Caroline Glick explains exactly what's wrong with Laura Bush donning the hijab in "Our World: Laura Bush's embrace of tyranny" in the Jerusalem Post (thanks to LGF):
Women in Saudi Arabia do not have human rights. As Amnesty International puts it, "The abuse of women's rights in Saudi Arabia is not simply the unfortunate consequence of overzealous security forces and religious police. It is the inevitable result of a state policy which gives women fewer rights than men, which means that women face discrimination in all walks of life and which allows men with authority to exercise their power without any fear of being held to account for their actions."For instance, women in Saudi Arabia cannot choose whom they marry and they have no real power to divorce their husbands. Men on the other hand can lawfully marry up to four women and divorce any of them simply by announcing that they have divorced them. And once they are divorced, they are by law and practice denied custody of their children.
Marital rape and physical abuse are not generally considered crimes and therefore women have no legal recourse for dealing with abusive husbands, or fathers or brothers. Since they are legally barred from serving as lawyers, and Islam weighs a woman's court testimony as worth half the testimony of a man, even if they were able to press charges against their male tormentors, Saudi women are effectively denied recourse in the local courts.
Women of course are not the only victims of the Saudi regime. Non-Muslims are denied the right to worship. Shi'ite Muslims' right to worship is subject to draconian limitations. Jews are officially barred from entering the kingdom. Then too, there are no real elections in Saudi Arabia, no press freedom, no freedom of assembly. Yet even against this totalitarian backdrop the position of women stands out in its severity.
Take education for example. As the State Department's 2006 Human Rights report notes, there is little academic freedom in Saudi Arabia. For instance, "The government prohibited the study of Freud, Marx, Western music, and Western philosophy." Yet women's educational opportunities are even more constrained. Due to gender apartheid, women may only study in all female institutions. There they are prohibited from studying fields like law and engineering and petroleum sciences. In 2005 the BBC reported, "Although women make up more than half of all graduates from Saudi universities, they comprise only 5 percent of the kingdom's workforce."
Saudi women have no freedom of movement. They may not drive. And they may not move around in public unless escorted by their husband, father or brother. Women found in public unescorted by suitable males are subject to arrest and corporal punishment.
The limitations placed on public appearances are mind boggling. As Freedom House reported in 2005, "Visible and invisible spatial boundaries also limit women's movement. Mosques, most ministries, public streets, and food stalls (supermarkets not included) are male territory. Furthermore, accommodations that are available for men are always superior to those accessible to women, and public space, such as parks, zoos, museums, libraries, or the national Jinadriyah Festival of Folklore and Culture, is created for men, with only limited times allotted for women's visits."
TO THE extent that women in Saudi Arabia are allowed leave their homes, they are prohibited from actually being seen by anyone through the rigid enforcement of Islamic dress codes. As the State Department 2006 report explains, "In public, a woman was expected to wear an abaya (a black garment that covers the entire body) and also to cover her head and hair. The religious police generally expected Muslim women to cover their faces and non-Muslim women from other Asian and African countries to comply more fully with local customs of dress than non-Muslim Western women. During the year religious police admonished and harassed citizen and noncitizen women who failed to wear an abaya and hair cover."
Perhaps it is because it is so offensive to the Western eye to see women covered like sacks of potatoes, the abaya has become a symbol of Islamic oppression and degradation of women. Although outlawing their use, as the French have attempted to do in recent years, is itself a form of religious oppression, the sentiment informing their ban is certainly understandable. The fact is that a free society should not be able to easily stomach the notion that women should be encouraged, let alone obliged to wear degrading garments that deny them the outward vestiges of their humanity and individuality.
Due to the fact that the abayas convey a symbolic message of effective enslavement of women, Mrs. Bush's interaction with women clad in abayas was the aspect of her trip most scrutinized. In the United Arab Emirates, Mrs. Bush was photographed sitting between four women covered head to toe in abayas while she was wearing regular clothes. The image of Mrs. Bush sitting between four women who look like nothing more than black piles of fabric couldn't have been more viscerally evocative and consequently, symbolically meaningful.
The image told the world that she - and America - is free and humane while the hidden women of Arabia are enslaved and their society is inhumane.
But then Mrs. Bush went to Saudi Arabia and the symbolic message of the previous day was superseded and lost when she donned an abaya herself and had her picture taken with other abaya-clad women. The symbolic message of those photographs also couldn't have been clearer. By donning an abaya, Mrs. Bush symbolically accepted the legitimacy of the system of subjugating women that the garment embodies, (or disembodies). Understanding this, conservative media outlets in the US criticized her angrily.
Sunday morning, Mrs. Bush sought to answer her critics in an interview with Fox News. Unfortunately, her remarks compounded the damage. Mrs. Bush said, "These women do not see covering as some sort of subjugation of women, this group of women that I was with. That's their culture. That's their tradition. That's a religious choice of theirs."
It is true that this is their culture. And it is also their tradition. But it is not their choice. Their culture and tradition are predicated on denying them the choice of whether or not to wear a garment that denies them their identity just as it denies them the right to make any choices about their lives. The Saudi women's assertions of satisfaction with their plight were no more credible than statements by hostages in support of their captors.
As the First Lady, Laura Bush is an American symbol. By having her picture taken wearing an abaya in Saudi Arabia - the epicenter of Islamic totalitarian misogyny - Mrs. Bush diminished that symbol. In so doing, she weakened the causes of freedom and liberty which America has fought since its founding to secure and defend at home and throughout the world.
This has been my point since this story broke. I had the opportunity to work in Riyadh (granted, for a year) and I said NO. I said NO because I'd have to wear that garbage bag in public...the whole TWO places I could go. I wouldn't have it. I still don't get why Laura did this, despite her explanation of 'it's their culture'.
"Since they are legally barred from serving as lawyers,"
Not exactly true. In Saudi Arabia, women may be lawyers. They just cannot practice in front of men. And since only men can become judges ...
Why Piss off your handlers, eh?
SOMETHING SMELLS IN DC
Written by: Richard Shaffer
Possibly the only private airplane flying in US air space after the 9/11 crimes against humanity, was a Saudi Arabian private jet picking up members of the bin Laden family who were scattered around the country. It flew from Los Angeles,to Orlando, to Washington, and finally to Boston. When the FAA permitted overseas flights, the jet flew to Europe.
This raises a question. What is the relationship between the bin Laden family and the Bush family? George Bush senior has been a houseguest of the bin Ladens when he visited Saudi Arabia. Not only that, the bin Laden family was heavily invested in the Washington based Carlisle Group with huge interests in defense contracting. The names that crop up in connection with the Carlisle Group are George Bush senior, James Baker, and former British Prime Minister John Major. The chairman of the Carlisle Group is Frank Carlucci, a former Secretary of Defense, and associate of Donald Rumsfeld. There are too many connections to be overlooked.
It is odd that the Bin Laden family should be profiting in the war that is allegedly being waged against Osama. The Bush family is reaping millions in profits through the Carlisle Group, in direct relationship to the alleged War on Terror, which has been initiated by Bush the Younger? There are some obvious conflicts of interest.
http://www.wordsasweapons.com/warconnections.htm
Its harder to tell the Republicans from the Democrats nowadays.
Does ANYBODY in Washington get it?
And by "it" I don't mean Saudi lobby money because they ALL seem to get that regardless of party.
As a Republican, I'm disapointed by Laura Bush wearing an Islamic head covering. While there's a number of Republicans who do get it, more than the Dhimmicrats, the GOP leadership remains as clueless as ever.
Why is it that it's our people conforming to Muslim demands when they go to Muslim lands, and in our lands, it's our people conforming to Muslim demands? Man, this dhimmitude crap is getting old.
According to the ArabNews article, this picture of Laura Bush in an abaya was taken at the residence of the US consul general in Jeddah. Technically, she was in U.S. territory. She wasn't required by protocol to "do as the Romans do." It is frightening the reach of dhimmitude.
According to the ArabNews article, this picture of Laura Bush in an abaya was taken at the residence of the US consul general in Jeddah. Technically, she was in U.S. territory. She wasn't required by protocol to "do as the Romans do." It is frightening the reach of dhimmitude.
According to the ArabNews article, this picture of Laura Bush in an abaya was taken at the residence of the US consul general in Jeddah. Technically, she was in U.S. territory. She wasn't required by protocol to "do as the Romans do." It is frightening the reach of dhimmitude.
According to the ArabNews article, this picture of Laura Bush in an abaya was taken at the residence of the US consul general in Jeddah. Technically, she was in U.S. territory. She wasn't required by protocol to "do as the Romans do." It is frightening the reach of dhimmitude.
According to the ArabNews article, this picture of Laura Bush in an abaya was taken at the residence of the US consul general in Jeddah. Technically, she was in U.S. territory. She wasn't required by protocol to "do as the Romans do." It is frightening the reach of dhimmitude.
If we are going to retain good relations with Saudi Arabia, it makes sense for the First Lady to follow Saudi custom while in that country. This does not imply agreement with other aspects of Saudi treatment of women.
Also, my understanding is that there are no particular restrictions against Jews visiting Saudi Arabia these days, subject to no more than the same restrictions which would obtain against any other non-Muslim. At least I've seen a story or two by Jews who have in fact visited Saudi Arabia recently, and have been treated courteously and indeed hospitably. Not that this means that the Koranic verses against Jews have been erased, e.g. that forbidding friendship with Christians or Jews (5:51).
Karl Pov,
Sorry, I have to disagree. Islam expects us to respect their customs but doesnt demand Muslims respect non Islamic customs. Just look at Europe and as it becomes more Islamic, Muslims demand more from their host nations. If we dont start standing up for our culture, our culture will surely fall.
Karl Pov,
If muslims are to retain good relations with the rest of the world, they should follow, or at least respect, our customs when in our countries!
"Unveil the images!"
Shakespeare, "Julies Caesar"
I lived and worked in Saudi Arabia for five years. My wife and daughters were compelled by law to wear the abaya in public. I did not meet a single Jew. A visa into the country requires the applicant to state their religion. Jews and Bahais are explicitly excluded. While I was there, we witnessed raids of mutaween on homes of foreigners who were having private Christian meetings that resulted in a number of deportations following short jail stints for the offenders. All non-Islamic religious articles including Bibles, Christian literature and prayer books are routinely confiscated and tossed in the trash by Saudi customs agents when found upon entry or exit. There are no churches in Saudi Arabia. In Jeddah I once met a recently liberated slave who originally hailed from Sudan. Women are treated worse than many Americans treat their dogs. Shall I go on?
Dr. Mack,
Yes, please go on. We need to hear it. And the useful idiots in our midst who go on and on about Islam being "peaceful" need to explain it.
Thanks for your post.
"As the First Lady, Laura Bush is an American symbol. By having her picture taken wearing an abaya in Saudi Arabia - the epicenter of Islamic totalitarian misogyny - Mrs. Bush diminished that symbol. In so doing, she weakened the causes of freedom and liberty which America has fought since its founding to secure and defend at home and throughout the world."
Right on the money!
DrMack wrote:
"All non-Islamic religious articles including Bibles, Christian literature and prayer books are routinely confiscated and tossed in the trash by Saudi customs agents when found upon entry or exit."
==============================================
Consider the international outrage if a Koran were tossed in the trash at Gitmo. In fact it is considered cruel and unusual punishment if Korans are not *provided* to Gitmo prisoners, at the expense of the US taxpayer. So much for non-establishment of religion.
In Saudi Arabia Fridays (I think) are the chop-chop - or public beheading days. The beheading of criminals is a part of local culture and tradition and there is never dearth of public. Very much like soccer in Europe, or baseball in the US. I wonder if Laura Bush's respect for islamic culture would allow her to decline an invitation to that distinctly islamic cultural event.
This is too bad--I genuinely llike Laura Bush. I imagine she wore the abeya so she could have better access to convey her message about breast cancer. Even then it would have been an extremely questionable step.
But she did not claim this. I also saw her interview on Fox News, and was dismayed at her defending the abeya.
In a non-Muslim country I might--might--understand someone thinking that the wearing of the abeya was purely voluntary. Even here, though, it is often the coercison of religious authorities or male relatives that lead to its adoption.
But the assertion that Saudi women voluntarily wear the abeya is grotesque, when a woman not wearing this garment can be beaten by the religious police or sentenced to prison.
Karl Pov said
They putatively allowed one or two Jews into Saudi Arabia, and apparently didn't behead them or forcibly convert them.
On the other hand, the Saudis (and other Gulf states) spend enormous amounts of money building and supporting mosques in Dar al-Harb.
It's not a relationship built on equality.
I think a large part of the problem with Western women wearing hijab/abayah what-have-you is actually a weak reflection of a good thing, not a bad.
Here in the United States, we have a tradition of respect for other religious symbols. I have been to many Jewish weddings and bar/bat mitzvahs where non-Jewish men wear a kippa (yarmulke) as a sign of respect. We take off our shoes in Hindu temples and Buddhist monasteries. In fact, were I ever to voluntarily enter a mosque (not likely), I'd probably shrinkwrap my head as well. The belief in respect of others' traditions is just that strong.
However, what's missing with regard to Islamic women's dress is an understanding of what it truly is -- the sign of degradation and subjugation in ALL spheres, not just the private practice of religion. As should be perfectly evident from even a cursory reading of imams' statements about hijab, the Muslim female headcovering is essentially a signal deflecting Muslim sexual aggression from Muslim women, who theoretically have a male "owner" whose property rights would be infringed. Infidel women, as "uncovered meat," are free prey.
It's the understanding of Islam as a sociopolitical system that is missing in our society. When a Western woman wraps her head, or bags herself, she is submitting to an ideology of social aggression and degradation that directly attacks her personhood. This basic point is overlooked --often not for craven reasons, but for the best intentions.
Karl Pov, If muslims are to retain good relations with the rest of the world, they should follow, or at least respect, our customs when in our countries!
Posted by: ImNoDhimmi
It’s a bizarre charade to see Saudis parading around in their sultanate white robes while their women trailing behind in their black sacks, in OUR countries, while they expect us and our women to dress ‘appropriately’ while in theirs. Typical pig-headed supremacist Moslem invert non-reciprocity at work.
Seeing Laura Bush cowtowing to this primitive immoral repressive belief system, a lying cult saying it’s ‘religion’, is a most grievous exhibition of how unfair and unequal is their barbaric world. If those Saudi Moslems want to retain good relations with us, and the rest of the world, they better learn equality and reciprocity, and the meaning of human freedom. What they do their women who are held captive by that primitive 7th century cult is a crime against humanity. Worse, those conniving evil men even convinced their enslavement is good for them! "Allahs will"... blah blah blah.
Give them no slack when they come here, but make them wear OUR clothing, if they want to be accepted as equals. Of course, they won’t, because they are not. I don't blame Laura's invert exhibition, but I do blame their 'princely' primitiveness dressed in white. Cowtowing savages.
Part of Laura Bush's trip to Islamoworld was to raise awareness of breast cancer. On Fox she observed that Dubai is "25 years behind the US in breast cancer prevention." Add a couple digits to that number, Laura, and you'll be correct.
Since the First Lady is openly pro-choice, maybe she should have raised awareness about another women's issue.
BLAME IT OWN THE BURQA (CHA-CHA-CHA!)
...a forthcoming Harvard School of Public Health study is expected to show that adequate vitamin D levels reduce cancer risk by 30 percent, increasing pressure on the US Department of Agriculture to raise the recommended daily consumption of the nutrient. The new data also are likely to add to the chorus of vitamin D advocates who say it is time to lighten up on the anti-sun message.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/health_science/articles/2004/12/30/vitamin_d_deficiency_tied_to_host_of_dangers/
Seems ironic to me as a conservative personality.... Mrs. Bush what the hell were you thinking? What would a "liberal" like Oriana Fallaci do?
Well we know what she would do and it just goes to show you that left or right we are still apt to be idiots at any given time....
Fulton Sheen said (paraphrased) In ancient days men knew their place in the universe. We knew hevens were above us and hell was below. In modern time we are too busy looking left and right to care.
I will vote for the person I feel best able to handle this particular crisis... period!
Has anyone been watching the news in UK? As King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia arrived the, grenadier guards played the darth vader tune. HONESTLY.
Excellent post AND comment thread; Thanks, folks!
Can't think of anything to add that hasn't already been said.
Marwan; wearing a kippa (yarmulka) in the synagogue isn't so much "respectful" as compliance with the religious edict to cover one's head in the House of G*d, both genders. Wearing it out in public is a cultural thing, basically saying that the wearer is devout, a personal statement as it were. If G*d wanted people to cover their heads all the time we'd have been born with hats...;)
In theory a baseball cap or toque would be just as compliant...but it doesn't say anything about the wearer (unless he's wearing the cap backwards.)
Weatherob,
Good luck with that.
Laura Bush is a sweet librarian who clearly doesn't "get it." In a post-hijab interview on FOX TV, Mrs. Bush quoted a Saudi woman who explained that even though she was wearing black, she felt "transparent"--as if seeing oneself in that way was a good thing. It didn't seem to occur to the First Lady that being "transparent" is the same thing as being invisible--which essentially describes a woman's status in the sharia-ridden Magic Kingdom.
DrMack is spot on.
If you question how I know when I haven't been there, it's because of others I worked with who did have to go to Saudi Arabia AND The Religious Policeman's blog.
Before he finally retired, he ran the site muttawa.blogspot.com. He's a Saudi ex-pat living in the UK.
If you want more details, I recommend reading his site. Nothing current, but all worthwhile.
(p.s. - They confiscate your religious jewelry too.)
On some TV program long ago, some-one said "When you feel invisible, then you don't feel very good about yourself".
Yes, but don't worry, the Left will take to the streets in protest, screaming about the human rights abuses in the kingdom of sand, the sexism, and not forgetting the racism against blacks. Which is pervasive and widespread, be they Muslims or no.
They'll ruin his visit. Or will they wait until America deports a terrorist?
According to the CIA World Fact Book (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/sa.html), Saudi Arabia's gender demographics run counter to most of the rest of the world:
0-14 years: 38.2% (male 5,369,285/female 5,162,585)
15-64 years: 59.4% (male 9,316,694/female 7,089,370)
65 years and over: 2.4% (male 348,827/female 314,277) (2007 est.)
In all three age categories presented and counter to tendencies in most places elsewhere on planet Earth, males outnumber females, leading one to conclude that 1) Saudi births show a higher than average tendency towards male babies, 2) the death rate for Saudi women in all age categories is greater than the global average or 3) Saudi women in all age categories are emigrating from Saudi Arabia faster than their male counterparts.
Maybe next time Mrs. Bush could ask the Saudi women she meets whether it is their choice to be in the minority within their own country or whether it is a condition forced upon them.
Dr Mack:
If you happen to read this question, how do these controls work in the digital age? It seems like you could e-mail someone a PDF of the whole Bible, and the recipient could print it out at the other end. If necessary, you could photograph each page and send it as a JPG. There are lots of people walking around with flash drives or laptops for business. Do the Saudi police have time to check them all?
My next question is one to which I already know the answer. The question is why don't we retaliate? The answer is we are addicted to oil and the car companies want us all driving trucks.
When I say retaliate, I don't mean bomb or kill people. But we could search every single Saudi coming into this country without a diplomatic passport and confiscate any books, pamphlets or religious objects. Of course, they could probably buy replacements at the airport Quran store, but at least it would be a face-saving sign of our displeasure.
Well, it seems obvious to me that female leaders from both parties are whoring themselves out to whomever can rack up the most human rights violations. Nancy Polosi (April 2007, Syria) did the same thing a couple of months ago, and she is the Speaker of the House. It's simply deplorable behavior, and it must stop.
I saw the First Lady defending herself over this issue on a Foxnews interview.
I like Laura Bush, but she doesn't have a clue.
"I have been to many Jewish weddings and bar/bat mitzvahs where non-Jewish men wear a kippa (yarmulke) as a sign of respect. We take off our shoes in Hindu temples and Buddhist monasteries. "
That is common to all humanity, it is a common decency, everyone does that way. It is only followers of religion of peace, who will take this courtesy as their superiority and would never reciprocate it. We never accept Saudi king visiting Britain to follow a single British custom. And they will forever consider this uncivilized behaviour as mark of superiority.
Cornelius says, "I like Laura Bush, but she doesn't have a clue."
Same here.
And pagan, you are exactly right.
http://www.westernresistance.com/blog/archives/003892.html
[-]
Rickets in Britain
UK: Muslim Clothing Blamed For 56 Cases Of Rickets
News from the Blackburn Citizen reports that 56 cases of rickets have been discovered in Blackburn and Darwen, Lancashire, a region with a high Muslim population.
The cases were found after a study was made by East Lancashire Primary Care Trust, and almost all involved people from the "South Asian community" (i.e. Muslims from Pakistan and Bangladesh). The cases happened between 2003 and 2005. From the article:
Experts said vitamin D, which is unique in being produced primarily by exposure to sunlight, was a relatively common deficiency among Asian immigrants, because of their darker skin, and Islam's requirements for clothing to cover limbs.
Until about 10 years ago, Government policy required that all health authorities gave out vitamin supplements to people from the Indian subcontinent, but then it was decided that it was no longer necessary.
Dr Ellis Friedman, director of public health for East Lancashire PCT, said: "It is caused by a combination of skin colouration, diet and dress, not poverty. We don't, for example, find rickets in deprived white communities."
Vitamin D supplements are being introduced to the Blackburn and Darwen areas, where most cases have taken place. In adjacent Burnley, Pendle and Rossendale, where Vitamin D supplements had continued after the UK government abandoned giving Vitamin D to south Asians 10 years ago, cases of rickets were a quarter of those found in Blackburn and Darwen.
Councillor Roy Davies, chairman of Blackburn with Darwen Council's health scrutiny committee said that south Asian women should think about covering up, especially during pregnancy.
Below is a report I wrote in 2006, when cases of rickets were being found in Birmingham, almost certainly caused by women covering themselves up and depriving their unborn children of Vitamin D.
cont...
[-]
And you will NEVER see the saudi king dressed in anything but islamic dress. Even when in Britain where he should be dressing like the natives. Why should Laura Bush dress like a muslim. She is not muslim and should not dress as such.
Neither should Prince Charles.
I formerly worked in Saudi Arabia and can agree with everything Dr. Mack says. I am just noting this because several of the comments above regarded his post as news.
It is all true folks, religious police, no bibles, no churches, etc.
The daily English language paper had a list of young Saudi boys and veiled girls picked up by the police in Safeway supermarkets for "making eyes" at each other, a criminal religious offense.
This was back in the 80s - a bunch of ex-pats had a weekly singing practice. We always had a religious spy-cop on hand to make sure nothing was "amiss". I think we did some songs with a religious theme - like Rock of Ages, but the cop didn't get it. There were both ex-pat males and females present. Not sure if they would allow even that for ex-pats these days.
At one of the ex-pat compounds, the swimming pool had male-only days and female-only days, never together even though all were ex-pat. The Saudi "lifeguard" was posted outside the swimming pool wall where he could not see if anyone was drowning. Judging from the event a few years ago when the religious cops would not let some girls out of a burning dormitory because they were not veiled, and all died, the lifeguard likely would not have saved a drowning female swimmer in a bathing suit.
What a sicko society.
Of for f***s sake! The Bushes are the number one supporters of the Saudi's. So why are you so shocked and dismayed by this? This is business as usual for western politicians. Bush is a duplicitous hypocrite, who is not interested in fighting terrorism. If he were, Saudi Arabia would be smoldering...
"Has anyone been watching the news in UK? As King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia arrived the, grenadier guards played the darth vader tune. HONESTLY.
Posted by: DaveMate"
.....and what is more funny is that the King thought it was a royal tune not unlike "Hail to the Chief"....meant just for him....ya gotta love the Grenadier Guard musicians...it was funny...
Ah, yes; covered meat.
As I walked near a clearly Muslim family this morning (the girl was hijabed, and otherwise covered from heat to foot, while dad & brother were as unfettered as Western men), I cringed when dad casually draped his arm around his daughter's shoulders & neck - all while continuing to walk along.
Was it fleeting thoughts of Aisha? Partly. But mostly, it was the impression of "captive" which went through my mind.
Oh, yes; and damn you, Laura Bush.
We never accept Saudi king visiting Britain to follow a single British custom.
Do you mean to say that the Saudi king, when visiting the West, never follows the Western practice of shaking hands with those he meets?
This wretched 'kingdom', with its trillions in unearned wealth, is today's most effective vector for spreading the virulent disease to the world's remaining healthy organisms. I wish it naught but ill. It may not come after abdullah's dispatch to the infernal regions, nor after his successor's, but eventually all those thousands of princelings will be literally at each other's throats, and the vector will, with God's help, die.