in ,

A Lunatic Attack On The Hijab

One of the enduring myths of the Twentieth Century and now on into the Twenty-First, is that the Second World War was fought to keep us free from tyranny, with particular reference to racial and religious persecution. The Nazis persecuted not only Jews but Jehovah’s Witnesses. Up until Hitler betrayed Stalin in 1941, the comrades recognised this lie for what it was; the struggle against the powers of darkness was really a clash between rival “Imperialist” movements.

Let us concede for the moment that the Allies liberated Europe and the world in 1945; they have now been slowly and at times not so slowly replacing it with a tyranny of their own. All Western European nations have been flooded with millions of immigrants, overwhelmingly against the wishes of their citizens. Cameras spy on us round the clock in cities and even quite small villages. Our telephone conversations, e-mails and even our social media posts are monitored. With Covid, we have faced massive restrictions on movements, and now, even the way we dress is under attack.

Different societies have different dress codes. In some parts of rural Africa, women walk around topless, totally unselfconscious. Obviously that wouldn’t be suitable for most cities, even in this weather. Then of course many people have to wear uniforms for their work: police officers, pilots, even supermarket staff. But what is so terrible about the hijab? Well, according to France, it’s a religious symbol, so should be banned. France has long waged war on all religious symbols, in the name of tolerance, of course, but never quite so hysterically as against the hijab, which may be as little as a ribbon in a woman’s hair.

The latest pronouncement from the European Court concerns not France but Germany, where in two separate cases, married women: one a care worker, the other a cashier, were told to remove their hijabs or find other jobs. And the court upheld this nonsense. And who did GBNews ask to comment on this case? Two people: a moderate imam and certifiable lunatic Yasmine Mohammed.

Mohammed is based in Canada, an apostate, and like her chum the Apostate Prophet, makes no bones about Islam being the root of all evil. Here she told viewers the hijab isn’t a benign piece of clothing but a “misogynist tool of rape culture”. She was referring specifically to Iran, a country where rape is capital. Ditto Saudi Arabia. The great irony here is that at the present time, people everywhere are being compelled to wear masks, certainly in public buildings. At some, visitors are also required to give contact telephone numbers. And Islam is the bad guy?

Help us grow. Support The Duran on Patreon!


The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Duran.

What do you think?

Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Helga I. Fellay
Helga I. Fellay
July 17, 2021

My first reaction is that I am confused about how to connect wearing a ribbon in my hair (“hijab, which may be as little as a ribbon in a woman’s hair”), face masks, rape and “Islam being the root of all evil” along with “Nazis persecuted not only Jews but Jehovah’s Witnesses.” It reminds me of a stew that has too many ingredients in it which don’t seem to belong in the same pot. I like to focus. By the way, the crime of rape happens world-wide, among all races, nationalities, religions, political systems, social classes, etc. I don’t know how… Read more »

Reply to  Helga I. Fellay
July 17, 2021

Neither do I. I suggest you ask the loony Yasmine Mohammed.

July 18, 2021

It is a matter of decorum to dress modestly. A hijab is a way of dressing modestly. Banning dressing modestly is in my view wrong. Western culture seems to prefer women dressing in a shameless way. But then, when men gawk at them or behave inappropriately they are offended. There is some confusion here in our culture.

Last edited 11 days ago by Beatus

1970’s Inflation Plus Financial Crisis and the Inevitable Chaos

U.S. leaves Afghanistan. What’s next?