By Eileen F. Toplansky, American Thinker, 02/12/2018

All of the fighters appear to be wearing the same matching black robes and beige coloured

On Thursday, February 8, 2018, Tucker Carlson featured Sonia Ossorio, president of the New York chapter of the National Organization for Women (NOW).  The portion begins here at 20:30.  The interview occurred because Macy’s has decided to unveil Muslim garb – i.e., the hijab.  The brainchild of Muslim convert Lisa Vogl, the items are part of Macy’s development program, The Workshop, which “helps nurture businesses owned by minorities and women.”

In the 1999 film titled Shackled: Women, Shiren Samieh explains that “the hijab comes from the Arabic word meaning ‘curtain,'” and as such, it is intended to be “a limitation” so that women are restricted in movement, thinking, and freedom.  In fact, Islamic religious leaders maintain that a woman who is not covered will excite men, and women who are uncovered lead themselves to being raped.

In fact, “Islamic law ([s]haria) requires women to cover themselves.  The head covering is interpreted as a symbol of male domination by most critics – and many Muslim women, who fight for the right to dress as they please.  In 1994, a 21-year-old named Katia Bengana became the first casualty of the renewed Islamist terror campaign in Algeria after refusing to cover her hair.  She defended her choice even as the gun was pointed at her head.

Some apologists insist that the veil is not mandated by the religion, although they do not have anything within the sacred texts to counter the passages in which Muhammad instructed its use.  In fact, verse 24:60 says that the veil is optional only for unmarried women too old to have children.

CAIR’s Jamal Badawi, often held up as a ‘moderate’ scholar, insists that the hijab is ‘a command of Allah to Muslim women’ and it should be ‘the duty of the state’ to enforce it.  In 2017, al-Azhar university in Egypt decreed that the veil was compulsory for Muslim women … and not even open for debate: ‘It is not acceptable that anyone from the public or non-specialized people, regardless of their culture, to voice their opinions on the matter.’

In 2011, an imam at a supposedly moderate mosque in Sammamish, Washington claimed that Muslim wives wear the hijab because they want to, but then stated that they may be ‘punished’ if they refuse.  In Pakistan, uncovered women are routinely attacked with acid.  In Iran, Basij fundamentalists have raped and killed dress code[-]violators.

Clerics, such as Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali, have said that unveiled victims of public rape invited their attackers.  In 2017, an Islamist lawyer on Egyptian TV stated that ‘when a girl walks about like that, it is a patriotic duty to sexually harass her and a national duty to rape her.’

Nike has already released a ProHijab for Muslim athletes, American Eagle offered a denim hijab, and Mattel has introduced a hijab-wearing Barbie.  Clearly, those who would profit from female customers simply ignore the fact that the hijab is intrinsic to a system based on coercion, intimidation, and terror for so many women around the world.  How damning that sexual harassment of the most extreme forms is ignored by these companies in this era of the #MeToo movement!

So Tucker Carlson wanted to discover what a Western feminist leader would say, considering that millions of women lead lives of oppression, of which clothing is just one manifestation.

According to Ossorio, “Islam isn’t any different from other religions” when she was asked if “Islam is a feminist religion.”  Yet the following is from the Koran:

Quran (33:59) – “O Prophet!  Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies.  That will be better, that they should be known so as not to be [harmed]” or molested.

Pundit Bill Warner explains that “the veil is the supreme symbol of duality and Islam.  The most dangerous aspect of a women is her sexuality.  All aspects of the veil/hijab control this, including the headscarf.  It says to Muslims, ‘I have submitted to Islamic men.'”

In fact:

The Muslim female dress is a battle flag of jihad[.]  It says to the civilization of equality and freedom, ‘I hate your freedom.  I hate your equality.  I want nothing of you (except your money and technology).’

The veil/hijab is also a way of subjugating the woman in public.  All aspects of being a woman are controlled by Islam (men).

In the end, there are two things to remember about Islam and sex – duality and submission.  Islamic dualism separates men from women.  Submission makes sure that the women submit to the men.

Warner’s “Sharia Law for the Non-Muslim” lays out in clear detail all the dictates of sharia or Islamic law and its tenets concerning women.

Ossorio thought it was “spectacular” that Muslim women “possess $44 billion in buying power,” but Carlson persisted and asked if women should be coerced to dress modestly.  He asked if that was a “feminist goal.”  In response, Ossorio asserted that women should be in control of their lives and their destinies and therefore, “hijab … is not the point.”  In fact, notwithstanding Tucker’s pointed rebuttals, Ossorio maintained that there are times when wearing this garment is a symbol of empowerment.

It is because of people like Ossorio that naïve American girls will be seductively persuaded to don a garment that is used to diminish their sex.  It is a typical Muslim maneuver: begin ever so innocently to ingratiate an Islamic idea, and before anyone realizes it, Islam becomes ever more dominant.

Unlike previous waves of migrants, far too many Muslims have no desire to assimilate.  In England, for example:

Husbands living in a ‘harem’ with multiple wives have been cleared to claim state benefits for all their different partners.

A Muslim man with four spouses – which is permitted under Islamic law – could receive £10,000 a year in income support alone.

Ministers have decided that, even though bigamy is a crime in Britain, polygamous marriages can be recogni[z]ed formally by the state – provided they took place overseas, in countries where they are legal.

Furthermore, “[m]edical staff working in England’s National Health Service recorded close to 5,500 cases of female genital mutilation (FGM) in 2016, but no one has been successfully prosecuted since the practice was banned over 30 years ago.  Meanwhile, the practice is rising.  The police and the Crown Prosecution Service are too frightened of seeming racist or ‘Islamophobic’ to apply the law.”

How ironic that while Iranian women are shedding the hijab at great personal risk, the U.K. Foreign Office celebrates World Hijab Day.

While admitting that discrimination is alive and well in the workplace, Ossorio maintains that “it is not in the form of the hijab.”  Evading the factual points that Tucker kept making concerning Islamic dehumanization of females, Ossorio finally went into standard leftist talk, claiming that what really bothers her is the possibility that the Trump administration will roll back women’s “full reproductive rights.”  Moreover, she wants to close the wage gap, and “if wearing the hijab can do that, more power to them.”

It is beyond belief to see a feminist movement, whether in America or elsewhere, that has lost its connection with truly oppressed women and is willing to put young girls and women at great risk.  I ardently hope that, for starters, Macy’s hijab sales tank big-time.

 

Loading...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here