What Hillary’s Hijab Portends for America

In her latest campaign ad https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKoPjeSt2CM, Hillary Clinton has donned the hijab. Muslims are currently…

In her latest campaign ad https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKoPjeSt2CM, Hillary Clinton has donned the hijab.

Muslims are currently estimated to be around three per cent of the US population. Their number has doubled since 9/11, and so has the number of mosques in the US.

After the deadly terrorist attacks on its own soil by the Muslim terrorists, the US has stepped up its efforts to keep Muslims in good humour, has opened its gates for them, has increased its outreach to the Muslims worldwide, and now there are calls in the US to place curbs on free speech to keep Islam above scrutiny and criticism.

Further, Iftar was never held at The White House before 9/11. No, the dinner hosted by Thomas Jefferson for the Bey of Tunis’ temporary envoy, one Sidi Soliman Mellimelli, was not the first White House Iftar. During the six solar months Mellimelli was in Washington, the lunar month of Ramadan occurred. And as it happens, during that Ramadan observed by Mellimelli, but naturally unobserved, hardly noticed, by the Americans, President Jefferson invited Sidi Soliman Mellimelli for dinner at the White House. He probably during that six-month period had done it more than once. Mellimelli replied that he could not come at the appointed hour of three thirty in the afternoon (our ancestors rose much earlier, and ate much earlier, and went to bed much earlier, in the pre-Edison days of their existence). That time fell, for him, but not for Thomas Jefferson or anyone else in the United States of America, during the fasting period of the month of Ramadan. He replied that he could not come at the hour set, that is, at half-past three, but only after sundown.

Jefferson, a courteous man, simply moved the dinner forward by a few hours. He didn’t change the menu, he didn’t change anything else. And moving the dinner forward by a few hours hardly turns that dinner into a soi-disant “Iftar Dinner.”

But after 9/11, Iftar has been regularly held at The White House. Evidently, if violence brings such rich rewards for the Muslims, they would never give it up.

And the dividends only continue to increase in size as the Hillary Clinton’s Hijab shows.

Hijab, and its variant, the burqa, is the most potent weapon and symbol of the gender segregation in Muslim societies, which is at the root of dysfunctionality of Muslim societies. It keeps women subjugated, uneducated, without opportunities to work, thus making them totally dependent on menfolk in the society. For Hillary Clinton to sanction Hijab is to sanction the oppression of Muslim women even in the free society of the US.

But why did she don the hijab? She knows that presidential races are a close affair. A win or loss occurs with a difference of a couple of percentage points. So, at three per cent of the total population, Muslim votes would become decisive, as they vote as a single bloc, and vote 100 per cent. And to garner such an all-important vote block, a politician would do anything. And so Hillary Clinton has submitted and donned the Hijab in the campaign video.

If Americans have any sense left, they should readily deduce that if at three per cent of the Muslim population their presidential candidate has donned the Hijab, by the time the Muslim population reaches five or ten per cent of the total US population, she would readily be in a burqa.

And Muslim numbers are sure to increase, with continuing high immigration from Muslim countries, caused by dysfunctional societies and barren economies in those countries, and encouraged by the appeasement and dhimmitude of the American politicians. The crucial factor of the higher fertility rate of Muslim families also plays a big role.

Equally, Americans would do well to remember that increased Muslim numbers would certainly cause Islam’s Rule of Numbers to kick in.

With the Rule of Numbers in place, submission and sharia facilitation by the American politicians would only accelerate, and more sharia would mean less freedoms, less commerce, and finally, less kafirs.

This happened even as Europe slept, and now when it seems to have woken up, it continues to grapple for a solution finding none.

The author is a marketing consultant in technology and a keen observer and student of Islamism and tracks jihad globally.
  • Dr. MS

    Even more amusing, and quite hypocritical, is Sylvia Kaufmann’s comment on growing intolerance in France one day, and then extolling French secularism and comparing it to the opposite practiced, as per Ms. Kauffmann’s analysis, by Modi government’s and Hindus’ so-called lack of tolerance, in another article in the New York Times.

    This is what Ms. Kaufmann wrote on April 2, 2015 in the New York Times

    But even more embarrassing, though less visible, was what it revealed about Ms. Le Pen’s strategy for the normalization of the National Front, the far-right movement that she inherited from her father. Her campaign to make the party more respectable has succeeded beyond expectations, as Mr. Cukierman unwittingly confirmed. Just a month later on March 29, the National Front drew 22.2 percent of the vote in the second round of local elections. Along with the party’s big gains in the 2014 European Parliament elections and Ms. Le Pen’s strong score in the first round of the 2012 presidential vote, the National Front has progressively managed to increase its electoral weight and to impose a three-party dynamic on a political system that was dominated for decades by a confrontation of the mainstream parties of the right and left.to increase its electoral weight and to impose a three-party dynamic on a political system that was dominated for decades by a confrontation of the mainstream parties of the right and left.

    Yet if Marine Le Pen seldom uses the word “values,” she has very adroitly steered her party back to the semantics of “the Republic” in order to broaden its appeal.

    Ms Kauffmann concludes by writing:

    To Ms. Alduy, the fact that Ms. Le Pen feels compelled to wrap herself in the mantra of the French Republic, just as mainstream politicians do, is a sign of the strength of these ideals and the enduring legacy of the Enlightenment. But clearly those values have different interpretations today: While mainstream political parties see secularism as a tool allowing religions and cultures to coexist peacefully, laïcité à la Le Pen is seen by many as Islamophobia in disguise. Not surprisingly, disenfranchised minorities in the suburbs see it as a way of limiting their religious freedom and as another discriminating factor, which explains the “Je ne suis pas Charlie” reaction.

    Who represents the Republic in this troubled new political landscape? Who owns France’s republican values? And maybe, more pointedly, what are these values? Rephrasing solidarity as the modern version of fraternity may be nice, but it won’t be enough: If moderate political parties want to get back the values that the National Front is cynically trying to steal, they have to redefine them and fight for them — seriously.

    Then on Oct. 27, 2015 Ms Kauffmann criticizes Hindus and the Modi government of intolerance and anti-secular practices, while extolling the greatness of French secularism

    Intolerance is on the rise in India, where the number of attacks on minorities, particularly Muslims, and on secularist intellectuals by Hindu chauvinists is part of a disturbing trend. Even more disturbing has been the reluctance of the governing party, the nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, to speak against violent assaults, like the barbaric killing of a 52-year-old Muslim man, Mohammad Ikhlaq, dragged from his home on Sept. 28 in a village near New Delhi and beaten to death by a mob that suspected him of storing beef meat in his fridge. It took more than two weeks for Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the leader who campaigned on inclusive development, to utter a word about the murder. And when he did, his comments were embarrassingly weak: He could only find the incident “really sad” and blame the opposition’s “pseudo-secularism.”

    Secularism is, precisely, at the heart of the debate in Mr. Modi’s India. Coming from a country, France, with strong feelings about secularism, or laïcité, I was intrigued to see how it is managed in a nation of 1.25 billion people with a 14.2 percent Muslim minority when I took part earlier this month in a study trip in India set up by the European Council on Foreign Relations.

    Emboldened by its electoral success, which brought Mr. Modi to power in May 2014, the B.J.P.’s powerful ideological parent, a social organization called R.S.S. (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh) thus tends to equate secularism with Hindu rule: They would not mind it if the state were allowed to intervene in the affairs of all religions. France, in turn, has enforced laïcité in the public sphere more rigorously….

    What hypocrisy from Ms Kauffman…She first tells us about how the Far Right parties are on the rise in France, and then she extols the virtue of French secularism and then compares it to the current Indian government that she sees as too intolerant.

    As they say, “Idiots and liars cannot even be consistently wrong”

  • lol. dhimmification

  • This terrible article is just an excuse to attack a strong powerful woman. The author’s hatred and fear of women and jealousy of Ms. Clinton is obvious. No Mr. Atreya, women do not exist simply to make your rotis and keep your house clean. And so what if she chooses to wear a hijab? That is her choice, not like oppressed Hindu women forced to wear saris and bindis by their aggressive, violent husbands all across India. Stop trying to divert attention from violent women-hating Hindoo men, who are also all short, dark-skinned, pot-bellied and ugly.

    It’s probably not surprising that the author is a self-styled “marketing consultant” in “technology”, neither of which are useful fields and have contributed nothing to the world. And I know what I’m talking about – I am an alumnus of various world-leading institutions like JNU, majoring in real subjects such as sociology, history of art, English literature and origami. I even published an abstract once in the world-famous South-West Delhi Journal of Paper Folding, which has been cited three times across Northern India. All you dirty Hindoo men can put that in your pipe and smoke it next time you’re beating your wives for putting too much coriander in your saag paneer.

    Here’s proof of what I’m saying:

    So there.

  • Brabantian

    Atreya M blames the wrong Abrahamics for the 11 Sep 2001 attack … Tho Islam is another conquest – enslavement ideology along with its Abrahamic-sourced cousins of Christianity, Zionism, Marxism & US & British empire-ism … let a President of Italy tell you what is crystal-clear to all major governments re 11 September 2001 New York City:

  • slayer98

    Muzzies play number game when they muster certain %

  • Dharma Youdha

    I hope Donald Trump comes to power in U.S.A. He will stop this appeasement. !!!

  • suru

    To get the power. politicians will do anything..When one becomes President or PM, he or she has enormous power..and all the luxuries in the world for self and family and may be relatives too. So why not please all to get these things. Once becomes a President then you can talk of anything you like…because it doesn’t affect your powers and unlimited comforts.