Pelsoi Syria Trip And Reform

Not good:

Reform Party of Syria

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi was seen roaming the streets of Damascus flaunting a Hijab. The Hijab worn by women across the Muslim world has come to symbolize either one of three things: 1) a symbol that men control women by forcing piety, or 2) a return to religiosity because of oppressive rulers, or 3) a fashion statement.

As a Muslim, I fully understand respect of our religion by visiting US officials and I applaud that respect. Had Speaker Pelosi worn the Hijab inside a Mosque, this would have indicated respect but for Pelosi to wear it on the streets of Damascus all the while she is sitting with the self-imposed Baschar al-Assad who has come to symbolize oppression and one of the reasons why women are forced to wear the Hijab as they turn to religion to express their freedom is a statement of submittal not only to oppression but also to lack of women’s rights in the Middle East.

The damage Speaker Pelosi is causing with her visit to Syria will be felt for many years to come.

Originally found this on LGF.

Even the WashPo calls this what it is:
Pratfall in Damascus – Nancy Pelosi’s foolish shuttle diplomacy

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “Pelsoi Syria Trip And Reform

  1. So when Pelosi wears the hijab it is treasonous and oppressive, but when Laura Bush and Condolezza Rice wear it, it is ok? If you have something to protest about Pelosi’s visit, stick to the real issues, not cosmetics.

  2. Where did anyone state the act was treasonous or oppressive?

    Putting words in my or the author’s mouth will NOT be tolerated here.

    The Syrian Reform Party rep’s ‘oppression’ comments related only to the Assad regime.

    Wearing a hijab (or head covering) out of respect in a holy place is fine. As far as I can tell, Mrs. Bush and Condi limited the headscarf to holy sites.

    If Pelosi would’ve limited it to the Mosque, you wouldn’t have heard a peep. The fact that she chose to wear it in the city streets (particularly when al-Assad’s wife does not) is where the problem surfaced.

    Further, I believe the Syrian Reform party has the right/authority to point out something they consider a set-back for their efforts under an oppressive regime (note that their comment strictly relates to wearing the hijab in the streets, not the Mosque).

    You may also want to note that Condi is considered to have set a precedent about not wearing a hijab when meeting with foreign officials. Geez, even Margret Thatcher didn’t challenge the Saudis on it.

    Ultimately, the Pelosi trip has been a mess for more than the hijab blunder. Even the liberal Washington Post has pointed that out.

  3. Perhaps treasonous was not justified, but the author did state that the hijab “has come to symbolize…2) a return to religiosity because of oppressive rulers.”
    What I am saying is if you really want to condemn Pelosi for her visit, focus on policy and not minutia like what she wears. If your post was just on the Washington Post’s editorial, I would not have been so concerned. “The hijab blunder” is not worth wasting time on when more important issues, like the impact on the Middle East peace process or how diplomacy is handled in a world of global terrorism. To me, focusing on her clothing (from the time she visited the White House as Speaker to now) tries to subconsciously tie her sex to her qualifications. Pelosi’s appearance has routinely be subject to criticism, while few male policymakers are subjected to the same criticism (though I do know some in the left-wing blogosphere have criticized Rep. Boehner for his tan, which I think is just as intolerable). I believe it is time we judge public figures on their official statements and actions and not on their physical appearance.

  4. In the Middle East, appearance does matter. Otherwise, Rice would not have had to have thought long about not wearing one in Saudi Arabia.

    In an area where appearance is important, especially when touting to be representative of US policy on a visit to an oppressive state, it is an entirely legitimate point. Again, I think those involved with reform in Syria, certainly also have the authority to remind us of that.

    In terms of Pelosi’s other clothing, you won’t find any comments about it on this blog. I’m sure you can come up with some on others – I can come up with plenty as well regarding Laura Bush, Limbaugh etc, but that accomplishes nothing.

    The reason the hijab became an issue is the expression is sent to a critical part of the world. Unfortunately, appearance remains a policy statement in some parts. Pelosi should have know that, I’m guessing she didn’t.

  5. Sorry, had to run.

    I wish I had time to comment more on the WaPo and how it tied into the whole Hijab thing, but I didn’t. Plus the WaPo speaks for itself and plenty of people will see it. I doubt many people would’ve bothered to check out the Reform Party of Syria to get their take on the visit.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s