On March 15, a lone lunatic killed 50 people at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand. All over the world, people registered their horror and expressed sympathy for the victims. The Prime Minister of New Zealand received great praise for wearing a hijab when she visited the survivors of the attack; since then, she has continued to wear the hijab in numerous public appearances. For this she has won continued praise. Many non-Muslim women, too, have emulated her, wearing hijabs in solidarity with Muslims, showing their hijabbed selves on Instagram, together with virtue-signaling sentiments of solidarity (“we are with you”), or identity (“we are you”), each text more treacly than the last. And in Australia, too, not to be outdone, a hijab campaign promoted on social media has also taken off among non-Muslim women.
The hijab campaign in New Zealand appears to have been the idea of Auckland doctor Thaya Ashman, who wanted to encourage people to wear a headscarf after hearing about a woman who was too scared to go out because she felt her headscarf would make her a target for terrorism.
“I wanted to say: ‘We are with you, we want you to feel at home on your own streets, we love, support and respect you’,” Dr Ashman said.
Apparently Dr. Ashman has not heard of the Iranian women who have been beaten and arrested for refusing to wear the hijab. Nor of the untold thousands of other Muslim girls and women who have been punished, even murdered, for not wearing a hijab, such as Aqsa Parvez, who was choked to death by her father. Not all Muslim women are delighted with the decision by some New Zealand women to wear the hijab as a sign of solidarity with Muslims; for them, the hijab is a sign of oppression.
And why must Dr. Ashman insist to Muslims that “we love, support and respect you”? On what basis should we now “love, support, and respect” Muslims? What exactly has changed in the texts and teachings of Islam? Did Islam suddenly become what it never was in 1,400 years, a peaceful and tolerant faith, because of the attack by a single loon in Christchurch? Have the 109 Jihad verses in the Qur’an been rendered null and void? Is the description of Unbelievers as “the most vile of created beings” (98;6) no longer in the Qur’an? Do the Hadith no longer contain Muhammad’s boast that “I have been made victorious through terror”?
As Christchurch locals prayed in front of the Al Noor mosque on Friday, where most of the victims were killed last week, women in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch posted pictures of themselves in headscarves, some with children in headscarves too.
“Why am I wearing a headscarf today? Well, my primary reason was that if anybody else turns up waving a gun, I want to stand between him and anybody he might be pointing it at,” Bell Sibly said in Christchurch.
Last week, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern won the respect of millions around the world when she wore a black hijab when meeting members of the Muslim community following the shootings. On Friday, the country came together in a national day of reflection, which saw Muslims and non-Muslims, including Ardern, appear in hijab.
During the service, the Muslim Call to Prayer (adhan) was broadcast across the country followed by two minutes of silence in memory of those who lost their lives in the terror attack.
The hijab, which has long been assumed to be a sign of oppression, is now a sign of unity. A sign of respect for Muslim women, Islam, and all religions.
The hijab has not become any less a sign of oppression for those millions of Muslim girls and women who are forced to wear it against their will; wearing it demonstrates not unity with Muslims, but only unity with a certain kind of Muslim female, those who submit to wearing the hijab. How is wearing the hijab, which many Muslim women object to, “a sign of respect for Muslim women, Islam, and all religions”? If wearing the hijab were always a free choice, that would be one thing. But since it is forced on women, it is not a sign of of freedom, but of Islamic misogyny.
Under the Instagram pictures of these hijabbed New Zealanders are various virtue-signalling sentiments:
“I stand with our Muslim community today and against hate and violence of any kind. I stand with my Muslim brothers and sisters.”
It is possible to deplore the murders in Christchurch without making such a jejune statement of pseudo-solidarity. How do you “stand” with your “Muslim brothers and sisters”? Do you want to help them follow the Qur’anic commands to wage violent Jihad against all Infidels? Do you want to “stand with your Muslim brothers” when they misreat “your Muslim sisters,” as, for example, when they “beat” their wives if they suspect them of disobedience? Do you stand with your “Muslim brothers” when they take plural wives, and can divorce those wives merely by uttering the triple-talaq? Do you stand with your “Muslim brothers” when they try to impose the Muslim inheritance laws, according to which a daughter inherits half that of a son? Do you stand with your “Muslim brothers” when, in Sharia courts, a woman’s testimony is worth only half that of a man — a rule that Muhammad himself explained was “because of the deficiency in women’s intelligence”? Do you stand with your “Muslim sisters” only when they wear the hijab, but not if they refuse to wear the hijab? Do you stand with your “Muslim brothers and sisters” if they decide they wish to leave Islam, or do you agree that they deserve the most severe punishment for daring to do so?
Someone else, also smiling and hijabbed, offers this statement:
“To pay respect [sic] and show our support to the Muslim community”
Did that hijabbed woman go to the French embassy in Auckland to “pay respects and show support” for France and its people after the attack on Charlie Hebdo and the kosher market that left 17 dead, or after the attack on the Bataclan nightclub and cafes that left 130 dead, or after the Bastille Day murder of 87 French people as they walked along the Promenade in Nice, by a Muslim driving a truck ? Not after any of the three? Did she, do you think, go to the Israeli embassy to “pay respects and show solidarity” for the dozens of terrorist attacks over the last few years? Of course not. But why not visibly show support when it is Unbelievers who are killed? Is it only Muslims who deserve these displays of solidarity?
And what does it mean to “show our support to the Muslim community”? Does it mean we have to accept, perhaps even approve, of Muslim attitudes and behavior toward Unbelievers? Why can’t we express sorrow for the killings, without being put in a position of having to say we support or endorse Islam? We non-Muslims are sorry for the killings at the two mosques. How many times must that be said? There is no need to “love, support, and respect” Muslims.
“Standing with our Muslim sisters” [the statement of yet another hijabbed woman in New Zealand]
How should these New Zealand women “stand with [their] Muslim sisters” beyond getting their pictures taken wearing hijabs? Wouldn’t a better way to “stand with [your] Muslim sisters” be to support campaigns against clitoridectomy in Muslim lands, to support international efforts to ensure that Muslim men no longer get away with light sentences for “honor killings,” to ensure that cover, from hijab to niqab, chador, and burka, is a free choice, and to support the right of Muslim women to refuse to cover, to help women in Muslim countries who are working to end child-marriage, the practice of polygyny, and the triple-talaq as a way for Muslim men to divorce? These undertakings would actually mean something to your “Muslim sisters,” not all of whom are delighted — see below — with this hijab hysteria.
“I stand with our Muslim community today and against hate and violence of any kind.”[yet another hijabbed woman]
“Hate and violence of any kind”? Do you, Ms. X, mean to include the “hate and violence” that are such a salient feature of the Qur’an and hadith? Do you have in mind the more than 100 Qur’anic verses that command violent Jihad, including a number that explicitly call for “striking terror in the hearts of the Infidels”? Do you hope that just as non-Muslims, including yourself, have rallied around Muslims, that Muslims will return the favor, and distance themselves explicitly from those 109 Jihad verses? Do you expect them to denounce the antisemitic verses in the Qur’an, such as the following, compiled by Robert Spencer:
“The Qur’an depicts the Jews as inveterately evil and bent on destroying the wellbeing of the Muslims. They are the strongest of all people in enmity toward the Muslims (5:82); as fabricating things and falsely ascribing them to Allah (2:79; 3:75, 3:181); claiming that Allah’s power is limited (5:64); loving to listen to lies (5:41); disobeying Allah and never observing his commands (5:13); disputing and quarreling (2:247); hiding the truth and misleading people (3:78); staging rebellion against the prophets and rejecting their guidance (2:55); being hypocritical (2:14, 2:44); giving preference to their own interests over the teachings of Muhammad (2:87); wishing evil for people and trying to mislead them (2:109); feeling pain when others are happy or fortunate (3:120); being arrogant about their being Allah’s beloved people (5:18); devouring people’s wealth by subterfuge (4:161); slandering the true religion and being cursed by Allah (4:46); killing the prophets (2:61); being merciless and heartless (2:74); never keeping their promises or fulfilling their words (2:100); being unrestrained in committing sins (5:79); being cowardly (59:13-14); being miserly (4:53); being transformed into apes and pigs for breaking the Sabbath (2:63-65; 5:59-60; 7:166); and more.”
Would you be outraged if Muslims refused to denounce the verses that command Jihad against all Infidels, or those that express antisemitic sentiments? Or would you give them a pass? Haven’t you claimed to be against “hate and violence of any kind”? Would you still wear your hijab as a sign of solidarity with Muslims?
Another hijab wearer, under her Instagram photo, has the declaration “Defeat Islamophobia.”
“Islamophobia” is the word invented by apologists for Islam to suggest that any criticism of Islam, no matter how sober, measured, and evidence-based it may be, is actually “an irrational fear or hatred of Islam.” The word is meant to deliberately misrepresent all reasoned criticism as merely a “phobia.” This sleight of word, by dint of repetition, has had its effect in silencing many potential critics of Islam who do not wish to be seen as “islamophobes.” They need a word to describe themselves; the best candidate, I have often suggested, is the sober “islamocritic,” which does not condemn those who are critical of Islam.
Another new hijab-wearer is delighted with her Muslim and non-Muslim “sisters” coming together:
“I have never seen this kind of solidarity in my entire life.”
Non-Muslim women are expressing “solidarity” with Muslim women, but the reverse is not true. No Muslim women in New Zealand, Australia, the United Kingdom, or anywhere else have demonstrated in solidarity with the thousands of English girls who were groomed and held as sex slaves — passed around like candy — by Muslim grooming gangs. No Muslim women have expressed solidarity with the 2,000 German women who endured sexual assaults by 1,400 Muslims in Cologne on New Year’s Day on 2016. No Muslim women have expressed solidarity with the Yazidi girls who endured every kind of savagery when they were forced to become sex slaves of the fanatical Muslims of the Islamic state. It appears that the “solidarity” is only in one direction.
Furthermore, these hijabbed non-Muslims, expressing their “solidarity” with their “Muslim sisters,” are unaware of those Muslim women who find their hijab campaign so very wrong.
While the New Zealand campaign won support and appreciation from the Islamic Women’s Council of New Zealand and the NZ Muslim Association, it has opponents in New Zealand and beyond.
In an unsigned opinion piece on Stuff.co.nz, a Muslim woman called the [#headscarfforharmony] movement “cheap tokenism.”
Mehrbano Malik, a 22-year-old woman from Pakistan also writing for Stuff.co.nz, said while she was “deeply touched by the sentiment”, the #headscarfforharmony movement reflected “Orientalist ideologies”.
“There are many, many Muslim women who do not veil,” she wrote.
“Veiling is not an inherent part of Islam. It is not mentioned anywhere in the Quran.”
Mehrbano Malik is herself clearly against wearing of the hijab, or other more extreme forms of coverage (niqab, chador, burka), and would prefer some other way of expressing sympathy for the Christchurch victims than wearing what she sees as a symbol of oppression.
Still another opponent of the “#”scarvesinsolidarity movement has been “the United Nations Special Rapporteur for Culture, Karima Bennoune, [who] took to Twitter to challenge the movement, pointing to the case of Nasrin Sotoudeh, who was convicted and faces years in prison for defending women who took part in a viral protest against mandatory headscarves in Iran.
An Islamic studies lecturer, Raihan Ismail, answered some common questions about Muslim veils on Twitter.
“Can I respectfully ask those thinking of participating in #scarvesinsolidarity [to] please also consider that millions of #Muslim #women do not wear [the] hijab, don’t want [to] wear it, [and] many like #NasrinSotoudeh take great risks [to] defend this opposition?” she wrote on Twitter.
Asra Nomani, a former journalist in Washington, who has campaigned for Muslim reform, urged women not to wear a headscarf for harmony.
“It is a symbol of purity culture antithetical to feminist values. We have women in jail and dead, for refusing the interpretation of Islam you promote,” Professor Nomani said on Twitter.
There are ways to express sympathy for the victims of the Christchurch attack other than that chosen by many women in New Zealand, who have been proudly wearing the hijab, which, as we have just seen, is understood by many Muslim women to be a symbol of oppression, one which millions of Muslim women object to; some have been imprisoned, and even killed, for refusing to wear the hijab. The lawyer Nasrin Soutoudeh was recently sentenced to 38 years in jail merely for defending women in Iran who had removed their hijab.
In New Zealand, some non-Muslims have been expressing, in ever more absurd rhetoric, what they think of as “solidarity.” “We Support and Love You,””We Are You,” “We Are One.” What does that idiotic phrase “We Are You” mean? And why should you proclaim that you “love” Muslims? Do you “love” Americans because of 9/11? Do you “love” the French because of the attacks on Charlie Hebdo, the Bataclan nightclub, the Promenade in Nice? Of course not. You are sorry for those who died and enraged at those who killed them. That’s it. That’s enough. The New Zealand Prime Minister, who initially set the tone, need not have worn the hijab except when she was visiting a mosque; her decision to wear it even outside the mosques no doubt contributed to the mania for wearing hijabs to express “solidarity” with Muslim “sisters.” A dignified visit to the wounded, an expression of sympathy, a deploring of the attack, was all that was called for. There was no need for New Zealanders to fall all over themselves in quite unnecessary and idiotic expressions of love for, and total identification with, Muslims. This behavior is both foolish and dangerous.
Perhaps a few dozen of the best-known Muslim women who work to reform the faith, and deplore the #scarvesinsolidarity group, could write a collective letter, to be published in New Zealand’s main newspapers and online, in which they can explain their objections, and describe the difficulties Muslim women face, including severe punishment by the state, or by male relatives, if they refuse to wear the hijab (or niqab, chador, or burka). This might cause some in New Zealand to reconsider their insensate enthusiasm for the hijab and for something they know so little about but claim to love and respect — they call it “Islam” — and ideally, to redirect their sympathies to Muslim reformers, who need all the help they can get.
Vladimir says
Totally agree with this article – I currently live in NZ and I was horrified by the carnage that took place in Christchurch. However, Ardern’s subsequent behaviour is as over the top as it is hypocritical and misguided.
Hugh Fitzgerald says
One would like to say to Prime Minister Ardern — here I am assuming from your name that the Russian language might need no introduction — ври, да знай же меру. It’s a line from “Woe From Wit,” by the famous playwright Griboyedov, and means “Lie, but know when to stop.” Griboyedov, incidentally, who was the Russian ambassador to Qatar Persia, was killed by Muslims. He was murdered by a Muslim mob in Teheran in 1829, when he tried to protect two Armenian Christian girls who had escaped from the Shah’s son-in-law’s harem, as well as a eunuch who had run away from the Shah’s harem.
And thus, dear hijabette and prime minister of all you survey, Jacinda Ardern, now being proposed by your army of instant admirers as a candidate for the Nobel Prize for Peace, if you must say something beyond the dignified expression of horror and sorrow, do not mislead about “our” — Infidels of the world — feelings. We are not “one with Muslims.” We do not “love and support” Muslims — why should we? We are sorry for what the lone lunatic did. We are not required to also give aid and comfort to those who are taught to fight us, to smite at our necks, to strike terror in our hearts, to despise us as “the most vile of created beings”
As for that hadith you read aloud, you completely misunderstood its significance. You read out: “The believers in their mutual kindness, compassion, and sympathy are just like one body. When any part of the body suffers, the whole body feels pain.”
Who are the “believers”? They are fellow Muslims; they are to feel “kindness, compassion, and sympathy” only for fellow Muslims. Look everywhere in the Qur’an, and you will not find expressions of “kindness, compassion, and sympathy” for non-Muslims. That hadith’s clear division of the world between the Believers (Muslims) and everyone else, quite passed over you.
PRCS says
One can safely assume–yes, I know–that she was given that and other passages from Islam’s texts to consider not by a ‘filthy unbeliever’ but, Mashallah, a member of the umma. Did any of her kuffar staff members research them before selecting that particular hadith? Did she?
Brian Ozzy says
Hugh Fitzgerald’s comment sums up the repulsively sycophantic and ignorant behavior of PM Arden and all the other useful idiots and their sickeningly idiotic responses perfectly. As he says the verses meaning that she quoted went right over her head but unfortunately there is no cure, except a tad of knowledge, for the warm fuzzy-wuzzy feeling that makes all these idiots feel so good about their enlightened and compassionate selves that is based on nothing but dangerous ignorance. Also Hugh a marvelous article and spot-on!
gravenimage says
Hugh Fitzgerald wrote:
Griboyedov, incidentally, who was the Russian ambassador to Qatar Persia, was killed by Muslims. He was murdered by a Muslim mob in Teheran in 1829, when he tried to protect two Armenian Christian girls who had escaped from the Shah’s son-in-law’s harem, as well as a eunuch who had run away from the Shah’s harem.
……………………
Hugh, you are a font of knowledge–I had not heard about this awful event.
Griboyedov was obviously a very brave man. And he was not the only one who died–the Muslim mob wiped out the entire Russian diplomatic legation. Persian Muslims storming an embassy and menacing the diplomats? That sounds oddly familiar…
One miniscule correction–I believe this is Qajar Persia–that is, Persia under the Qajar dynasty–rather than Qatar Persia.
Rob says
Jacinda in a hijab to show solidarity with Muslims. But she caused great offense when she visited the deeply Christian conservative Pacific Islands as an all-too-obviously pregnant unmarried woman with her BF in tow and expecting to be treated as a married couple.
gravenimage says
Agree with Vladimir.
Lydia Church says
The “I am you” slogan is one of the terminology and phraseology orchestrations (such as with the blank-o-phobias) in the war that is ushering everyone into that big warm and fuzzy global ‘oneness’ and this is part of the campaign. The bit about ‘all religions’ is also a tip of the hat to the one world religion under antichrist (you know who).
Down Under and Over the Top….
yes.
And “we’re not going to take this laying down”!
joel mcilveen says
Lydia I love your comments! Pls tell me who you know who is, I wld love to hear it!
Mac-101 says
Are these the same women who burned their bras back in the 60’s? LOL!
CRUSADER says
“….they call it “Islam” — and ideally, to redirect their sympathies to Muslim reformers, who need all the help they can get….”
BUT: Can Islam be reformed? How to handle the perfection of the Qur’an? Is it not unchangeable? Is it no inalterable as well as not unalterable?
AND: Who are these reformers? Who is on the list?
CRUSADER says
Irshad Manji and Bill Maher Debate France’s Burqa Ban
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFETapc1cZc
Indiana Tom says
The Muslims had their reformation and it was called Whabbanism. Back to the fundamentals. Next question.
gravenimage says
Spot on, Indiana Tom.
carpediadem says
No.And incidentally that never happened.
Mac-101 says
I kind of remember it happenin as a young man seein ALL those puppies bouncing ALL around unrestrained. LOL!
gravenimage says
True, carpediadem.
Cece says
In Western Christian democracies, women have the most rights, the most freedoms and are generally the most independent and wealthy. It is hard for me to reconcile Western women’s embrace of Islam, because I know most of these women would never want to live in an Islamic country with sharia laws. So why the big welcome, or the ‘pass’ on the violence? I think it because in the now Western secular societies, there is the belief that all religions are the same. And that Christianity is the same as Islam….i.e., they are all wierd and crazy….equally violent. So if you talk about Islam, they talk about Christian fundamentalism. There is a profound ignorance of all religious texts, well and history, too.
I was talking w/ a friend who is a male homosexual who was defending Islam to me. I responded, You are defending a religion that would have you thrown off a roof! He changed the subject. Now we don’t talk about it.
As for the women, maybe they admire the hyper masculine culture with has very set limits and laws. Obviously, I’m going to have to ask more questions to get to the bottom of it. It’s like white people don’t believe they have a culture worth saving.
Mac-101 says
Bro, once you git to da bottom of it, I want a report of your findings. LOL!
Buraq says
Good article! Here’s my two-cents worth.
‘…… on Instagram, ……… each text more treacly than the last.’ (Hugh Fitzgerald)
And the undertow of meaning following in the wake of this phrase perfectly characterizes the dralon-furniture, lottery-ticket-buying sensibility of the modern day citizen all over the world! Treacly, sentimental, maudlin and, ultimately, shallow.
In a month or two, these hijabs will be ironed and folded, then buried under a pile of linen in a suburban cupboard, or pressed into service as cloths used to polish the Ikea furniture. Or draped raffishly around a neck as a splash of color when meeting ‘the girls’ for a coffee and gossip at a chic bistro in town.
Islam’s biggest problem will be ‘the commitment’ thing. Ikea’s latest glossy brochure easily beats reading about Al Qur’an’s demand for 100% commitment to the death. So, I wouldn’t worry too much that Jacinda Ardern hugs everyone at the Mosque while muttering sympathy for Allah’s surviving slaves.
The hijab-wearing citizens will already be thinking about the next episode of ‘Game of Thrones’, or dreaming about George Clooney crushing them in his arms!
Clowns!
Sivle says
Fortunately she didn’t go all the way and wear a niqab.
You could be right but we’ll know for sure when the anniversary of this
disaster comes around -in a waking nightmare I see that in Australia 1n 2020
they have conflated the March anniversary with Anzac Day in April -everything stops (like a Melbourne Cup Day) and all the war veterans, television presenters (in hijabs), repentant Catholic priests (seeping out of the woodwork), all 25 million people, weep as the alien wail comes out through every radio and television and even in the streets from loudspeakers. It’s just a bad dream but I just can’t seem to wake up, can’t get back into the real sane world which is not populated by Dover zombies allowed to tell the Prime Minister that he is a stupid infidel…we have nothing like Lese Majeste; we are a Free Country; we have Free Speech; and they are free to destroy us.
jonwhinch says
excellent . The truth shall set you free !
Anjuli Pandavar says
This is a brilliant article, full of force, full of facts, well-written. The line that resonated with me most is, “We non-Muslims are sorry for the killings at the two mosques. How many times must that be said? There is no need to “love, support, and respect” Muslims.”
I especially appreciate that it is also strong direct criticism of Muslims, proving that it is possible to quite sensibly and soberly criticise Muslims without sinking into bigotry. The exaggerated distinction made between Islam and Muslims, and the fervour with which that distinction is insisted upon even if it stands in the way of a critical assessment of Muslims (yes, the people), has no place in the philosophy of the critical mind. I am very happy to see it so decisively set aside. Thank you for a thought-provoking text.
gravenimage says
Yes–Hugh Fitzgerald’s analysis is always excellent.
CRUSADER says
Precisely.
How far are we to “stand” together?
To the point of conversion?
Such “false pretense”.
CRUSADER says
“jejune statement of pseudo-solidarity.”
INDEED SO !!!
Michael Garant says
It is called prostitution for profit. They are doing this to protect their meat industry and market. New Zeland is an certified halal meat producer.
When you prostitue yourself for this, you will prostitue yourself for anything.
gravenimage says
You find similar toadying to Islam in countries that do not have a major Halal meat industry though, too.
simpleton1 says
Many other countries, like Great Britain and the USA, are very ok with halal meat in general, so it is very difficult for a small country like NZ to hold the line.
Though NZ meat companies do play the “shell game” to which markets they put the “halal” sticker on.
One of the few meat companies to change from halal. A very small company.
http://i.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/news/3062363/Move-from-halal-brings-manna-for-meat-firm
Nov 2009
Sadly there was not enough support for them, demand for the meat products, and with financial pressures to comply I note that they are now registered as “approved animal products halal premises (excluding dairy) as at 1 Mar 2019”
It is market demand, and being ok to pay a bit of premium. That is the bottom line, and unless many others make that a cause, then islam will collect the dues in halal compliance from all of us.
Kay says
“I have never seen this kind of solidarity in my entire life.”
——————————-/
That is because the sentiment of being “one” expressed by the Prime Minister as being taught by Mohammed is actually a Christian ideal.
See for one, St Paul in 1 Corinthians 12.
Since Jesus came to fulfill the law, I would expect this ideal is also in the Torah.
Mohammed May have said it too— but did he say it consistently in various places and ways, and did his life demonstrate it?
More to the point, New Zealanders and other civilized people in the world felt compassion and solidarity because we have a culture and values built on judeochristian values and beliefs.
somehistory says
Kay
Exactly so. And although Christians all over the world feel at “one” with all other Christians, we don’t all dress the same. When we read of Christians in Nigeria, or any place else on earth, being slaughtered by moslims, we don’t all go out dressed as those Christians in other countries dress.
Christians show the “oneness in the faith” by prayer for endurance for those suffering in whatever way this may be, but we don’t make a big outward show to be seen on the world stage.
Putting on a scarf for a few hours or a few days only shows the moslims who expect women and girls to wear them or be raped, that they can use such a terrible act to gain support for islam. It shows people like sarsour and the many imams preaching hate that they are gaining in their campaign to silence opposition and to get sympathy for any and every time they may even just appear to be victims, even if it’s as “victims” of Truth.
gravenimage says
Good post, Kay.
Kay says
Thank you
CRUSADER says
What does “solidarity” in this case mean?
To what extent are we now to be doing so?:
———————————————————-
“On what basis should we now “love, support, and respect” Muslims?”
Crusades Were Right says
What a great idea – wearing the garb of another group that strikingly conflicts with culture and values of the country in order to achieve peace!
Now, let’s see her apply this approach to other regions of the world. She could, for example, head over to Yemen, or Mali, or Nigeria, or Afghanistan to appeal for peace…
…WEARING A BIKINI!
Worth a try, no?
Indiana Tom says
That could be interesting. At one time, a TV show was aired showing a Chinese American girl having rocks thrown at her in Algeria or Morocco because she was simply wearing shorts.
James Lincoln says
New Zealanders — men as well as women — were asked to wear the hijab on Friday…
My question to the group is simple: what would have happened to these non-Muslim New Zealanders if they were NOT ALLOWED – by Muslims – to remove the hijab on Saturday?
simpleton1 says
J.L. a good point.
It is like playing with a “tar baby”
A little hijab for now, and as you point out, Do not take it off tomorrow, or next week, ….. or forever.
But your hair was not properly covered. Do it again, but more properly.
Is that lipstick, No we can not allow lipstick on a *** , but that can be cured.
Just a bit more cloth over the top of the head.
Cultural misappropriation? no problem.
Just recite the shahada to be properly in solidarity.
Is it not so wonderful that you are at one with us?.
Apostasy? you really would not like to know.
observer says
I am so irritated by Jacinda Ardern who appears, bizarrely, to have morphed into a muslim identity in order in order to decry the actions of a mad extremist. Her behaviour seems to reveal an unhealthy co-dependence on the ‘other’. She seems pathologcally unable to maintain her Western identity whilst supporting those who were on the receiving end of this horror. It seems bizarre to me. Is she so ashamed of her Western identity that she must wear a muslim head scarf ? If so, perhaps conversion to sharia is the way to go?
I have difficulty coping with that seemingly staged look of tragedy she displays so constantly. Instinctively, I feel it is false.
I find myself wondering what she would do if the shoe were on the other foot and she found herself needing to support Western citizens ( = hated infidels) massacred by a muslims, which is usually the way massacres play out these days, and which will very likely happen in NZ not long from now…
No prize for any guesses as to what her response would be…
tim gallagher says
I agree with your comment, observer. I am also extremely irritated by the over the top carry on by Ardern. Of course, she would need to express some sympathy but the carry on has been far too much. It seems like a surrender to islam to me. And, as you say, most massacres are by Muslim terrorists against non-Muslims. I can’t recall any show of support and solidarity from the Muslims for the non-Muslims after such attacks. I believe almost all Muslims hate non-Muslims and therefore have no compassion, no human emotion for non-Muslims. I see Ardern’s response as basically being what you’d expect from a left wing person. Always on the side of Islam, which is something I’ll never understand.. It’s pathetic and such attitudes endanger all of us non-Muslims.
dumbledoresarmy says
Same here. The thing is: the *instant* that the news broke I *saw* all of this coming down the pike. It was just awful, watching it playing out exactly as expected. That evil fool who – in a western country, ostensibly at peace – broke our western laws, and went into that mosque and shot people who, though members of the religion of blood and war, were at that time and in that moment unarmed and not at that moment offering immediate violence, did *huge* damage to the cause of the counter-jihad. It will now be *extremely* difficult – even more difficult than it already has been, and that really is saying something – for anyone within the West – not just in NZ but everywhere – to try to publicly, calmly, rationally criticise Islam, *at all*.
tim gallagher says
Peter35, I agree with the two alternative outcomes that you outline. When it comes to Islam, it is them or us. Either we will win or they will win. And, I have to say, that I honestly have to admit that I have not been too bothered by those rare fightback attacks, such as the attack on the NZ mosque. The guy in Norway didn’t kill Muslims but just young leftwingers, didn’t he. There have been endless Muslim attacks on innocent people and that is the reason that I personally don’t care when the Muslims receive some of their own treatment back. There’s that report here on Jihad Watch that non-Muslims are 143 times more likely to be murdered by MUslims in Muslim countries than Muslims are in non-Muslim nations. Says it all. I understand why you say that many people are too soft and are “masochists”. I don’t want us to end up with civil wars in our countries. I prefer peace. My only solution is to keep Muslims out, keep Islam out. Of course, we already have idiotically let some Muslims in, but, we can wake up and stop letting more in. Hungary has the right approach. Otherwise we are going to end up with war in our countries as Muslims try to take over. dumbledoresarmy, I’ve read enough of your excellent comments over the years to know that you also want us to stop letting Muslims in. There’s no other solution. Politically, Ardern, or any other political leader in any country, would have had to express some sympathy. I have found the over the top response (it’s been surrender) she’s put on sickening.
gravenimage says
Fine analysis, DDA.
tim gallagher says
Yes, Peter35, we’re on the same track. We’d keep Muslims out and there would be far more peace. Japan’s another example of a country that lets very few Muslims in and I often hear how peaceful it is, mainly from a radio presenter here in Australia who goes there every year to go on a skiing holiday. Hungary, the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia will all avoid Muslim terrorist attacks by keeping Muslims out. “Those who know “better””, as you call them, are know nothing fools when it comes to Islam’s nature. I just battle on, write to politicians from time to time calling on them to wake up and stop Muslim immigration and wait for the majority of our population to wake up. That’s what has to happen. I hope it will happen sometime in the near future.
Taurus in Germany says
Apparently right-wing terrorists are really too stupid to realize that with their crimes they are playing into the hands of political Islam and its left-green, pseudo-liberal and “Christian” apologists. Once again Muslims can present themselves as victims (this time rightly so), reinforce the “Islamophobia” propaganda, draw the “racism” card and distract from Islamic terror. Fanaticism eats brain.
gravenimage says
It’s hard to know how to characterize the NZ shooter. I’ve read his witless “manifesto”, and he variously calls himself an “eco-fascist” and expresses admiration for Communist China.
CRUSADER says
Not only Jihad Watch
but also
Hijab Watch….
Why Girls Are Taking Off Hijab
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2atV258ED1w
PRCS says
Note: The woman in the “Taking Off Hijab” video says reason #1 for TAKING IT OFF is [essentially] fear of being abused FOR WEARING IT–(in the U.S.).
But wait!
Islamic law says PUT IT ON to distinguish yourselves from “unbelieving and slave women” and to not be abused–by Muslim men
By Muslim men? Yes, because Islamic law only applies to Muslims, dhimmis, slaves and travelers–where it’s THE law of the land.
The woman apparently realizes that hijab doesn’t protect Muslim women here.
This Utah Muslim girl apparently doesn’t realize she’s no longer in Iraq.
https://fox13now.com/2018/11/15/letter-encourages-schools-to-adopt-religious-clothing-guidelines-after-boy-rips-girls-hijab-off-during-recess/
gravenimage says
PRCS wrotre:
Note: The woman in the “Taking Off Hijab” video says reason #1 for TAKING IT OFF is [essentially] fear of being abused FOR WEARING IT–(in the U.S.).
……………..
Thanks for pointing out that mendacious claptrap, PRCS.
Wellington says
Sentimentalism plus ignorance can often abet malevolence, as demonstrated this week in New Zealand by scores of non-Muslim women who would be treated very differently in Muslim nations aplenty.
Put more plainly, what a bunch of useful idiots.
gravenimage says
Spot on.
Indiana Tom says
Many non-Muslim women, too, have emulated her, wearing hijabs in solidarity with Muslims, showing their hijabbed selves on Instagram,
Well, they might as well get used to it since NZ seems so enthusiastic about catering to Muslims and later converting to Islam.
Indiana Tom says
If the NZ women want to stand with their Muslim sisters, why don’t they go to Iran, Saudi Arabia, or other Islamic countries and fight and protest for women’s rights there?
FYI says
Has Ardern not heard of the Yazidi women FORCED to wear the hijab or Iranian women
currently protesting about having to wear it?
And that islamic call to “prayer”?
It is directed at the moslem pagan god allah “the BEST of deceivers” k3:54
A god who CURSES Christians koran 9:30
A god whose greatest enemy is MALIK AL AMLAK{Sahih Muslim vol 5 hadith #5611}
..which is Jesus Christ
A god who is OK with women being RAPED koran 4:24,Abu Dawud vol 2 hadith # 2155
A god who says women are only HALF the worth of men{Sahih Bukhari 2658}
“This{said muhammed} is because of the DEFICIENCY OF A WOMAN’S MIND”
{That’s a bit rich coming from an illiterate moron,muhammed…k7:157 “who could neither read nor write”}And a god who says most women go to hell{sahih muslim 241}
A god whose name is the Greatest Deceiver{Khayrul Makhereen}
allah is NOT the Judeo-Christian God.
Remember what the hijab actually represents
Where are the Christians in NZ to warn about islam’s existential threat to its society?
The goal of islam is to “CONVERT EVERYBODY to islam by persuasion or by FORCE”
ibn khaldun{muqqadimah}
It starts by getting them to wear the hijab,have interfaith “prayers”{to allah the deceiver??},introduce islamic teachings in schools,subvert christianity…
See too on YT the Apostate Prophet channel..
The origin of the hijab-allah takes orders from a man
Seth says
The obdurate stupidity and lethal ignorance on display is enraging. They’re proud of their imbecility.
It’s a New Zealandian degringolade!
Geoffrey de Brito says
Just liberal “useful idiots”, virtue signaling… sheep.
When Islam takes over, they’ll predictably wonder how this could happen… and Islam’s answer will be the same as the Mexican bandit in the movie, “The Magnificent Seven” proclaiming, “If God did not want them sheared, he would not have made them sheep”.
somehistory says
Perhaps the pm wanted to convert. Using the attacks and choosing to show “solidarity” by wearing a scarf…a symbol of evil that says “rape her, not me” to the male of the species, would be a way to slowly announce the conversion, as opposed to announcing one morning that the conversion had taken place.
People can be exceedingly brainless in making decisions. They see others feeding alligators, they want to do it, to heck with the risks. They see others bungee jumping, they want to also, to heck with the risks.
Some idiot with a visible platform dons a scarf and ties it as moslims do, encouraging everyone else to do it…and others do without a thought for any risks.
The Bible said the serpent was the “most cautious” creature. The devil, the “original serpent,” doesn’t just come out and pronounce that he is satan and wants all of mankind to be destroyed. satan the devil is deceitful, “transforming himself into an angel of light.” He is using islam to slither his way into people’s lives and take over in order to destroy. The pm of NZ is assisting this demon to do that.
Mac-101 says
Well said1
No Muzzies Here says
Jacinda didn’t earn any of my respect by wearing a headscarf. She earned my pity, for being such a dummy/dhimmi. She has shown us who controls her.
PS, Muslims are not your brothers or sisters. They hate you. Read their book.
Cece says
Women (by in large) value compassion and inclusion. Historically they are the nurturers. That is why (historically) it is men who have fought wars and patrolled the perimeter (check out some of Jordan Peterson’s videos). I know women want to be leaders and politicians but what I am seeing is them being very bad at it. Think of Theresa May, who can’t seem to Brexit, Angela Merkel who welcomed millions of military aged men from 3rd world countries into Europe who are now sitting on the dole, the Swedish government with their idiotic refugee policies. In Seattle, WA we have all these drug addicts camping in the parks costing the city millions of dollars. We have a predominately female city council and they cannot seem to hold a hard boundary. We are essentially giving addicts money to camp in our parks and steal from us. When news counters the liberal ideology, the libs want to silence the speakers. Get conservative politicians in your government who can hold a boundary.
gravenimage says
This is not really about gender.
Are you really making the claim that Emmanuel Macron and Barack Obama are better leaders than were Margaret Thatcher and Golda Meir? And one of the least dhimmi politicians in Europe right now is Marine Le Pen–then there was member of the Dutch House of Representatives Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
There are strong and savvy leaders of both genders–as well, unfortunately, as dhimmi tools. The witless Jacinda Ardern is unfortunately very much one of the latter.
tgusa says
The uncomfortable and little known truth is younger men view these leftist women and the transgender males that accompany them, macron, trudeau, etc, as a grave threat to their lives and liberty. You wont hear them talk about it as with most younger men they talk among each other on the down low. The only reason I know what they are thinking is because I am considered a trusted elder male.
These non leftist younger men also view the majority of western women as not up to the fight and excepting a scattered few I have to acknowledge that they are right. Women of the west that don’t want to go along with what these leftist women are doing need to begin to fight back and fight back hard. These younger men need to know that non leftist women are with them all the way.
If non leftist western women are seen to be a weak link in the chain it will not go well for them in the future. Non leftist western women must fight for their lives and liberty or lose them. I know what these young men are thinking but I have little control of what they may eventually have to do.
gravenimage says
tgusa wrote:
If non leftist western women are seen to be a weak link in the chain it will not go well for them in the future. Non leftist western women must fight for their lives and liberty or lose them. I know what these young men are thinking but I have little control of what they may eventually have to do.
………………………
What is this intended to mean?
That young Western men are poised to mass slaughter Western women?
What the hell are you smoking? *Ugh*.
Besides–a more minor point–many of the young Western men I know are no more savvy about the threat of Islam than is any other demographic in the West.
Kerry says
I am a Christian living in Christchurch, New Zealand and I am finding it increasingly depressing here. The terrorist attack here was a terrible thing and we all feel compassion for the victims and their loved ones but the politicising of this event has been completely over the top to promote the progressive agenda that can be seen around the world in other western countries. Our free speech is under attack, Like most things that happen Trump is first to cop the blame, then the YouTube commentator PewdePie, because he was mentioned by the killer, then Jordan Peterson’s new book was confiscated by our major book retailer Whitcoulls because of a T shirt worn by a fan (one of many thousands) had his photo taken with Peterson. This somehow makes Peterson responsible for the gunman. Guilt by association. While Peterson’s book is banned, Mein Kampf can still be purchased off their shelves. Our successful Super Rugby team in Canterbury called the Crusaders are being pressured to change their name also as it now is suddenly offensive to Muslims. Once again, the title, Guilt by association. Anyone who has a different opinion to this leftist wave or has concerns about the attack on our freedoms are branded racist, Islamophobic or a hate speaker. The manifesto of the gunman has also been banned here, though I was able to read it before it was and this was done I believe to stop people from debating the narrative that has been spewed that the gunman was an alt-right radical christian when he wasn’t, rather he was an echo-fascist and is probably more left than right, but this however doesn’t fit the narrative pushed by the far left. Most of the hatred and racism I see is coming from the leftists and I feel our prime minster has been swept up in the whole wave of emotionalism and virtue signalling. As much as the say on the news and in the fake news articles put out by Stuff and NZ Herald that we are “ONE”, we are anything but and a lot of people are getting sick off it all. The gunman has done exactly what he set out to do… cause division! I kind of have a feeling of isolation amongst it all and when I see others who feel the same as I do, I don’t feel so alone, but I worry for my family and my nation. Feels like the “1984” film has become a reality. 🙁
gravenimage says
Very grim, Kerry and Peter.
thebigW says
the Muzzlimas who don’t wear the veil are wearing a better disguise that fools the counter-jihad into thinking they ain’t doing taqiyya.
gravenimage says
They are a mixed bag–certainly, some Muslimahs who eschew the Hijab are still stealth Jihadists.
gravenimage says
Hugh Fitzgerald: Down Under and Over the Top
…………….
Fine article from Hugh Fitzgerald.
Shamus says
“Never let a good crisis go to waste.”
No doubt Jacinda Ardern is sincerely horrified by this appalling crime but, at the same time, she and her government are milking it for all they are worth. It distracts public attention from the gross incompetence of their administration and a series of scandals, and is a good opportunity to rush through legislation that might otherwise have proved difficult. We have already had new restrictions on firearms, next will be a crackdown on “islamophobia.” Like many others, kiwis love virtue-signalling and relish this chance to do hakas and make speeches about love being more powerful than hate, etc.
New Zealand is a long way from the rest of the world, both physically and mentally. A well-educated friend recently referred to the upsurge of anti-semitism in France as proof of the resurgence of Nazis and seemed surprised when I suggested that those responsible were the new immigrants from North Africa and the middle east. Even before this crime, Ardern was determined to see the number of Moslems in this country grow; we have increased the annual number of refugees to be admitted (and these will not be Christians and Yazidis from Iraq and Stria, or South African farmers); we have signed up to the UN refugee convention, and she has begged the Australians to let us have the migrants from Manus Island detention camps. When ships of illegal migrants reach our shores, as no doubt they will, kiwis will be there holding welcome signs just like those deluded Germans.
JMB says
Wake up New Zealand. Yes, there was an evil crime committed by an Australian gunman, 50 innocent people lost their lives. The crime certainly was cowardly, it took place in a quiet regional city where there are no real problems with Islam and where guns are readily available. (Shooting, as in hunting is a very popular activity in NZ) The NZ PM has shown leadership and compassion but I feel talk of the Nobel Peace Prize is a bit premature. The people of NZ have collectively shown their genuine and heartfelt sorrow over this terrible crime. But surely it is now time to move on. The PM should take off her headgear and get on with running her nation. Confiscating guns will not stop another evil attack like this. But in all of this I would like some reciprocity by both the media and the Islamic world (as well as the UN) in expressing compassion and regret for the daily slaughter of Christians, the torching of their churches and burning of their homes in places such as Nigeria, Pakistan and Indonesia.
dumbledoresarmy says
“But in all of this I would like some reciprocity by both the media and the Islamic world (as well as the UN) in expressing compassion and regret for the daily slaughter of Christians, the torching of their churches and burning of their homes in places such as Nigeria, Pakistan and Indonesia.” YES. And maybe .. you could write a letter to the NZ PM, pointing out exactly that.
the hermit says
Once a politician, always a politician.
Jacinta Arden campaigned at her last election on the platform of reducing
immigration….these days I suppose she has to ensure that within her electorate, every muslim votes for her……therefore she kowtows to muslims to ensure she obtains those
votes…this is not a genuine showing of compassion…its just to get votes…
na says
Imam does not want hear what he says that is why he closed his ears. This is just for you.
TruthSeeker says
… and while praying they bend over to do unspeakable things involving their anuses , it’s the will of allah that in this way bunch of homophobic ,ass smelling, barbaric followers always blowing themselves up in slightest excuse for benefits in afterlife which nobody has seen, be nurtured and groomed , aided by wilful ignorance and complete hypocrisy by confused libtards while cunning ones like Jacinda gets her career gold plated …
na says
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZZlo0WZ_iU
na says
Hediyah Mehraj
Anjem Choudary’s daughter
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/09/22/article-0-04247F1D00000514-776_306x423.jpg
is a powerful figure like PM
HenkyPanky says
Please give Prime Minister Ardern a burka. Cann’t stand her face.
NZ, get rid of you PM and safe your beautiful country before the sharia takes over.
In Utrecht, The Netherlands, no moslima removed their hijab to show solidarity with the victims of the terrorist act last week.
Lorraine E Blazich says
The shooting in New Zealand was just another false flag no different than the many so called government produced school shootings. Watch the Caravan to Midnight web site dated 3/22/19 episode 1090 to learn about all of the signs which prove that the shooting was a nothing but a hoax to be used as another reason to disarm people world wide. Watch the YouTube “Innocents Betrayed” to see what happens to the citizens of a country which allows their government to disarm them.
Wellington says
I am against the vast majority of gun control measures because they don’t work and just leave law-abiding citizens more defenseless, but how was the killing of 50 people, irrespective of their religious affiliation (and for the record, I detest Islam but I don’t detest all Muslims though I think all Muslims are confused human beings), a hoax?
You can’t just claim something is a hoax and then provide no evidence that the “something” was a hoax. And I don’t need to watch anything. I am so tired of people saying you need to watch this or read that. Once in a while there is a basis for this, but the vast majority of the time it is symptomatic that the person can’t make a clear and cogent argument. Like you.
gravenimage says
No, this was not a hoax. The shooter filmed the massacre–it did indeed take place.
The reaction to this awful massacre has been mostly disgusting, as the story above–but that does not mean it did not happen.
By the way, the man behind “Caravan to Midnight”–John B. Wells–is a 9/11 “Truther”.
Brian hoff says
This woman PM have than very good change or being reelected. You people in NZ who dislike liberals and muslim miss the point that she is stoping violence. You donot want to have peaceful relationship with muslim.
gravenimage says
Firstly, Ardern was not elected.
Then, is “Brian hoff”–really, “DefenderofIslam”–saying that the only way of “stoping violence” from Muslims is to cringingly toady to them? *Ugh*.