The premise is a good one.
Parliament debated the dearth of beaches in Bahrain and wanted to beg the king to revoke ownership deeds in order to return the coastline to the populace. However, some MPs are showing their depravity as they associate the available beaches – they’re referring to privately owned resorts and the like – with a semi-nudist colony. The logic is indefatigable, I know, but it also demonstrates that the only thing that those bozos think of is matters of the flesh, catering to their own baser instincts:
“The problem is not only with the beaches being used by women in bikinis, of whom even the fish are ashamed, but with owners of projects on the coast thinking that they own the sea too, as they have already started banning fishermen.â€Â
Yes my friends, this eruption was from an upstanding member. The first vice chairman to be exact, whose faculties, mental and otherwise, do not extend beyond, well, his basic instinct.
I don’t think he even realises how much damage his outburst does to not only himself – which is frivolous – but also to the noble cause he is championing, which is the return of the coastline to public ownership. Why he has to draw an association between the current availability of beaches to that of scantily clan women and immediately passing judgement on them as nothing more than shameless hussies is beyond me.
But, it seams, those images are firmly ensconced in his head. Both of them. And are doubtlessly keeping him awake at night.
Comments
Love that alt-text on the picture.
Besides, everybody knows that many of those MPs who are crying over things that infringe upon their moral and religious codes do so based on whether they would have a personally gain. Ethical considerations and serving the people are -of course- western values that need to boycotted furiously.
““The problem is not only with the beaches being used by women in bikinis, of whom even the fish are ashamed”
LOL, what? Oh lord, is this guy a poet? The fish are either thinking “mmmm, food”,”oh noes, PREDATOR!”, or “Hey, what’s that thing?”. Puh-leaaaaaaaase. 🙄
I’m all for keeping the beaches in public hands. While there are a lot of private beaches in California (usually through circumstance like having a sandy beach between two rocky cliffs and the only access is a road through your property), a lot of them are in public hands. People who’ve tried to keep others off of their assumed private beaches have been given judicial smackdowns that tell them they cannot exclude the public from public beaches.
@Barry: The overwhelming majority of land adjacent to shores in Bahrain are privately owned in addition to a fair amount of the sea is also privately owned. Much of which is given away to citizens with exemplary service to the country and the king . Seaside land has grown in value many times over in the past few years, so taking that landand putting it in public hands once again would be a heavy loss to the owners of that land.
I think the fish are more ashamed of our MPs.
What flawed logic.
I also use the term “our” very loosely.
How come any Muslim man that speaks of “scantily clad women” running around on the beaches of Bahrain like wonton hussies…never ever mentions the Bahraini men that don Speedos and strut around flexing pot bellies to those same women…meanwhile their own women are sweltering in the sun under layers of clothing…and forced to play in the water in those same layers…not only hindering their fun…but putting themselves in danger as well. Alot of clothing soaks up a lot of water and makes even casual wading a chore…believe me I know.
I cannot recognize Bahain anymore from when I arrived here 21 years ago…the slippery slope is very nearly a free fall…. 😥
I think they were trying to illiterate that:
The beaches are not for the Bahrainis, but for other people.
Brilliant. They illustrate that by demonstrating their xenophobia, intolerance and disregard for women?
Oh oh, so its because the fish are ashamed that there are fewer and fewer of them in Bahrain’s waters?!
It has NOTHING to do with the destruction of their habitat, right? its all those bikini wearing women! 😯
Bahrain could benefit from development of a public trust doctrine. That is what is at work, Barry, in the judicial “smackdowns” you reference. Wet sand areas, land beneath navigatable waters etc are held by the sovereign in trust for the people, and this is a limitation on the sovereign’s power to convey title as was demonstrated in the Illinois Central Railroad case referenced in the wiki.
So, using my twisted American logic, what the MP is actually proposing by limiting private beaches, is the promotion of more public lewdness?
You just gotta love 14th century thinking.