Former Bolivian Congressman and political dissident Jose Brechner sends this report on the latest radical developments in Bolivia.
Jose Brechner passed this information in Spanish to Ann Huggett at The Reality Check who translated this news into English:
On Wednesday, November 24, Iranian demands that female nurses don the hijab in response to Iran’s providing $1.2 million for funding of the new El Alto city hospital in Bolivia sparked a national outcry among women’s rights advocates within Bolivia. In an international teleconference in La Paz held between Bolivian President, Evo Morales, and Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, to celebrate the hospital’s opening, nurses were shown wearing hijabs as part of their new uniform regulations.
This imposition of political Islamic pseudo-religious attire from another country is causing a rift within Bolivian political ranks. Even though the Morales administration is the profoundly socialist MAS party, the Iranian demand is still seen as an affront on Bolivian cultural integrity especially in a country with a Roman Catholic majority.
December 5th, 2009 | 2:30 pm | #1
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Vince Humphreys and DNC Fail!, Paul Alyunov. Paul Alyunov said: Iran Demands That Nurses in Bolivia Wear Hijabs: Former Bolivian Congressman and political dissident Jose Brech.. http://bit.ly/8ocTZZ [...]
December 5th, 2009 | 2:41 pm | #2
Roman Catholics may be the majority of Bolivians, but Socialism is the new religion. And what Socialism needs, Socialism gets. Burkas ahoy!
December 5th, 2009 | 2:54 pm | #3
Unsanitary, unsafe, insulting. RN’s all over the world should demand
December 5th, 2009 | 2:59 pm | #4
So, if one of our Catholic groups that are funding medical care in another country demanded that medical personnel on staff wear crosses…would that be OK, too?
December 5th, 2009 | 3:07 pm | #5
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by World_Policy: Iran Demands That Nurses in Bolivia Wear Hijabs: Former Bolivian Congressman and political dissident Jose Brech.. http://bit.ly/8ocTZZ...
December 5th, 2009 | 3:14 pm | #6
So now instead of threatening to cut our heads off in order to get us to convert to Islam, the Muslims are just going to pay us to convert?
December 5th, 2009 | 3:34 pm | #7
a little selling of our souls – so to speak. i think
i smell sulphur.
cutting home health care – not only effecting the elderly/disabled but those working in that field maybe?
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9CDC5OO0&show_article=1&catnum=0
and then there’s this little group.
http://www.secstateproject.org/about/
and “george soros eyes secretaries”
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/12/04/soros-eyes-secretaries
December 5th, 2009 | 3:57 pm | #8
darn these stupid bolivians. if they would hurry up and just convert to islam, it would be so much simpler.
December 5th, 2009 | 4:03 pm | #9
this is what socialists get. money from iran means subjugation,religious conversion, and shelter for terrorists.
December 5th, 2009 | 4:07 pm | #10
Dang is that all it took? $1.2 million to get all the women in that hospital to wear slave uniforms? What is more the rest of the countries women….Man they are cheep!!!
December 5th, 2009 | 4:14 pm | #11
If I were a nurse in Bolivia…I would quit and live off the government before I would wear a hijab. After all, the socialists would support me. I could claim emotional distress.
December 5th, 2009 | 4:21 pm | #12
I’m all in favor of Iranians and Morales pissing off Bolivians. This will sow dissension and further fragment Bolivian society — that would be a good thing at this time since it would help undermine Morales.
December 5th, 2009 | 4:50 pm | #13
Well, the browser goofed me up.
Anyway, RN’s should demand that professional standards be upheld in healthcare facilities, regardless of where they are located. Nursing is not a localized profession…it’s universal. Requiring nurses in any part of the world to wear a garment that negatively impacts their ability to perform their work in a safe, sanitary, professional manner, not only puts patients at risk, but the nurses themselves.
Disgusting and insulting.
December 5th, 2009 | 5:03 pm | #14
Maybe the doctors should wear jockstraps on their heads in protest, but that assumes the socialist wuss doctors actually know what a jockstrap is…
December 5th, 2009 | 5:12 pm | #15
Even though the Morales administration is the profoundly socialist MAS party, the Iranian demand is still seen as an affront on Bolivian cultural integrity especially in a country with a Roman Catholic majority.
How’s that old saying go again about lying down with dogs…?
December 5th, 2009 | 5:18 pm | #16
“Socialism is the new religion. And what Socialism needs, Socialism gets.”
Not quite so simple….socialism leads to people loosing their faith and becoming ‘lost’. It also leads to forced political correctness. Islam is a perfect ‘fit’ for both of those and will ultimately overtake them both as well.
December 5th, 2009 | 5:45 pm | #17
++
hmmm, guess this still stands..
[..] “I’ve made it clear that the US respects the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and is not interfering with Iran’s affairs ” [..]
oh wait a sec, this isn’t about crimes against the Iranian people..
it’s about Iran’s “interference” with the Bolivian people, right??
Boiling The Infidel Frog
“You ain’t seen nothin’ yet!” ~ B Hussein O
==
December 5th, 2009 | 5:50 pm | #18
Well, well. Look what we have here. Hey American progressives, are you listening? This is exactly what is happening in our country you jack a****. All it took in Bolivia is a little cash. In the US all it is going to take is a few more years of Obama.
December 5th, 2009 | 7:12 pm | #19
Can someone remind me of exactly why Obama is on the same side as Morales with respect to Honduras?
And with the Honduran legislature NOT re-installing Zelaya, does Obama still plan to treat Honduras as the enemy?
December 5th, 2009 | 7:42 pm | #20
Wasn’t the world a more peaceful place when the communist where in charge? At least they acted civilize and didn’t try to force religon on you.
The muslims are extremely violent and will kill men,women,children,livestock to try and convert you.
Oh How I mourn the days of communism, when our enemy wore uniforms and acted somewhat civilize.
The world will always have evil people, some more evil then others.
December 5th, 2009 | 8:47 pm | #21
Dhimmis!
December 5th, 2009 | 9:25 pm | #22
on RodrigoNo Gravatar
December 5th, 2009 | 4:21 pm | #12
Agree wholeheartedly.
December 5th, 2009 | 10:29 pm | #23
++
jonyjoe101 @ 7:42 pm #20
re: [Wasn’t the world a more peaceful place when the communist where in charge? At least they acted civilize and didn’t try to force religon on you.]
if you call the following “peaceful”.. you’re
in desperate need of some history lessons..
Murder By Communism (by any other name)
[How can we understand all this killing by communists? It is the marriage of an absolutist ideology with the absolute power. Communists believed that they knew the truth, absolutely. They believed that they knew through Marxism what would bring about the greatest human welfare and happiness. And they believed that power, the dictatorship of the proletariat, must be used to tear down the old feudal or capitalist order and rebuild society and culture to realize this utopia. Nothing must stand in the way of its achievement. Government--the Communist Party--was thus above any law. All institutions, cultural norms, traditions, and sentiments were expendable. And the people were as though lumber and bricks, to be used in building the new world.
Constructing this utopia was seen as though a war on poverty, exploitation, imperialism, and inequality. And for the greater good, as in a real war, people are killed. And thus this war for the communist utopia had its necessary enemy casualties, the clergy, bourgeoisie, capitalists, wreckers, counterrevolutionaries, rightists, tyrants, rich, landlords, and noncombatants that unfortunately got caught in the battle. In a war millions may die, but the cause may be well justified, as in the defeat of Hitler and an utterly racist Nazism. And to many communists, the cause of a communist utopia was such as to justify all the deaths. The irony of this is that communism in practice, even after decades of total control, did not improve the lot of the average person, but usually made their living conditions worse than before the revolution. It is not by chance that the greatest famines have occurred within the Soviet Union (about 5,000,000 dead during 1921-23 and 7,000,000 from 1932-3) and communist China (about 27,000,000 dead from 1959-61). In total almost 55,000,000 people died in various communist famines and associated diseases, a little over 10,000,000 of them from democidal famine. This is as though the total population of Turkey, Iran, or Thailand had been completely wiped out. And that something like 35,000,000 people fled communist countries as refugees, as though the countries of Argentina or Columbia had been totally emptied of all their people, was an unparalleled vote against the utopian pretensions of Marxism-Leninism.
But communists could not be wrong. After all, their knowledge was scientific, based on historical materialism, an understanding of the dialectical process in nature and human society, and a materialist (and thus realistic) view of nature. Marx has shown empirically where society has been and why, and he and his interpreters proved that it was destined for a communist end. No one could prevent this, but only stand in the way and delay it at the cost of more human misery. Those who disagreed with this world view and even with some of the proper interpretations of Marx and Lenin were, without a scintilla of doubt, wrong. After all, did not Marx or Lenin or Stalin or Mao say that. . . . In other words, communism was like a fanatical religion. It had its revealed text and chief interpreters. It had its priests and their ritualistic prose with all the answers. It had a heaven, and the proper behavior to reach it. It had its appeal to faith. And it had its crusade against nonbelievers.
What made this secular religion so utterly lethal was its seizure of all the state's instrument of force and coercion and their immediate use to destroy or control all independent sources of power, such as the church, the professions, private businesses, schools, and, of course, the family.]
==
December 5th, 2009 | 11:00 pm | #24
++
Stephen @ 5:18 pm #16
i wholeheartedly agree..
Radical Islam and Infantile Marxism
[Despite the crimes that were committed in its name in the twentieth century, Marxism remains one of the most libertarian of modern belief systems. Not for nothing did Marx and Engels describe their vision of a communist society as one in which "the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all." This makes it all the more bewildering that so many Western socialists should have embraced Islamofascism as enthusiastically as they have. How can it all be explained? Why on earth do the likes of Galloway, Tariq Ali and John Pilger support a movement whose main objectives are to re-establish the medieval Caliphate, institute the most austere and repressive form of Sharia law, destroy Western democracy and stone adulterers, infidels and homosexuals to death? The ostensible reason is their hostility to American "imperialism". Committed to the view that revolutionary change can never occur when some nations are dominated by others, they argue (or at least imply) that Islamic extremism is well worth supporting so long as it gives Washington a bloody nose. When ordinary Muslims are murdered on the streets of Baghdad by suicide bombers (or when Iraqi communists and trade unionists are butchered by disciples of Osama Bin Laden), they go along with it on the grounds that "support for a movement for liberation should not depend on those who lead it at a particular point in time." Yet it is surely clear that other, more fundamental explanations also need to be canvassed. What I want to suggest here is that the rapprochement between Islamism and Marxism reflects some disconcerting similarities between the two systems of thought. For all its intellectual majesty and libertarian fervour, Marxism possesses a number of characteristics which frequently make it attractive to the authoritarian mind�a fact which the inglorious history of "actually existing socialism" tragically bears out. Several of these characteristics are also present in Islamic doctrine, where they have caused similar problems. Recognising at some level that authoritarian Muslims behave as they do because they hold similar beliefs to their own, Marxists of a certain stripe have their worst political instincts immeasurably strengthened. The result is a monstrous perversion of a great ideology.]
Obama & Dualism
[Since Muslims are the best of people and follow a perfect doctrine, there is no need to even examine Islam, since, ipso facto, it is right. Therefore, all criticism of Islam is hate speech.]
Islam and Black Liberation Theology
[Islam and BLT are theologies that have a political goal of making all politics submit to their demands. Submission is the political goal.
[..]
The reason for so many parallels between Islam and BLT is that they are both based upon the same principles—submission and duality. Since Islam views white America as an enemy, BLT see Islam as the “enemy of my enemy” and therefore is a friend. Witness the award that Rev. Wright gave Louis Farrakhan as an outstanding person. This comradeship is temporary. When the time comes and Islam is fully ascendant, BLT will find out that Islam has been using them, just as Islam uses the Left. In the end, Islam will annihilate BLT for the simple reason that Islam demands political submission from ALL, not the just the whites.]
The Near Enemy
[We have two sets of enemies. The far enemy is the politics of Islam. The near enemies are the dhimmi apologists, fueled by ignorance and multiculturalism and political correctness.]
Obama’s UN Resolution to Stifle Free Speech on Islam
Obama [CONFIRMED] nominee supports Islamic Sharia law in U.S.
re: bg @ 10:29 pm #23
“I am confident that we can CREATE A KINGDOM right here on EARTH”
“[..] my INDIVIDUAL salvation is not going to come about
without a COLLECTIVE SALVATION for the COUNTRY”
“I am not a Muslim”
“I am not a Communist”
~ B Hussein O
and that’s just a mere sampling.. *sigh*
==
December 6th, 2009 | 10:21 am | #25
To Bolivia, when you deal with evil (I.R. Iran) this is what you should expect and more. I wonder when Iran will demand that Bolivian hospitals outlaw all alcohol products (like isopropyl (rubbing) alcohol)?
December 6th, 2009 | 11:01 am | #26
To the nurses in Bolovia:
Just refuse.
To go along with this forced attire would be to take the first of many steps backwards in the status of women in your society.
There will be more demands to come.
December 6th, 2009 | 3:24 pm | #27
[...] vielleicht Probleme bekommen: Der Iran hat ein neues Krankenhaus gesponsert. Die Mullahs haben verlangt, dass die Krankenschwestern dort jetzt den Hijab tragen. Bei der Feier zur Eröffnung mit einer [...]
December 6th, 2009 | 4:33 pm | #28
++
Freddy @ 7:12 pm #19
maybe not exactly.. just wrap your imagination
around some of the facts & see what they tell you..
Conversacion con Bill Ayers, parte 7
World Education Forum
Centro Internacional Miranda
more here..
oh yeah, Chavez & FARC & Obama & Pelosi, etc..
(links @ link)
didn’t even get around to Chavez & Morales links to Iran..
==
December 6th, 2009 | 10:16 pm | #29
[...] Iran Demands That Nurses in Bolivia Wear Hijabs! In an international teleconference in La Paz held between Bolivian President, Evo Morales, and Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, to celebrate the hospital’s opening, nurses were shown wearing hijabs as part of their new uniform regulations. [...]
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact