Chesler Chronicles

October 31st, 2007 4:33 pm

“Hillary’s Going to Wellesley Tomorrow. Where Does She Stand on the Veiling of Muslim Students at Wellesley?”

On May 31st, 1969, Hillary Rodham delivered the Commencement address at Wellesley. I have just read her speech and in my view, it says very little about a great deal. You just can’t pin her down–not then, not now. She tries to include everyone, offend no one, and she does so in an even-tempered, non-passionate way. She says:

“Part of the problem with empathy with professed goals is that empathy doesn’t do us anything. We’ve had lots of empathy; we’ve had lots of sympathy, but we feel that for too long our leaders have used politics as the art of making what appears to be impossible, possible.”

And she closes by quoting a long (and rather harmless) poem written by Nancy Scheibner, which ends this way:

“Earth could be fair. And you and I must be free
Not to save the world in a glorious crusade
Not to kill ourselves with a nameless gnawing pain
But to practice with all the skill of our being
The art of making possible.”

Thus, it is possible that Hillary is not being micro-managed by a team of hired hands and focus groups so much as she has hired a team to reflect her own character and political strategy.

She is a Nice Girl. (Yes, I know, she has done some awful things in order to “stand by her man” and hang onto power but this is precisely what Nice Girls are supposed to do).

By definition, being a Nice Girl means trying to, or at least appearing to try to please everyone and offend no one; but above all, it means keeping your true opinions hidden. All direct expressions of one’s own point of view or of one’s own naked, raw, ambition or passion must be repressed, hidden. Sometimes even from oneself.

But folks: This is 1969 that we’re talking about. Our country spent this decade marching for civil rights and against the war in Vietnam. President John F. Kennedy, Civil rights leaders Martin Luther King and Malcolm X had all been assasinated. Feminism had been on the move since the mid-60s as well. Max Yasgur’s farm in Woodstock, New York was about to receive 450,000 young people who wanted to revel in “sex, drugs, and rock and roll.”

The best and the brightest of our college graduates were challenging both authority and tradition. In retrospect, however thrilling (and make no mistake, there were thrilling moments), nevertheless, these pitched campus confrontations also turned out to have some very unfortunate consequences. But Hillary was not one of us. She was elsewhere, doing something else; perhaps she was “inhaling” our ideas and using them but only to gain power for herself. Like guys do. No crime by the way, but it’s information.

Now, onward to Wellesley.

Democrat and Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, donned a headscarf when she visited Syria. More recently, First Lady, Laura Bush, also did so when she visited the Arab Middle East on a campaign about breast cancer. Representatives of both sides of the aisle have donned shmattas abroad.

Hillary will be visting Wellesley tommorrow. I am told that she wishes to encourage or inspire young “Hillaries” to campaign for her or to follow her path in the future. I have only one question to ask Hillary and here it is.

Hillary Rodham Clinton: Where do you stand on the veiling of female Muslim students as encouraged by the female Muslim chaplain at Wellesley? Are you aware that Wellesley students have either been funded or peer-pressured into attending Islamist gatherings in Boston in which Wellesly girls are made to feel ashamed if they are not veiled, play contact sports, merely run too quickly?

Perhaps my information is incorrect. Maybe this is not really happening. But assuming that it is: Can you say something about the place of private religious beliefs and religious practices in the American public square? And please, I implore you: can you express yourself both clearly and directly?

A Muslim headscarf, face veil, or full body covering and the ideology that accompanies it at this moment in history are not the same as an orthodox Jewish headcovering, a Catholic nun’s headcovering, or a Sikh’s turban.

As our President, you will have to make crucial decisions about the Islamification of America which in my view is currently underway.

The floor is yours, Madame Senator.

Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:

1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.

2. Stay on topic.

3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.

4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.

5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.

The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.

These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.

9 Comments

1. Virginia Ray:

You know why this question is unfair? Because of ALL our politicians, who will oppose the veiling of Muslim women at Wellsely or anywhere else?

Which politician will demand that UNIFEM and USAID fund domestic violence shelters and train women to defend them? Which politician will call for Islamic states to revise their constitutions and develop a modern legal system to replace sharia?

No, I am afraid it is up to us, US. If we form into an organization to demand that US foreign policy prioritize women’s security by building Domestic Violence Shelters, arming and training women to protect them and by negotiating secular constitutions and legal changes to replace sharia laws, then it will happen.

Expecting global gender equality as US policy to come from any politician without an organization or many organizations demanding it is as futile as expecting politicians to prevent illegal immigration when the rich want cheap labor.

That is why the little the State Dept’s Office of International Women’s Issues under Condi Rice has done is still significant. We might ask Hillary if she intends to continue the effort. There is a bill being pushed now by Biden called the International Violence Against Women’s Act which has some vague goals, but mainly exists to get money to NGOs working on global women’s issues. But like UNIFEM, no specifics such as DV Shelters are prioritized or even mentioned. It looks to me like the CIA’s front groups need funding. We might ask Hillary what she would do to make this bill really relevant to reducing violence against Muslim women and increasing their safety.

But really politicians do not give us what we need – we take it. For instance, Hillary is not promoting a single payer health care system -she is doing as much as the organized money will let her do to “reform” health care.

Our only power is numbers. We must form a non profit, recruit and use direct action and our numbers to get what we need from the system. We must use the media. No politician is going to save us. We have to do it ourselves.

Oct 31, 2007 - 6:09 pm 2. feh:

I think this post is weak. Your question for Clinton and other politicians is reasonable and even important, but your build up to this question itself is weak, and you admit you don’t even know if your claims about Wellesley are remotely true.

And the reason I am telling you your argument is weak is because I suspect you may have the resources, credibility, and know how to get the answer to your questions in ways that other bloggers or even journalists could not.

Oct 31, 2007 - 7:59 pm 3. George Jochnowitz:

The question is a difficult one. Certainly one must draw the line at wearing a veil covering one’s face when being photographed for a driver’s license. But by and large, it is a celebration of America’s commitment to liberty not to make an issue of people’s garb. And of we are comfortable with liberty, that is already a rejection of fanaticism and oppression.

Oct 31, 2007 - 8:04 pm 4. Azzam:

A young Harvard student explained the Jihad of a good student many years ago. http://www.beliefnet.com/story/107/story_10725_1.html
http://www.icnefounderstrust.net/
And this is not the Jihad of Mr. Qardawi.
Similarly, in America the Hijab(veil) of a any lady is her free choice.
But when it is instituted as an organized effort, as a statement of an ideology and not as a cultural or personal statement I think alarm bells should ring.
And it is not impolite to ask questions. If 100 % of Wellesley (Muslim girls) wear Hijab at time of Eid prayer what is there to question? But when it becomes a statement of separateness in labs, in gym, then I have to wonder.
Sensitivity and inquiry about an ideology are separate issues.

Oct 31, 2007 - 9:40 pm 5. David Thomson:

Hillary Clinton is not going to touch this subject directly with the proverbial ten-foot pole. It would almost certainly destroy her political campaign. It is all about race. This may very well be the number one issue that discombobulates Democrats. Dark skinned Muslims are perceived as victims of Western imperialism and oppression. Nothing more needs to be said.

Barack Obama also appears to be so politically correct that he has come out for the politically suicidal position of supporting the proposed New York State law that would allow illegal aliens the right to obtain a driver’s license. Even most regular Democrats reject this nonsense! Nonetheless, this is what the hard-core leftists want—and neither Hillary nor Barack dare tell them to go to hell. The ideological divisions within the Republican Party are mild next to those afflicting the Democrats. This is becoming more obvious on a daily basis.

Nov 1, 2007 - 7:24 am 6. Azzam:

This comment is addressed to Senator Hillary Clinton. I hope some student prints it and hands it to her.

Dear Senator Hillary,
From your student days at Stone Davis Hall you know many Muslim students and you still have not forgotten your friend from Pakistan Miss Spenta Captain (now Mrs. Spenta Kandawala).
Spenta has done so much for women’s rights and written books.
When you go to Wellesley take the time to visit the Chapel and compare if the scene is as you left it.
There is an alien ideology that is overpowering the scene at Muslim Student Association. Not that there are not any more Spentas there(yes, she was a Parsi but she wore Pakistani dress) but what is the guiding spirit now? On Eid day there was an Eid party at MIT (Room 6-120).
Well, it was no Eid party! Nancy Khalil, the Wellesley Muslim Chaplain was there with her Wellesley “squad” to listen to a Gentleman by the name of Suhaib Webb. Mr. Webb invoked the name of Mr. Qardawi five times in the first portion of his lecture (He was one hour late. Spoke from 6:00 to 6:6:30 P.M.) Interestingly, Mr. Webb was at Harvard, the day before and started his talk by saying:”continuing my talk, what I said at Harvard yesterday…..” And on Eid day Mr. Webb was giving the sermon at the new mosque ( http://www.masboston.org/index.php?action=view&id=61&module=newsmodule&src=%40random41940a897e943 ) in Boston. His web site. http://www.suhaibwebb.com/blog/
Isn’t the ideology of Mr. Qardawi known to you, dear Senator?
Does not the “ideology” continueum call for hearings at the Senate.
You will get many parents and students as witnesses. Go to the website of the Muslim Student Association and check for yourself. That is how you left Wellesley in 1969?
It is not that students are to blame. They do not even understand what hit them! This is the same phenomena that is taking over all old institutions in the name of Islam, without defining whose Islam?
Who does not know the denomination of Mr. Qardawi? But does any student know the denomination of Mr. Webb? Is it different from Mr. Qardawi? Oh, really. Then what is it?
Mr. Qardawi is entitled to his free speech. Do Wellesley Muslim girls have the freedom: not to be exposed to him, if they so desire? Or all over America we have to be “Qarda-wised” without a hint of what is hitting us? That would be only possible if this ideology walked in through the front door. Your job as Senator is to find out as to how the back door opened? You held hearings for Muslim Chaplains in prisons. Why did you forget the Muslim Chaplains among American Students?
If you hold hearings, Ms. Chesler
will put you in touch with us parents. If not you, then who should we request?
God bless you,
A parent.

Nov 1, 2007 - 10:23 am 7. Virginia Ray:

Azzam

Why not get these comments to the FBI and homeland Security? I get from your post which is a little vague that traditional (violent?) Muslim groups are trying to recruit/convert students with this chaplain as a recruiter, bribing the students with secret funding? Let the agents handle it. A few undercover agents will do more good than Clinton ever will.

Nov 1, 2007 - 1:03 pm 8. tanstaafl:

Why is Hillary Clinton’s opinion relative to wearing hijab at Wellesley relevant to anything under the sun ?

From last week’s debate, it’s apparent that Hillary isn’t even going to offer a “view” on something like Eliot Spitzer’s idea of furnishing drivers’ licenses to illegals in New York.

For the record, Hillary isn’t interested in the worldview of Mr. Qaradawi.

She’s interested in getting elected which, for her, involves saying whatever she construes as “user friendly” to whatever group she is standing in front of.

Nov 3, 2007 - 9:53 pm 9. Diralect of Dialect:

What could possibly be the basis for this statement: “A Muslim headscarf, face veil, or full body covering and the ideology that accompanies it at this moment in history are not the same as an orthodox Jewish headcovering, a Catholic nun’s headcovering, or a Sikh’s turban.”? A few reactionary crazies running in the streets some of whom happen to be wearing hijab should in way determine the political inclinations of those
who wear the hijab for simply religious reasons. Can hijab be a political statement? Yes, in the hands of this new generation of hyperpoliticized reactionaries who don thehijab orother religious paraphenalia for a march to make a political statement but eschew it on a day to day basis.

Aug 8, 2008 - 4:05 am