Recently in Switzerland Category

It is no accident or coincidence that Muslims commit 91 percent of honor killings worldwide. A manual of Islamic law certified as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy by Al-Azhar University, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, says that "retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right." However, "not subject to retaliation" is "a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring's offspring." ('Umdat al-Salik o1.1-2). In other words, someone who kills his child incurs no legal penalty under Islamic law.

Syria in 2009 scrapped a law limiting the length of sentences for honor killings, but "the new law says a man can still benefit from extenuating circumstances in crimes of passion or honour 'provided he serves a prison term of no less than two years in the case of killing.'" And in 2003 the Jordanian Parliament voted down on Islamic grounds a provision designed to stiffen penalties for honor killings. Al-Jazeera reported that "Islamists and conservatives said the laws violated religious traditions and would destroy families and values."

Nonetheless, the media drumbeat is constant: honor killings have nothing to do with Islam. And so they continue, as no one ever challenges Muslim authorities to do anything to stop them.

"Dad killed daughter in brutal axe murder," from The Local, January 13 (thanks to Twostellas):

A Swiss prosecutor has described as a "veritable slaughter" the vicious axe murder of a 16-year-old girl by her 53-year-old Pakistani father, who believed his daughter had tarnished her family's honour.

The charge sheet presented by prosecutor Ulrich Krättli suggests he will call for the accused to be given life in prison, the maximum sentence under Swiss law, when the high-profile case goes to trial on March 14th.

On May 10th 2010, 16-year-old Swera was picked up at a Zurich police station by both her parents. She had been held there by police after she was arrested for a minor theft.

Once back at their apartment in Höngg, on the outskirts of the city, a heated argument broke out between father and daughter, newspaper Tages Anzeiger reports.

The girl said she wanted to leave home permanently and started to pack her things. She then went down to the basement of the building to get a pair of shoes. While she was gone, her father allegedly retrieved an axe from the balcony and hid it in the bedroom he shared with his wife.

Once she was back in the apartment, the girl went into her parents' bedroom to pick up some of her belongings. When she bent down to get some things from the wardrobe, her father hit her with the axe on the back of the head, the prosecutor says. The man struck his daughter 19 times with the axe: 12 times with the blade and seven with the blunt end.

The teenager not die instantly, but lay on the ground in agonising pain for several minutes until her life finally slipped away.

The father left the axe between her legs, pointing to the feet, a gesture Krättli does not want to interpret, but that usually has sexual connotations and expresses the motives behind the murder, newspaper Tages Anzeiger reports.

After washing his hands, he left the apartment and called his wife to say he had killed his daughter. Fifteen minutes later, he called the police, who arrested him shortly after near his apartment.

In an interview with newspaper Blick, Swera's boyfriend explained that the girl's parents had strongly disapproved of her relationship with him, primarily because he was a Christian. The boy said she was desperate to get away from her parents and had already sought help from a local youth shelter.

According to the prosecutor, the defendant killed his daughter because she had violated his archaic values and had brought shame on the family. Krättli says the Pakistani man had planned the killing “in cold blood”.

The 53-year-old man has remained in custody since the girl's death. He will be tried in March not just for the brutal killing of his daughter, but also for allegedly trying to kill her three weeks earlier.

On April 20th, the pair had argued after the girl's father suspected she had been smoking marijuana.

Seizing his chance while she was in the bathroom, he pushed her into the bathtub, turned on the tap and threw a hairdryer into the water.

He wanted to electrocute her, the prosecutor alleges, but his attempt failed because of an in-built security system in the appliance to prevent electric shocks upon contact with water. On that occasion, the 16-year-old girl managed to get away before running to a friend’s home in her wet clothes.

Given pitch of the antisemitism in Islamic texts, this story is fortified with a month's supply of irony. As noted earlier, the point of this exercise is to cast anyone standing in the way of Islamic supremacism and a potentially limitless demand for accommodations (including getting rid of the Swiss flag, which has a cross on it) as Nazis: he who hath looked critically on anything having to do with Islam hath committed hate crimes in his heart.

"Anger as Muslims demonstrate with yellow Star of David," from YNet News, November 5:

Protesters wore a yellow star sticker printed with the word "Muslim" reminiscent of the one that the Nazis forced Jews to wear during the Third Reich. Some protesters constructed a plastic model of a mosque with minarets, which are banned in Switzerland.

Edith Bino, president of the Jewish community in Bern, told the Basler Times that she found the use of the yellow star "so obviously wrong that it could not be taken seriously." And Yves Kugelmann, editor in chief of the Jewish newspaper Tachles, said he found the choice of symbols "simply idiotic."

"It is regrettable when legitimate concerns are raised using false comparisons," Kugelmann told the Basler Times. He said that discrimination against Muslims is a theme that must be taken seriously in Switzerland, "but not in this cheap way."

The choice of symbolism irked Muslim groups as well: Two mainstream Muslim organizations reportedly stayed away from the demonstration as a result.

Nicolas Blancho, head of the Islamic Central Council, defended his choice of symbols, telling the Tages Anzeiger newspaper that "Muslims are treated as second-class citizens and are discriminated against, for example because they wear a headscarf or because of their name when they look for an apprenticeship or are looking for an apartment."

Among the speakers were British journalist Lauren Booth, sister-in-law of former British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Booth, who has converted to Islam and wears a veil, told demonstrators she sensed that Bern citizens had glared at her as she passed them on the street.

As described below, this arrogant move comes amid a larger climate of legal jihad aimed at making Switzerland stop being Switzerland, all while saying it's the Swiss thing to do. "Immigrants Want Cross Removed from Swiss Flag," by Soeren Kern for Hudson NY, September 26 (thanks to JS):

An immigrant group based in Bern has called for the emblematic white cross to be removed from the Swiss national flag because as a Christian symbol it "no longer corresponds to today's multicultural Switzerland."

Ivica Petrusic, the vice president of Second@s Plus, a lobbying group that represents mostly Muslim second-generation foreigners in Switzerland (who colloquially are known as secondos) says the group will launch a nationwide campaign in October to ask Swiss citizens to consider adopting a flag that is less offensive to Muslim immigrants.

Switzerland isn't forcing people to go live there if the flag offends them.

In a September 18 interview with the Swiss newspaper Aargauer Zeitung, Petrusic said the cross has a Christian background and while the Christian roots of Switzerland should be respected, "it is necessary to separate church and state" because "Switzerland today has a great religious and cultural diversity. One has to ask if the State wants to continue building up a symbol in which many people no longer believe."

In the interview, Petrusic said Switzerland needs new symbols with which everyone, including non-Christians, can identify. As an alternative to the current Swiss flag (see image here), Petrusic proposed the former flag of the Helvetic Republic (see image here) which was officially introduced in 1799 and consisted of green, red and yellow colors. "Those colors are similar to the current flags of Bolivia and Ghana and would represent a more progressive and open-minded Switzerland," Petrusic said.

The proposal to change the Swiss flag has been met with outrage across the political spectrum and is sure to fuel anti-immigrant sentiments in Switzerland.

Sylvia Flückiger a councillor with the conservative Swiss People's Party (SVP) said the demands are: "Totally unacceptable. With our Swiss flag there is nothing to change. The next thing you know, they will demand even more, that we change our constitution."

Marianne Binder, spokeswoman for the center-right Christian Democrats (CVP) said: "This is just what was missing, that we need to change our flag. The Swiss flag is part of Swiss identity, precisely because it is inviting for all to want to be involved...even the immigrants."

Stefan Brupbacher, general secretary of the libertarian Free Democrats (FDP) said: "This is utter nonsense. The Swiss cross is an extremely successful and valuable global brand. It is a symbol of success and quality. We will tightly hold on to it, out of love for Switzerland."

The issue of Muslim immigration to Switzerland has been a hotly debated topic in recent years and the flag controversy is sure to add fuel to the fire.

At this point, it is probably a poorly calculated overreach.

The Muslim population in Switzerland has more than quintupled since 1980, and now numbers about 400,000, or roughly 5% of the population. Most Muslims living in Switzerland are of Turkish or Balkan origin, with a smaller minority from the Arab world. Many of them are second- and third-generation immigrants who are now firmly establishing themselves in Switzerland.

The new Muslim demographic reality is raising tensions across large parts of Swiss society, especially as Muslims become more assertive in their demands for greater recognition of their Islamic faith.

The ensuing controversies are fuelling a debate over the role of Islam in Swiss society and how to reconcile Western values with a growing immigrant population determined to avoid assimilation.

Swiss courts have been jam-packed with Islam-related cases in recent years. In one case, Muslim parents won a lawsuit demanding that they be allowed to dress their children in full-body bathing suits, dubbed "burkinis," during co-ed swimming lessons. In another case, a group of Swiss supermarkets created a stir by banning Muslim employees from wearing headscarves.

In August 2009, the Swiss basketball association told a Muslim player she could not wear a headscarf during league games. In August 2010, five Muslim families in Basel were fined 350 Swiss Francs ($420) each for refusing to send their daughters to mixed-sex swimming lessons.

In September 2010, the secretary of the Muslim Community of Basel was acquitted of publicly inciting crime and violence. The charges were pressed after the 33-year-old made comments in a Swiss television documentary saying that Islamic Sharia law should be introduced in Switzerland and that unruly wives should be beaten. The judge said the defendant was protected by freedom of expression.

In November 2010, Swiss voters approved tough new regulations on the deportation of non-Swiss immigrants convicted of serious crimes. The measure calls for the automatic expulsion of non-Swiss offenders convicted of crimes ranging from murder to breaking and entry and social security fraud.

Also in November, Swiss Justice Minister Simonetta Sommaruga said the approval or extension of residency permits should be closely linked to the efforts immigrants make to integrate themselves. "Compulsory schooling must be respected. Children should attend all courses and exceptions made on religious or other grounds, for example in swimming classes, should no longer be possible," Sommaruga said.

In December 2010, the Federal Commission on Women's Issues called for Islamic burqas and niqabs to be banned in government offices and in public schools. The government-appointed committee said the move would prevent gender discrimination.

In January 2011, a 66-year-old Turkish woman living in Bern was sentenced to three years and six months in prison for encouraging the father and brothers of her daughter-in-law to carry out an "honor" crime against her for her "risqué lifestyle."

In May 2011, voters in canton Ticino, in Switzerland's Italian-speaking region, collected enough signatures to be able to launch a referendum that would ban burqas, niqabs and other Islamic head dresses. If the referendum goes ahead, it will be the first time in Switzerland that citizens have been asked to express an opinion on burqas.

Also in May, Swiss Defence Minister Ueli Maurer said increasing numbers of Swiss Muslims are training in Islamic militant camps in countries like Somalia and Yemen. In an interview with the SonntagsZeitung newspaper, Maurer also said that under current Swiss laws it is difficult to prevent Islamists from raising funds.

The SVP has described the minaret is a "symbol of a religious-political claim to power and dominance which threatens -- in the name of alleged freedom of religion -- the constitutional rights of others."

The SVP has backed its claim by citing a remark by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has implied that the construction of mosques and minarets is part of a strategy to Islamisize Europe. The pro-Islamist Erdogan has bragged: "The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers." Erdogan has also told Muslim immigrants in Europe that "assimilation is a crime against humanity."

In recent years the number of mosques in Switzerland has mushroomed; there now are over 200 mosques and up to 1,000 prayer rooms dotted across the country. Critics fear the mosques are facilitating the establishment of a parallel Muslim society -- one that is especially welcoming to Islamic fundamentalists.

It was thrown out because the plaintiffs couldn't prove they were injured by the minaret ban. So watch for the Islamic supremacists to cover that angle next time. "Legal move against minaret ban thrown out," from SwissInfo, July 8:

The European Court of Human Rights has rejected appeals against a ban on the construction of new minarets in Switzerland.

Judges ruled that the plaintiffs – three Muslim organisations and a private citizen – were not victims of an alleged human rights violation.

The Strasbourg-based court on Friday announced that the complaints by the applicants were not admissible.

“The main complaint was that a disputed constitutional provision offended their religious beliefs. However, they did not allege that it had had any practical effect on them,” the statement said.

The applicants could not prove either that they were indirect victims because none of them was planning on building a mosque with a minaret in Switzerland in the near future, it added.

The appeals were lodged in December 2009 following approval of a controversial rightwing initiative in a nationwide vote.

A majority of 57.5 per cent of Swiss voters came out in favour of the rightwing initiative in November 2009.

Why is it "rightwing" to oppose the spread of a triumphalist and repressive political ideology that will extinguish the freedom of speech and deny women basic rights?

And visiting Qur'an schools -- yet somehow that peaceful book's peaceful message eludes them. Eurabia Alert: "More Swiss train in Islamic militant camps," from SwissInfo, May 8:

Defence Minister Ueli Maurer says there has been an increase in the recruitment of Muslims for militant training camps.

In an interview with the SonntagsZeitung newspaper, Maurer said the government was aware of Swiss who went to these training camps, and others who visited Koran schools.

He said the federal intelligence service had a good overview of Switzerland’s “Jihad fighters”, but refused to give any figures.

According to the intelligence service, a militant Islamic network was set up last year in Switzerland in order to find recruits who are sent to countries like Somalia and Yemen.

Maurer told the newspaper that under current Swiss laws it is difficult to prevent Islamists from raising funds.

“The intelligence service can only observe and provide analyses,” he said. “We have at our disposal very little means [to fight Islamic militant activities] since parliament has up to now rejected them.”

The story unfolds in the Swiss press, ably translated by Norman and posted by Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs:

Police knew about abuse by father

Svera was frank: "I'm afraid of my father. He beats me." But for the authorities it wasn't clear enough.

16 year old Svera R. from Zurich-Hongg: A strong person who wanted to live her life- without the bonds of the strict muslim faith which stood above everything for her father. On Monday he killed his fistborn child with an axe. Then he surrendered to the police.

Svera's friends are under shock. And they're in anger: "Svera was a poor girl. In the family there was a lot of confrontation.

Heated arguments", says Daniel A. (20) to BLICK. He lives in the community Rutihof next to family R. "Often the father was beating her so severely that we could see the bruises. She attended school in that condition." In 2007 the school filed a notion/alarm concerning the four kids who received Swiss citizenship. They got a social worker and an Egyptian counselor/mediator.  

"Nonetheless, police and ambulance showed up several times", says Daniel A. "Last time I noticed was two weeks ago, when the father had a heart attack."

That incident was confirmed by Marco Cortesi, spokesman of the police in Zurich. "Scheragha R. was brought into hospital by an ambulance." It was the second time the police got involved with family R. "Three weeks ago we were called for the first time" according to Cortesi. "Svera ran away. Very soon we located her at her boy-friend's home. On the phone she told an officer that things aren't all right at home any longer. That her father beats her and that she is afraid of him."

What does the police do with these information? "We offered her to visit the police station and provide a testimony- or move to a shelter. She didn't do either. That's why the charge of abuse wasn't investigated any further. This is standard procedure", says Cortesi.

The family counselor arranged a mediation between father and daughter. Svera spent a night at her parents' home but then ran away to her boy-friend.

"The third deployment in that case occurred on Monday when Svera and a friend of hers were caught stealing", says Cortesi. "We informed the parents." And Svera? "She said it was ok with her- but she would run away from home instantly."

But why were these cries for help not being paid attention to? Cortesi explains: "She didn't go to the police station in order to provide a testimony, nor did she contact a shelter. That way a case like this does not get on record."

At the Guardianship Authority (I guess: Guardian ad litem) of the city of Zurich father's R. beatings were never an issue.
Spokesman Martin Naef (39): "There were no indications of massive use of violence. It seems like it wasn't more than  skirmishes/fisticuffs and arguments/conflicts." Moreover, family R. had been in care/coached intensively. Naef: "We were under the impression that tension had been in decline since 2007." During the last weeks the family counselor increased visits to the family even more.

Tragic: A meeting with Svera, coaches and family counselor was scheduled for Tuesday morning. Naef: "It was planned to talk about the situation at home and assistance/care." Too late. Svera is dead.

Read it all.

And so the hard-won principle of equality of treatment for all starts to give way, and Muslims begin to be established as a privileged class in society, as Sharia dictates. "Muslim army recruits get special conditions," from Swiss Info, April 19 (thanks to C. Cantoni):

The Swiss army has drawn up guidelines outlining special conditions for meals and prayers for its rising number of Muslim recruits.

The move is in line with the army's tradition of catering to other faiths, spokesman Martin Bühler said, following an article in the NZZ am Sonntag newspaper. Special provisions already exist for Jewish soldiers.

Muslims going into the summer recruit school - part of obligatory military service for young men - can now signal that they do not want to eat pork. They will instead be offered an alternative. Halal products can in some cases be brought in.

However, the five daily prayers will not be possible, but recruits will be able to pray once the day's army duties are over.

I expect that that will prove unacceptable.

The guidelines have been drawn up with the input of Muslims, according to the NZZ am Sonntag.

The number of recruits of Islamic faith has been on the rise in the past few years. In some infantry recruit schools, one in ten new soldiers is a Muslim, the paper said....

Instead, he should be calling on Gaddafi to apologize for the double standard of his call for Muslims to undertake economic jihad against Switzerland for banning minarets when non-Muslim religious practice is restricted far more severely than cosmetic issues all over the Islamic world.

"US apologises over Gaddafi comments," from the BBC, March 9 (thanks to Pamela):

The US state department has apologised for comments made about Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi's call for jihad against Switzerland.

Department spokesman PJ Crowley, who made the dismissive comments, said they did not reflect US policy and were not intended to offend.

Col Gaddafi had criticised a Swiss vote against the building of minarets and urged Muslims to boycott the country.

Mr Crowley described it as "lots of words, not necessarily a lot of sense." [...]

"I regret that my comments have become an obstacle to further progress in our bilateral relationship," Mr Crowley said.

Last week, Libya's National Oil Corporation warned US oil firms of possible "repercussions" over Mr Crowley's reaction.

The Libyan ambassador to the US sought to clarify Col Gaddafi's remarks saying the Libyan leader meant an economic boycott not "an armed attack".

"I should have focused solely on our concern about the term jihad, which has since been clarified by the Libyan government," Mr Crowley added.

As if the clarification, which was that economic jihad should be waged rather than violent jihad, makes Libya's action acceptable.

"I understand my personal comments were perceived as a personal attack on the president," he said.

"These comments do not reflect US policy and were not intended to offend. I apologise if they were taken that way."

Just an economic and commercial boycott, that's all. But of course Qaddafi would be the first to oppose any economic and commercial boycott of Saudi Arabia for not allowing the construction of churches and synagogues -- and Switzerland has done far less than that regarding mosques. "Libya says jihad against Switzerland 'not an armed struggle,'" from the Telegraph, March 4 (thanks to Twostellas):

Libya said its leader Colonel Gaddafi's call for "jihad" against Switzerland was not a reference to armed struggle.

Ali Aujali, Libya's ambassador to the United States, said: "It is a call for (an) economic and commercial boycott against Switzerland, this is true, but it doesn't mean by any means that it is an armed struggle."

On Feb 25, Col Gaddafi called for a "jihad" against Switzerland, branding it an infidel state that was destroying mosques - an apparent reference to a Swiss referendum in favour of banning the construction of minarets.

But Mr Aujali said that Tripoli still expects an apology for US criticism of his remarks....

They probably don't believe he will actually do anything. And maybe he won't. Maybe. An update on this story. "Switzerland Plays Down Qaddafi's Calls for 'Jihad,'" by Steven Erlanger for New York Times, February 26 (thanks to all who sent this in):

PARIS -- The Swiss government reacted blandly on Friday to the latest rhetorical sally from the eccentric Libyan leader, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, who called on Thursday for a "jihad" against Switzerland. The two countries have been sparring ever since the Swiss arrested one of Colonel Qaddafi's sons and his wife in 2008 on suspicion of beating their servants.

On Thursday, in a rambling address in Benghazi, Libya, before a gathering to mark the birthday of the Prophet Muhammad, Colonel Qaddafi called for jihad, or a holy war, against Switzerland because of its ban on new minarets for mosques and urged Muslims to boycott Swiss products and ban Swiss planes and ships.

"Those who destroy God's mosques deserve to be attacked through jihad, and if Switzerland was on our borders, we would fight it," Colonel Qaddafi was quoted as saying by Libya's official news agency....

Who would have thought that the legendary Libyan "strongman" would turn out to be a Misunderstander of Islam? Why is it that those who understand Islam correctly as a Religion of Peace seem to inhabit only Western university posts, not leadership positions in the governments of Muslim countries? "Kadhafi calls for jihad against Switzerland over minaret ban," from AFP, February 25 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi called on Thursday for jihad (holy war) against Switzerland over the ban adopted last year on the construction of minarets in the country.

"It is against unbelieving and apostate Switzerland that jihad ought to be proclaimed by all means," Kadhafi said during a speech in the Mediterranean coastal city of Bengazi to mark the birthday of the Muslim Prophet Mohammed.

"Apostate" Switzerland because Islam teaches that all people were originally Muslim.

"Jihad against Switzerland, against Zionism, against foreign aggression is not terrorism," Kadhafi said.

"Any Muslim around the world who has dealings with Switzerland is an infidel (and is) against Islam, against Mohammed, against God, against the Koran," the leader told a crowd of thousands in a speech broadcast live on television....

Expect Honest Ibe Hooper to book the next flight to Tripoli to explain to Libya's aging rock star that the Qur'an actually teaches peace, respect for the People of the Book, etc. etc. etc.

In case the jihad in Switzerland needs a boost. After all, more and more inmates from Gitmo are returning to the jihad -- and what was done there in any case to prevent that eventuality? Nothing whatsoever. "U.S. sends Uzbek from Guantanamo prison to Switzerland," from Reuters, January 26 (thanks to Maxwell):

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An Uzbek detainee held at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba has been sent to Switzerland for resettlement, the U.S. Justice Department said on Tuesday.

The prisoner was the latest transferred from the facility as the Obama administration seeks to close the controversial prison opened in 2002 to house foreign terrorism suspects....

On December 24, the Arab American News published a piece called "Minaret ban indicates evolving fascism" by Ali Moossavi, in which Moossavi, with a Charles-Johnsonish flair for defamation, characterized those concerned about the Islamization of Europe as neofascists. Predictably, Moossavi paid no attention to the fact that there is no similar reaction in Europe against Hindus, Sikhs, or other immigrant communities. Moossavi doesn't consider, of course, the fact that many young Muslims in Europe identify publicly with the global jihad and against Western ideals of freedom and democracy.

Roy Brown of the International Humanist and Ethical Union responded with this letter to the Arab American News:

Mr Moossavi has completely failed to understand the reasons for the Swiss vote in favour of a ban on the construction of minarets. The call for a referendum was certainly provocative and the Swiss People's Party, the SVP, is certainly on the right of Swiss politics. But the SVP does not have the level of support which on its own would have brought them victory in the referendum.

The Swiss in general are a tolerant, liberal people, and are not racists. But living as they do in the heart of Europe, they can hardly be unaware of what is happening around them. The vote was quite simply a reaction to the ever more shrill demands of Europe's Islamic leaders for special rights and special treatment. Examples are legion: special areas set aside in the workplace for prayers - in company time; demands for an alternative system of justice based on sharia law for the settlement of family disputes that would deny women equal treatment; and the fact that while not all Muslims are terrorists, most terrorists we have seen in Europe recently have been Muslims.

The Swiss were also provoked by a recent call by Muammar Gaddafi for Switzerland to be broken up because the Geneva police had had the temerity to arrest his son for beating a servant, followed by the unjustified arrest of two Swiss businessmen in Libya in retaliation.

Most of all, however, the Swiss have been provoked by the failure of Europe's Muslims to play by the rules; to enter into debate about the merits and demerits of Islam, but instead to take to the streets, banners screaming for the overthrow of democracy and freedom, at every insult to Islam, real or perceived.

The other reason for the success of the vote was that it does not infringe the right of Muslims to practice their religion. It was merely symbolic. Muslims are completely free to build mosques and worship in them as they please without any interference. It is no hardship not to have a minaret. To put this into perspective it should be compared with the plight of the Christians in Iraq and Egypt who face daily violence, with priests being murdered, churches burnt and worshipers harassed.

No, Mr Moossavi, this was not racism or fascism, it was a protest vote and a wake up call to Europe's Muslims to lower the tone.

Roy W Brown
Lausanne, Switzerland

The well-known Hamas propagandist, the "Palestinian" Arab Azzam al-Tamimi, has recently denounced the Swiss for their vote, one overwhelming in favor of banning minarets, on a program beamed out by Al-Jazeeera. Azzam al-Tamimi is quite a figure in London, where he used to be -- just a few years ago -- a respected commentator on Middle Eastern, especially Arab-Israeli matters. In the United States too, he was allowed, a few years ago, in the guise of that same respected commentator and analyst, to contribute a "My Turn" column to Newsweek, no doubt his piece being vetted and approved by the disturbingly skull-faced Fareed al-Zakaria. Zakaria has been such a sly apologist on the matter of Islam, though he himself, in his own ostentatious behavior, is reassuringly "moderate" (you know, with a love of wine, and that sort of thing, that can so mislead). You can see, for your first viewing, the Al-Jazeera interview with Al-Tamimi here.

Al-Tamimi's performance is telling, and deserves to be seen. One hopes that his, and similar denunciations, will be played and played in Switzerland and all over Europe, so that the next time there is a vote, the well-informed will not constitute 58%, but 98% of the vote. Al-Tamimi mingles real fury and illogic with, at times, a voice barely under control, but meant to indicate that he, Azzam al-Tamimi, is being logical. He begins by maintaining that while the "Swiss elites" were intelligently against the ban, the ignorant Swiss people themselves, devoid of intelligence, were for it. Or rather, while the Swiss "elites" were against the ban, it was those "neo-Nazis" whose "neo-Nazi" followers, according to Al-Tamimi in his Al-Jazeera interview, were "behind the Swiss minaret ban." Except that a few seconds later he decides that it was really the "Zionists" who were behind the ban, but don't worry, in a Hegelian synthesis of the thesis ("neo-Nazis" were behind it) and the antithesis ("Zionists" were behind it), he offers his own synthesis: the "neo-Nazis" and the "Zionists," naturally, have no trouble working hand in glove.

From Switzerland comes this contemporary political statement that is also an intimation of future Eurabian Christmases (thanks to Islam In Europe).

That'll show us.

And of course, for many, it will. There are so many cowards in the West, who would rather give up all their principles than suffer any inconvenience or face any threat.

"Turks Threaten to Kill Priest over Swiss Minaret Decision," from Compass Direct News, December 15 (thanks to all who sent this in):

ISTANBUL, December 15 (CDN) -- In response to a Swiss vote banning the construction of new mosque minarets, a group of Muslims this month went into a church building in eastern Turkey and threatened to kill a priest unless he tore down its bell tower, according to an advocacy group.

Three Muslims on Dec. 4 entered the Meryem Ana Church, a Syriac Orthodox church in Diyarbakir, and confronted the Rev. Yusuf Akbulut. They told him that unless the bell tower was destroyed in one week, they would kill him.

"If Switzerland is demolishing our minarets, we will demolish your bell towers too," one of the men told Akbulut.

The threats came in reaction to a Nov. 29 referendum in Switzerland in which 57 percent voted in favor of banning the construction of new minarets in the country. Swiss lawmakers must now change the national constitution to reflect the referendum, a process that should take more than a year.

The Swiss ban, widely viewed around the world as a breach of religious freedom, is likely to face legal challenges in Switzerland and in the European Court of Human Rights....

When the Swiss minaret ban first broke, I noted that minarets were often expressions of Islamic political dominance. Many dismissed this as an "Islamophobic" idea. But now it has been affirmed by Tarek Kahlaoui, assistant professor of Islamic art history and history at Rutgers University -- no doubt a dyed-in-the-wool "Islamophobe." To be sure, Kahlaoui then denies that minarets are assertions of dominance, but only after he has provided examples of their being just that.

"Misunderstanding the minaret," by Tarek Kahlaoui for Arab News, December 12 (thanks to James):

[...] So the more serious discussion is not about one single political statement at one single point in time but about the significance of the minaret throughout time. It is true that Muslims began the tradition of adhan (call to prayer), which is frequently and wrongly seen as the minaret's primary function, even before minarets came into existence. It should be noted here that the Swiss objection does not seem to be primarily focused on the function of prayer calling, for none of the four existing minarets in Switzerland is actually used for that purpose.

But what is perceived now as exclusively Islamic minarets are in fact inherently pre-Islamic, notably Christian. Minarets were introduced in the process of conquest such as in the earliest surviving imperial mosque -- the Umayyad Mosque of Damascus -- in the beginning of the 8th century. Minarets were in this case an appropriation of a Byzantine church's bell towers.

Slowly minarets became one of the elements asserting the grandeur and influence of big mosques financed by the early Islamic states, notably between the 8th and the 10th centuries. The Damascus Mosque's minarets seem to have been imitated later in the 10th century when the rulers of Andalusian Cordoba were aspiring to rival the major Islamic eastern caliphates. The helicoidal 9th century minarets in the mosques of the Abbasid city of Samarra, which are the largest mosques in pre-modern history, seem to have been imitated in Egypt in the same century. Yet minarets were not a constant element. In the eastern Islamic lands, especially within the Persian space, minarets seem to play a minor role. At some point in the 14th century minarets in Iran were simply decorative accessories for huge portals with big domes in the background.

It is probably with the Turkic dynasties, culminating with the Ottomans since the 15th century, that minarets would be equated with Islamic images in the Western European imaginaire. It has been widely reported in the European travelogues that one of the first acts of Ottomans after conquering Constantinople in 1453 was the insertion of a minaret at one of the corners of the Byzantine church of Haghia Sophia. In fact, the Ottomans seemed to have used the minaret as one of the elements to visually appropriate conquered Byzantine churches and convert them to mosques. They tended also to build monumental minarets, sometimes four, in their new mosques....

It thus appears that the historical significance of the minaret was not homogenic. It seems that the dominant tendency, especially within the Muslim diaspora, was the construction of minarets as an act of cultural affiliation and remembrance rather than of expressing dominance. It is utterly simplistic to assign to the minaret the intention of politico-religious conquest, for even in the case of Muslim hard-liners, their specific understanding of one single architectural element is defined by the dominant modern view of their community that is of cultural affiliation and remembrance rather than by their explicit political views....

That is, it is hypocrisy from a Western point of view. As far as the Saudis are concerned, Islam is the truth, its truth is self-evident, and therefore the Swiss are obligated to accommodate it in a way that the Saudis are not obligated to accommodate non-Muslim religious observance.

"Saudi Arabia calls to boycott Swiss over minaret ban," by Roee Nahmias for Ynet News, December 8 (thanks to Fjordman):

A number of religious figures in Saudi Arabia called to boycott Switzerland and withdraw all Muslim deposits from bank accounts in the country in protest against the Swiss referendum that banned building new minarets. The UAE-based newspaper al-Bayan reported that religious moderator Khaled al-Shamrani called for afar-reaching boycott on all good and products originating in Switzerland. He also called upon Muslims to avoid traveling to the country. Religious figure Ahmed al-Hassan called wealthy Muslims to withdraw their deposits from Swiss banks.

Hypocrisy. That is, it is hypocrisy from a Western point of view. As far as these "scholars" are concerned, Islam is the truth, its truth is self-evident, and therefore the Swiss are obligated to accommodate it in a way that the Saudis are not obligated to accommodate non-Muslim religious observance.

"Saudi scholars slam Swiss minaret ban," by Abdul Rahman Shaheen for Gulf News, December 6 (thanks to James):

Riyadh: Several prominent Saudi Islamic scholars and preachers lambasted the recent Swiss referendum to impose ban on the construction of mosque minarets in the country

Speaking to Gulf News, they said that this is another evidence of the West's antagonism towards Islam and such moves detail the serious initiatives being undertaken for holding dialogue among followers of various religions in different parts of the world.

Shaikh Abdul Mohsen Al Shahri, an eminent scholar in Islamic jurisprudence, said that the Swiss referendum was part of a new hostile campaign unleashed against Islam and Muslims in the West. "This is a clear evidence of the racial and religious segregation still prevails in the West, especially in a country, which boasts of an exemplary model of democratic ideals," he said adding that this serves as a severe blow to the so called secular image of Switzerland.

On his part, Shaikh Murshid Al Motairi, a noted Saudi preacher, underlined the need for launching a massive campaign to withdraw investments of Muslim countries from Swiss banks and halt going to Switzerland for holiday making.

Now you're talkin', al-Motairi!

More hypocrisy from the chief enemy of free speech in the world today, the OIC:

Meanwhile, the Secretary General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) Prof. Ekmeliddin Ihsanoglu voiced disappointment and concern over the Swiss public referendum to ban building of minarets in the mosques in Switzerland.

The Secretary General of OIC, which groups 57 Muslim countries, qualified the ban as an unfortunate development that would tarnish the image of Switzerland as a country upholding respect for diversity, freedom of religion and human rights.

He described this as the latest example of growing anti-Islamic incitements in Europe by the extremist, anti-immigrant, xenophobic, racist, scare-mongering ultra-right politicians who reign over common sense, wisdom and universal values.

The Chief of OIC, which represents about 1.5 billion Muslims worldwide, expressed his deep regret that at a time when the Muslim world and Muslim societies around the world have been engaged in a struggle to fight extremism, the Western societies are being hostage to extremists who exploit Islam as a scapegoat and a springboard to develop their own political agenda which in turn contributes to polarization and fragmentation in the societies.

He stated that this move also highlighted the need for promoting genuine dialogue at the grass-roots level to alleviate all misunderstandings and misinformation that lead to intolerance and misconceptions.

Therein lies the assumption that all acts of jihadist terrorism must be a response to some kind of provocation (real or imagined) from non-Muslims: after all, the apologists keep telling us "defensive" jihad is quite alright, caliph or no caliph.

The Fraggle-haired dictator also quips "I don't think anyone in the Muslim world will from now on authorise the construction of a church." This is ironic, of course, since 1.) it's not like the Muslim world has welcomed churches or freedom of worship with open arms up to now, and 2.) restrictions on building non-Muslim houses of worship are enshrined in the Pact of Umar, which has provided a far-reaching precedent for oppressing non-Muslims in a variety of ways. For that matter, the minaret ban does not restrict worship or the construction of mosques.

"Swiss inviting Qaeda hits," from Agence France-Presse, December 6:

TRIPOLI - LIBYAN leader Moamer Kadhafi said the Swiss referendum banning the building of new minarets was an invitation for Al-Qaeda to launch attacks in Europe, the official news agency JANA reported on Sunday.

'They pretend they are 'fighting Al-Qaeda and terrorism' whereas in fact they have just rendered it the greatest service,' he said, referring to Switzerland with disdain as 'the mafia of the world.'

'On November 29, more than 57 per cent of Swiss voters approved a rightwing motion to ban minarets on mosques, a decision that has sparked an international backlash and charges of intolerance.

''Al-Qaeda militants are now saying: 'We warned you that they were our enemies... Look at what they are doing in Europe. Come and join us for a jihad (holy war) against Europe,'' Kadhafi said.

'The Libyan leader, speaking at an academic ceremony on Saturday in Zliten, 160 kilometres (100 miles) east of Tripoli, said Muslim countries now had an argument not to allow the building of new churches. 'I don't think anyone in the Muslim world will from now on authorise the construction of a church,' Kadhafi said.

'He warned Switzerland of an economic fallout of a rift with the Muslim world. 'You must think of your interests. You need gas, ports, the sea, solar energy, investments,' Kadhafi said.

Investments: After all, things are going so swimmingly in Dubai.

While the world waxes indignant over the Swiss minaret ban, it is useful to put things into perspective. In Egypt, Christians are persecuted. In Pakistan, construction of new churches is severely restricted. In Saudi Arabia, it isn't allowed at all. So why is a ban on minarets -- not on mosques -- so much more terrible than that?

"Will Saudi Arabia allow construction of Cathedrals to challenge Swiss ban on minarets?," by Nazir Bhatti for the Pakistan Christian Post, December 1 (thanks to Andreas) -- reproduced as printed:

Karachi: November 30, 2009. (PCP) Dr. Nazir S Bhatti, President of Pakistan Christian Congress PCC expressed surprise on statement of Pakistani representatives in UNHRC expressing concern on Swiss vote ban on construction of minarets on mosques and other Islamic institutions in Switzerland when construction of new Churches in Pakistan has to follow strict government guidelines which prohibits one furlong from existing mosque and use of loudspeakers.

Nazir Bhatti said " Christ The King processions and other open rituals have been banned in public places from decades but not any Muslim human right activists have raised voice against government actions to damage true spirit of religious freedom in Pakistan but their protests in name of human right against Swiss government vote to ban minarets is index of substandard"

In a statement released by PCC Central office here today also urged Saudi Arabia to allow construction of Churches in kingdom to challenge Swiss ban on minarets.

"The Human Right activists around world shall raise voice to press upon Saudi Arabia and other Islamic countries in Middle East to permit construction of Cathedrals and ensure religious freedom for Christian minorities" added Nazir S Bhatti...

"Vengeance, boycotts, retaliation ... this clash with Islam could cost dearly." Don't resist Islamic supremacism! It might make the Islamic supremacists angry!

More on this story. "Europe unites to deplore Swiss ban on minarets," by Charles Bremner for Times Online, November 30 (thanks to Kris):

The Swiss and European establishment united today in deploring yesterday's decision by Swiss voters to outlaw the construction of minarets but conservative leaders warned that the referendum showed genuine fear over Islam on the continent.

Swiss officials, media and business leaders voiced shame over a vote that they say will stigmatise the country's 400,000 Muslims and stain Switzerland's name in the Muslim world. In contrast, hard right leaders in France, Austria, Italy and the Netherlands hailed what they depicted as a triumph for the people against the elite.

Le Temps, Geneva's establishment newspaper, said: "The vote was inspired by fear, fantasies and ignorance." Damage to the country's international standing would be spectacular, it said. "Vengeance, boycotts, retaliation ... this clash with Islam could cost dearly."...

In other words, roll over.

Pamela has more on the European, Swiss and Muslim reactions: Intifada Switzerland Begins.

Ali Gomaa is the statue-hatin', wife-beatin', Hizballah-supportin', Muhammad's-urine-drinkin' Mufti of Egypt, who some time ago denied reports that he had rejected the traditional Islamic death sentence for apostates. The delirious Dinesh D'Souza has praised him as a "traditional Muslim" with whom American conservatives should cultivate an alliance.

And now Ali Gomaa's poor little feelings are hurt. "This proposal...is not considered just an attack on freedom of beliefs, but also an attempt to insult the feelings of the Muslim community in and outside Switzerland."

"Egypt mufti says Swiss minaret ban insults Muslims," from AFP, November 29 (thanks to Maxwell):

CAIRO -- Egypt's Mufti Ali Gomaa denounced a vote to ban new minarets in Switzerland on Sunday as an "insult" to Muslims across the world, while calling on Muslims not to be provoked by the move.

A solid majority of Swiss voters chose in a referendum to ban the construction of new minarets, the towers attached to mosques from which the call to prayers is announced.

"This proposal...is not considered just an attack on freedom of beliefs, but also an attempt to insult the feelings of the Muslim community in and outside Switzerland," Gomaa, the Egyptian government's official interpreter of Islamic law, told the state-run news agency MENA.

He encouraged Switzerland's 400,000-strong Muslim community to use "dialogue" and legal means to contest the ban, which he described as "provocative behaviour."

The rightist Swiss People's Party (SVP) -- Switzerland's biggest party -- had forced the referendum after collecting a mandatory 100,000 signatures from eligible voters within 18 months.

Gomaa also called on Muslims not to be affected "by this provocation," adding that Islam "considers humanity a single family."

Provocation.

Because they symbolize a "political-religious claim to power" -- which, of course, they do.

"Exit polls show Swiss will accept minaret ban: TV," from AFP, November 29 (thanks to Inexion):

GENEVA -- Exit polls show that Switzerland will accept a far-right call for a blanket ban on the construction of minarets, Swiss public television reported Sunday, describing the result as a "great surprise."

Partial results from the poll which closed at mid-day (1100 GMT) indicated that the German-speaking canton of Lucerne accepted the ban, while French-speaking cantons Geneva and Vaud voted against.

The Swiss People's Party (SVP) -- Switzerland's biggest party -- had forced a referendum under Swiss regulations on the issue after collecting 100,000 signatures within 18 months from eligible voters.

It claims that the turrets or towers attached to mosques from where followers are called to prayer symbolise a "political-religious claim to power."

Egyptian scholar Sheikh Wagdy Ghoneim, on his way to attend a two day convention in Switzerland held by local Muslim organizations, was denied entry into the country by Swiss autorities. While the government has not yet issued a statement on why Ghoneim was not allowed into the country, it may have a little something to do with him having being arrested in Egypt, being on American terrorist watch lists, and having been accused of funneling money to Hamas. Of course, Swiss Muslims leaders have responded with their characteristic hyperbole, charging the government with anti-Muslim bias, according to Islamonline.net (thanks to Sr. Soph):

Swiss Muslim leaders hit out at airport authorities for banning prominent scholar Sheikh Wagdy Ghoneim from entering the country to attend a key conference, while slamming the conspicuous absence of invited officials at the two-day event.

"This is not the first time, and probably not the last, that a Muslim scholar is denied access to the country," Gamal Al-Khatib, the organizer of the 15th annual meeting of the League of Muslims in Switzerland (LMS), told IslamOnline.net.

He said the reasons behind the decision will remain as usual vague and unknown.

"The decision is driven by a bunch of opportunists who are playing the terror card to scare authorities and to provoke the Muslim minority."

Airport authorities said Egyptian Ghoneim, who holds a valid Swiss visa, is accused of raising funds for the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas, has been arrested by Egyptian police and is a persona non-grata in the United States.

Regardless of the fact that they invited a suspected terrorist to their convention, Muslim leaders castigated government officials for not attending:

Separately, the LMS harshly criticized government officials for failing to show up in their annual meeting, themed the Mercy to Mankind, in Fribourg.

"This is unacceptable and inexcusable," LMS head Mohammad Karmous told IOL.

"Ignoring the forum by Swiss officials, particularly those who tirelessly talk about the integration of the Muslim minority, raises many question marks."

He said government officials were expected to attend to listen to minority leaders and address problems facing Muslims.

From Swissinfo via swisspolitics.org, with thanks to Ali Dashti:

The woman behind the forum, Saida Keller-Messahli, told swissinfo there were many moderate Muslims in Switzerland, who have had limited opportunity until now to voice their opinions.

According to Keller-Messahli, there are currently many religious Muslim organisations in Switzerland but no associations for those who do not necessarily practise their religion. ...

Interesting. So moderate Muslims are those who don't necessarily practice their religion?

One of the goals is to tackle controversial topics, such as draconian punishments meted out to criminals under Sharia law.

"We want to show that Islam can be interpreted in a way that is compatible with human rights," stressed Keller-Messahli.

As a sign of the forum's progressive nature, five of the seven executive committee's members are women and not all are Muslims.

They include an Islamic scholar, journalists and Keller-Messahli herself. One of the members, Karl Gruber, is a Catholic and a member of Zurich's constitutional assembly.

I will be most interested to see how they interpret Islam in a way that is compatible with human rights, especially since the Islamic nations that signed the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights felt compelled to add some caveats later, withdrawing support for some of the Declaration's statements regarding freedom of conscience, women's rights, etc.

Here's one for all those who would prefer to convince themselves that Osama is a cynical manipulator of the poorly grasped religious beliefs of the uneducated and poor, rather than as a deeply pious Muslim who believes that he is serving Allah in what he is doing. From AP, with thanks to Nicolei:

GENEVA: Osama bin Laden's sister-in-law describes him as a man so driven by his beliefs that he would deny a water bottle to his own infant son in the heat of the Saudi desert. "I'm sure Osama would not have wanted to lose his baby. By his insistence, his wife used a spoon instead of a bottle," said Carmen bin Laden, the Swiss sister-in-law of the alleged terrorist mastermind.

"It was not as if he didn't care about the child. But to him, the baby's suffering was less important than a principle which he probably imagined stemmed from some seventh-century verse in the Koran."

"Eight foreigners have been arrested in Switzerland in connection with suicide bombings in Saudi Arabia. The detained are being held on suspicion 'of providing logistical support to a criminal organisation,' federal police said in a statement. 'The police action was in the context of terrorism investigations,' the statement added. Twenty-six people - including one Swiss citizen - and nine attackers were killed in the Riyadh bombings last May." This from the BBC, with thanks to Nicolei.

Interesting that these men thought they could hide out successfully in a quiet Western European country, although it is good news that they were wrong.

"'In the course of our inquiries related to terrorism - and in particular the attacks in Riyadh - an operation by the federal police took place simultaneously on Thursday in five cantons [regions],' Switzerland's public prosecutor said.

"Over 100 police officers took part in what is being described as Switzerland's biggest-ever nationwide operation against alleged terror suspects, the BBC's Imogen Foulkes in Bern says."

"But because of the continuing investigation, the police is declining to provide any further details. 'We are at the beginning of the investigation,' Andrea Sadecky, a spokeswoman from the Swiss Federal Prosecutor's Office, said. And 'it would not be right to say all of these people had the same religious or ethnic background,' she said."

Well, I'm sure they don't all have the same ethnic background, but it will be very interesting if Sadecky is telling the truth about their having different religions. We shall see.

Showing that it can outsneer the New York Times any day, Switzerland's Neue Zürcher Zeitung headlines this story "Zurich's Right fears rise of "Koran schools.'"

I see. So the possibility that Muslim schools in Switzerland may become "universities of jihad," or that Muslims in Switzerland may hold the radical Muslim convictions that no government has any legitimacy unless it governs according to Islamic law, and that Muslims must wage war to overthrow such governments -- those are all just "fears" of the "Right." It doesn't matter how many Muslim spokesmen are on record saying that they want Sharia. To pay attention to them is to betray one's allegiance to the "Right."

Anyway, the NZZ says that "voters in Zurich are set to decide on controversial new laws that would lead to the official recognition of non-Christian faiths, including Islam. But the proposals are being challenged by politicians from the Right, who have been accused of running an inflammatory campaign."

Surprise, surprise. "The People's Party claims that cantonal contributions -- which are given to all recognised religions -- would be used by Muslims for fundamentalist religious teaching."

Well, there are precedents.

"Party literature even shows a montage of the Zurich Münster with its tower replaced by a minaret and the words 'it's a question of time'."

There are precedents for this also, abundant ones in history. Swiss multiculturalists are outrageously self-deceived if they believe that Muslims have discarded the elements of their religion that call upon them to expand the hegemony of Islam by force. In the words of a legal manual approved in the 1990s by the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, Al-Azhar University in Cairo, the Muslim community must make "war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians . . . until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax" ('Umdat al-Salik, o9.8).

Nevertheless, "both the three recognised Churches and the country's anti-racism commission have heavily criticised the [People's Party] campaign. In a joint statement, the three Churches said that opponents' assertions were simply not true, because funds were not given for religious lessons."

This is specious. Islam makes no distinction between the sacred and the secular. If they were forbidden outright to give "religious lessons," radical Muslims would teach jihad under the guise of politics or civics or history or any number of other things.

"Gioia Weber from the Federal Commission against Racism told swissinfo that this was the case, adding that the Right's campaign bordered on being racist."

Gioia, radical Islam is not a race. It is an ideology.

Meanwhile, "Markus Notter, director of justice in canton Zurich, said that assertions that cash could be used for 'Koran schools' were simply false. He said there were strict requirements that needed to be met before a religious community could gain official recognition. These automatically rule out sects, splinter or fundamentalist groups."

With all due respect, I wonder if Mr. Notter and other Swiss officials are sufficiently informed of the root causes of radical Islam to be able to distinguish between "splinter or fundamentalist groups" and those deserving of official recognition. In reality, there is no great schism between moderate and radical Muslims. Signs are not posted outside mosques denoting their "moderate" or "radical" status. And even if Notter did get condemnations of terrorism from his groups, would he be able to distinguish between genuine ones and counterfeits?

These are the kinds of questions that ought to be asked now in Switzerland and all over Europe. Careful and detailed answers should be known by every leading governing official. I doubt such an effort is being made.

"The law for recognising religions sets out that among other things, a Church must carry out charitable activities. It is not allowed to have any political or economic goals."

This stipulation is certain to collide with Islam's traditional character as a political and social system as well as an individual faith.

"The faith in question must also have been active in Switzerland for 30 years, be organised democratically, recognise the Swiss legal system and exercise religious tolerance."

Will the institutionalized inferior status of the dhimmis count as tolerance? Probably. (Thanks to LGF.)