I 1958 grinte Nasser og publikum af Broderskabets forslag om, at ægyptiske kvinder skulle forpligtes til at bære hijab. Hijab/Broderskabet vandt. For at danske kvinder skal være frie, må nogle kæmpe for det. At bære hijab og tale om frihed, er ligeså overbevisende som en rygende læge der beder patienten afstå fra cigaretter.


Re. Iranske kvinder barberer hovedet for at undslippe hijab og moralpoliti


In the year 53′ we really wanted to compromise with the Muslim Brotherhood, if they were willing to be reasonable. And I met with the head of the Muslim Brotherhood, and he sat with me and made his requests.

What did he request? The first thing he asked for was to make wearing a hijab in Egypt mandatory, and demand that every woman walking in the street wear a tarha (scarf).

(The listeners break out in laughter.)

Every woman walking…

(Nasser waits for people to calm down. A listener calls out: “Let him [the imam] wear it!” Loud applause.)

And I told him… If I make that a law, they will say that we have returned to the days of Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah [“Ruler by God’s Command”] who forbade people to walk at day, and only allowed people walking at night.

(More laughter.)


And my opinion is that every person in his own house decides for himself the rules. And he replied: “No, as the leader, you are responsible.” I told him, ‘Sir, you have a daughter in the School of Medicine – and she does not wear a tarha. Why did you not make her wear a tarha?’

(Delighted laughter and applause. Nasser attempts to continue):

‘If you… if you are unable to make one wear… if you are unable to make one girl — who is your daughter — wear the tarha, you want me to put a tarha on 10 million women? Myself?’


Broderskabets mest effektive forklædninger i Vesten i dag, er den veluddannede og tilsyneladende moderne muslimske herre, velplejet og i dress, og den imødekommende, succesrige, uangribelige studine i hijab. Specielt sidstnævnte skal det blive vanskelig at forsvare vores friheder imod. Imødekommenheden, den falske “dialog”, invitationen til at opgive sig selv, lidt efter lidt, er envejsruten til islamifisering, indtil vi bliver af med dagens politiske appeasere.





  • 1954-1970: CIA and the Muslim Brotherhood Ally to Oppose Egyptian President Nasser. In 1954, Egyptian President Gamal Abddul Nasser’s nationalist policies in Egypt come to be viewed as completely unacceptable by Britain and the US. MI6 and the CIA jointly hatch plans for his assassination. According to Miles Copeland, a CIA operative based in Egypt, the opposition to Nasser is driven by the commercial community—the oil companies and the banks. At the same time, the Muslim Brotherhood’s resentment of Nasser’s secular government also comes to a head. In one incident, Islamist militants attack pro-Nasser students at Cairo University. Following an attempt on his own life by the Brotherhood, Nasser responds immediately by outlawing the group, which he denounces as a tool of Britain. The following years see a long and complex struggle pitting Nasser against the Muslim Brotherhood, the US, and Britain. The CIA funnels support to the Muslim Brotherhood because of “the Brotherhood’s commendable capability to overthrow Nasser.” [Baer, 2003, pp. 99; Dreyfuss, 2005, pp. 101-108] The Islamist regime in Saudi Arabia becomes an ally of the United States in the conflict with Nasser. They offer financial backing and sanctuary to Muslim Brotherhood militants during Nasser’s crackdown. Nasser dies of natural causes in 1970. [ Devil’s Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam; pp. 90-91, 126-131, 150, by Robert Dreyfuss.]