Media in Uproar Because I’m Not Enthused About the Hijab Fencer
The leftist media is outraged. When I was asked on Breitbart News Daily about hijab-wearing Olympic fencer Ibtihaj Muhammad, I spoke of the larger context: “They’ve designed special outfits… it’s more of imposing Islam on the secular marketplace. Whether it’s in the workplace, whether it’s in the school, it’s Islamic supremacism.”
Why the fuss? Why does the media go into fifth gear on a story like that of Ibtihaj Muhammad wearing a hijab in the Olympics? Is it because a Muslim isn’t slaughtering people? Isn’t that “Islamophobic”?
Where are the news stories every time a Christian, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, Mormon, Wiccan, pagan, et al picks up a tennis racket or a polo stick? Why is Ibtihaj Muhammad’s hijab national and international news? And why is it news if I don’t share the general enthusiasm? It seems to me that the media suffers from the soft bigotry of low expectations when it comes to Muslims: if Muslims aren’t killing, it’s a news story.
Ibtihaj Muhammad is being in-your-face about her hijab: she is the only Olympic fencer whose religion we will all know. And that is part of a larger agenda. None of those who excoriated me for objecting acknowledged that I was saying was true: there is a long-standing effort to impose Islam on the secular marketplace.
An American company, Ariens Manufacturing Company of Brillion, Wisconsin, is under attack by Islamic supremacists who are demanding that the company submit to Islamic law. Ariens got into hot water when it asked Muslim employees to “pray during scheduled breaks in designated prayer rooms. Our manufacturing environment does not allow for unscheduled breaks in production.” Muslims walked off their jobs, demanding that Ariens allow Muslims to leave their work station whenever they want.
Mind you, these Muslim workers don’t have to pray at those times. They can make up the missed prayers later. They don’t stop production lines in Iran and other Muslim countries for prayer. But here in the West, it is a way to impose Islam on the workplace, on the secular marketplace — and on their co-workers.
A similar thing recently happened at Cargill Meat Solutions in Fort Morgan, Colorado. Despite the fact that Cargill was accommodating the vast majority of Muslim daily prayer requests by providing specially created “reflection rooms,” i.e., prayer rooms, 190 Muslim workers walked off the job.
A Muslim flight attendant, Charee Stanley, claimed that she was suspended from her job with ExpressJet Airlines because she refused to serve alcohol. She filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) – and the Hamas-tied Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) jumped onto the case. Why would a devout Muslim want to be a flight attendant in the first place, when half your job is serving alcohol?
That was reminiscent of Samantha Elauf, the devout Muslim who sued retailer Abercrombie & Fitch because she wanted to wear the hijab on the job. She won that case and got herself a healthy cash settlement – and Abercrombie & Fitch had to change the way they do business in order to accommodate her demands. That is no doubt part of the objective here as well.
There are many such cases. The EEOC is suing Star Transport for rightfully terminating two Muslims who refused to do their job. If these Muslim truck drivers don’t want to deliver alcohol, then they shouldn’t have taken a job in which part of their duties would be to deliver alcohol. It’s that simple.
But no, Islamic supremacists chip away at the establishment clause, and in doing so, impose Islam on the secular marketplace. They want to establish a public Muslim presence everywhere and bend rules to gain special privileges. Why Ibtihaj Muhammad? When is the media going to pay any attention to the girls who didn’t want to cover up and were honor killed for it? Where is the coverage of the Muslim girls who were killed by their fathers and/or brothers for refusing to wear the hijab?
For the millions of women and girls forced to wear the cover-up, the adulation given to Ibtihaj Muhammad is ghastly. Instead of lauding her, why not honor the memory of
Aqsa Parvez, who was honor murdered — strangled to death by her father and brother because she didn’t want to wear the hijab. Where is anyone honoring all the many, many other women and girls who have been victimized or killed for not wearing the hijab?
Look at the energy the media expends, the lengths they go to try to discredit me. They are very afraid of me – clearly, I must frighten them immensely. They’re not used to people telling the truth.
Article reposted with permission from PamelaGeller.com, the opinions and views shared do not necessarily reflect the views of The Washington Standard.