GERMANY’S defence minister has sparked fury in Saudi Arabia after she willingly refused to wear a hijab during an official visit to the Kingdom.
Ursula von der Leyen and her entourage did not wear the hijab head coverings or the full length Abaya garment during her visit, despite adamantly claiming that she “respected” the country’s customs and traditions.
According to an Iranian newspaper, Von der Leyen said: “No woman in my delegation will be required to wear the abaya, as the right to choose one’s attire is a right shared by men and women equally.”
Shortly after her meeting with the Deputy Crown Prince Mohnammed bin Salman al Saud, Saudis took to twitter to express their disdain for her actions.
A similar angry reaction on twitter occurred after First Lady Michelle Obama did not wear a hijab last year. … Angela Merkel, Hillary Clinton, Condoleeza Rice and former First Lady Laura Bush all refused to wear the hijab.
Why is wearing a hijab such a big deal? Because, as I think we all know at least unconsciously, it is a symbol of allegiance or submission to Islam.
Consider women who wear hijabs and so on in the West, deliberately sticking out like sore thumbs with their symbols of Islam. Fundamental Islam is hostile to non-Muslims, especially Christians and Jews, so wearing a hijab is a political statement of superiority and intolerance — openly going about their oft-stated business of colonizing the West, a statement of contempt for us. Yes they are free to express that, and we should be free to dislike and protest it.
The PC crew expect us to be tolerant and adopt to Muslims in the West, yet also expect everyone to fit in with the locals in Muslim countries. That is as crazy and unfair as Muslim grievances — see The Ugly Truth about Muslim Grievances, which pointed out that Muslim grievances are real but are supremacist in nature:
Muslims … get angry seeing infidels on an equal footing with Muslims. And they get murderous seeing infidels actually lording over Muslims.
hat-tip Stephen Neil