(Translator’s note on the language of Danish politics. It is customary to distinguish between Islam and militant Islam with the terms “Islamic” versus “Islamistic”, respectively—as in “Islam” versus “Islamism”.
The adjective “Islamstic” thus implies an extremist ideology compared to a broad characterization of people who identify as Muslim.)
By Pia Kjærsgaard, July 14, 7:24 AM CET 2014
This Friday, [Danish newspaper] Politiken reported how Muslim women who wear headscarves felt overwhelmingly subjected to persecution, rudeness, and jeers on the street. I personally have never experienced such a thing, nor have I ever heard anyone talk about it, so perhaps the extent has been slightly exaggerated. I generally know the Danes as a well-mannered people, who, even though they do not feel great sympathy for the Muslim headscarf, naturally will not resort to foul language against the wearers of the headscarf.
Those Muslim women feel provoked by the reaction their headscarves elicit. I feel provoked, too. By them and their choice of the scarf over the Danish society!
The headscarf is a red rag in the face of the Danish society. It is a no thank you to integration! A symbol of Islam being above it all. I am also aware that some girls simply do it in self defence to avoid jeers from a self-appointed Muslim religious police. It’s awful for them—and my criticism of the scarf girls does not include them.
No, the people who can provoke me are people like the beaten candidate to parliament Asmaa Abdol-Hamid and her ilk. Islamistic Muslim women, who use the scarf, as a manifestation of them distancing themselves from the Danish society and the wish to replace our democracy with a Sharia rule.
These very loud-mouthed—often—young women are truly provocative. This applies to such people as the young Palestinian Nada Fraije and her fellow scarf-wearing protesters who showed up at a Netto [supermarket] in [the city of] Odense wearing Muslim headwear and claimed their right to service customer in [the chain] Danish Supermarket wearing their Islamistic uniform. And Danish Supermarket gave in!
It is also hard to forget the scarf-wearing Muslim doctor, Suher Othman, whom Danish Radio’s [TV program] Deadline at one point tried to portray as an expert in young Muslim women. They had merely forgotten that Othman and a couple of other Muslim women on TV 2 earlier on had expressed an understanding for the killing of Theo van Gogh.
What these scarf-wearing girls have in common is their aggressive, chronically offensive and insulting presence that sends the signal that they are beter than us. They truly use their scarf as a provocation!
More and more Muslim women—including a significant share of Danish Islam-converted women—in the last couple of years also put on niqab or chador—meaning the fully-covering black suit, which as for the niqab only leaves room for the eyes, and for the chador only leaves room for the face.
You can hardly find a clearer signal of distancing yourself from the Danish society. Recently, France received support in the European Court of Human Rights for the country’s ban on the burka. A similar ban must naturally also be introduced in Denmark, and now the opponent can no longer use the argument that it would violate human rights.
Fact is that the scarf in all its variants is a symbol of Islamic fundamentalism and a declaration of war against women's right to equal right and equal value. Thus, there is every reason to criticize the headscarf. Muslim women who choose the scarf must therefore not expect to smoke peace pipe with me. On the contrary. When you choose to distance yourself from the Danish society, you must also come to expect that the Danish society distances itself from your choice. That is how it is.