaric sledge hammer of jihad “justice”.

  9. It appears, stupidity is universal. Out of all these comments, two posters wrote lucid comments, Mark H. and Baron Bodissey. I question that Bishop’s sincerity in his posting – condemning an entire population because of bad manners by a few. As far as the Muslims’ attire while swimming, I well remember being clothed neck to knee, as were all proper women until almost mid 20th century. Catholic nuns showed only their faces until @1980s, though there are still some wearing the full regalia. Be kind, and accepting – we’re all in this humanity crowd together.

    • It’s not about attire; it’s about the supremacist expansionist ideology attached to the attire (and to 1,001 other rules in Islam) — an ideology that has been mass-murdering us; is mass-murdering us now; and portends even worse mass murders of us in the coming decades. But by all means, keep [delete] talking about attire and sartorial etiquette while Rome is burning.

    • Be kind and accepting of what, precisely? Of the old Islam game of special rules for them but not for others. Common sense hygiene says you don’t come in and jump in the pool in your street clothing.

      As for the “condemning an entire population because of bad manners by a few”…that’s the old “tiny minority” fallacy. If these women were willing to flout the law to rub in their “special” status, then they have an agenda.

      As for questioning the sincerity of another commenter, where does that leave you with your command to “be kind”? You might start with the Bishop and follow your own dictum. How can you possibly know his level of sincerity? Is this special knowledge in the same category as dismissing the rest of us as stupid?

      Are *you* sincere? About what?

      Stupidity is not nearly as universal as discourtesy.

  10. “The non-Muslim population must adhere to hygienic rules while the Islamic population need not.”

    Time for a discrimination lawsuit? Failing that, yes, as a poster above suggested, let”s start swimming in t-shirts etc.

Comments are closed.