Our Norwegian correspondent Zylark sends a report about a recent enricher vs. enricher conflict over the wearing of hijab. Below is his translation from today’s Dagbladet:
Police dispatched to hijab-row
Photo caption: “Hijab conflict: Two Islamic families argue over the use of hijab in Drammen [city outside of Oslo]”
During recent weeks the police in Drammen have been dispatched twice after arguments between two Muslim families over the use of hijab.
A Kurdish-Iranian and an Iraqi family are neighbors in a municipal housing, but can’t stand living next door to each other because of a disagreement over the use and non-use of hijab, writes Drammens-Tidende. [The original article in Drammens-Tidende reveals that the Kurds are Shia, and the Iraqis are Sunni, which I am sure does not quite ease the tensions between the two families. — translator]
In the Kurdish family from Iran the daughters do not wear hijab. In the Iraqi family the daughters always wear hijab whenever they are outside of the house. The issue has led to many arguments, and several times resulted in physical fights [translator’s note: Norwegian; håndgemeng, “low-level violence”, such as pushing, slapping, wrestling, etc.] between the two families.
Want to decide for themselves
“I must be able to decide for my own family, without others telling me what is right or wrong,” says the Kurdish-Iranian mother to Drammens-Tidende.
The last time violence [translator’s note: again the Norwegian håndgemeng is used] occurred, one of the children was sent to the emergency room with minor injuries. The police confirm that the incident centered around disagreement between the families on the use or non-use of hijab.
“Are equals”
Iraqi family members deny that their attitude is condemnatory towards the neighbor family.
“We do not care that they do not use hijab. We are equal human beings still,” says the Iraqi mother.
Both families have been in contact with the municipality and the police to get help, and both wish either to move, or that the other family should vacate the building. (NTB — Norwegian Telegram Bureau)
Zylark adds these comments:
- - - - - - - - -
I tend to mistrust the family that practices Islam more strictly, in this case the Iraqi family. They force their own daughters to wear the hijab, and I am pretty certain they rail on the more secular Kurdish-Iranian family, because the Iraqi daughters might just have asked daddy dearest why they must wear a hijab, whilst their less strict Muslim neighbors don’t force their daughters to wear that little sign of subjugation.
It is hardly surprising that the Iraqi mother then proceeds to lie through her teeth to the Norwegian press about how much this bothers her. All Muslim fundies practice this taqqiya. Say one thing amongst themselves, say what the infidels want to hear to the outside world.
That the Kurdish-Iranian family is the more secular does not surprise me. In my experience most Iranians, whether Persian or Kurdish in origin, tend to be rather vaccinated against allowing religious thuggery. Perhaps they’ve had one or two bad experiences with the morality-police in Iran, and did not fancy it that much. Something our own politicians and authorities might lend an ear to before crawling to bed with the vilest of the vile Islamic sharia-practicing and -promoting elements of the Muslim communities here in the West — and elsewhere.
For a complete listing of previous enrichment news, see The Cultural Enrichment Archives.
6 comments:
horrible story, and an all too common kind of conflict I am sure.
What kind of message are we sending to those who have fled Islam? that we are taking the side of the Islamists?
I met a lot of Iranian Norwegians, none wore their Masks of Servitude. The law should be on their side, not that of the oppressors.
Without wishing to come across as a spoiler at this little celebration, has anyone asked that Kurdish family if they support the stoning of adulterers, so-called "honor" killings and all the other gruesome accoutrements of shari'a?
Yes, it is a positive development that they can survive seeing their women go about uncovered. Yet, exactly how far does this putative moderation extend? Du’a Khalil Aswad certainly did not benefit from any ostensible Kurdish modernity.
At issue is how there simply is not available anywhere near the many decades needed for whatever necessary percentage of the Muslim world to shake loose the bonds of Islamic Puritanism. Long before then several Western cities will have been immolated in terrorist nuclear attacks.
The stubborn fact remains that there is no way to adequately determine who is and who isn't a risk to security as Muslims continue pouring into Europe and America. Admitting a thousand enemy soldiers behind your lines for the sake of turning a few to your cause is idiotic at best and suicidal at worst.
Zenster is correct. The immigration of ALL Muslims to the West must be stopped and all non-citizen Muslims must be deported. There is one fact that cannot be denied, that as the number of Muslims increase they are driven by Islam to embrace more of their retarded practices and thinking. The end result is easily predictable. Fourteen centuries of history tell us what will happen. Europe is well down this path. The blockheaded elites in the US are trying to rush us in the same direction.
The West belongs to us Europeans. I say we take it back and let the Muslim stay in his own lands til he wipes himself out.
There is constant pressure on more westernized Muslims by the most retrograde. So those Muslima with uncovered hair are looked at askance by the head-scarfed. Those who wear the hijab are told they are less devout that those wearing the niquab with eye slits while the walking mummies with even eyes obscured are considered the most devout on the Muslim hit parade and a credit to their proud barbarian menfolk.
In fact, investigation of most honor killings uncovers fathers driven to murder their daughters because of the shame their rebellion, as mild as rejecting a head covering brings to the family.
No family that requires veiling of their women should be allowed to immigrate into a Western country because they are 100% sharia promoters, incompatible with Western law.
Because of takiya, no citizenship oath requiring abjuring sharia will separate Muslim sheep from the goats. Therefore, all Muslims need to be barred and the ones already here who do not westernize made to feel unwelcome by social ostracism.
It's sad that some intelligent moderate Muslims will be penalized along with the primitive ones, but better that than that non-Muslims be made to bear the price in suffering more 9/11's or worse.
One might have more sympathy or even belief in so-called moderate Muslims if they had made themselves visible and heard in large numbers on the side of the West. They've had years now, and aside from one or two brave voices per country, this has not happened. Therefore we would be foolish to keep increasing our own risk for the benefit of Muslim individuals who are very few in number if they exist at all. Let them take their chances with their own kind.
Arius, you can deport Muslim citizens too. You just strip them of their citizenship. I don't get what's so hard for people to come with this up.
Post a Comment