Bloodthirsty Liberal

Daniel Pipes on the minaret thingy:

What importance has the recent Swiss referendum to ban the building of minarets?

…

I see the referendum as consequential, and well so beyond Swiss borders. First, it raises delicate issues of reciprocity in Muslim-Christian relations. A few examples: When Our Lady of the Rosary, Qatar’s first-ever church opened in 2008, it did so minus cross, bell, dome, steeple or signboard. Rosary’s priest, Father Tom Veneracion, explained their absence: “The idea is to be discreet because we don’t want to inflame any sensitivities.” And when the Christians of a town in Upper Egypt, Nazlet al-Badraman, finally after four years of “laborious negotiation, pleading, and grappling with the authorities,” won permission in October to restore a tottering tower at the Mar-Girgis Church, a mob of about 200 Muslims attacked them, throwing stones and shouting Islamic and sectarian slogans. The situation for Copts is so bad, they have reverted to building secret churches.

Why, the Catholic Church and others are asking, should Christians suffer such indignities while Muslims enjoy full rights in historically Christian countries? The Swiss vote fits into this new spirit. Islamists, of course, reject this premise of equality; Iranian foreign minister Manouchehr Mottaki warned his Swiss counterpart of unspecified “consequences” of what he called anti-Islamic acts, implicitly threatening to make the minaret ban an international issue comparable to the Danish cartoon fracas of 2006.

Second, Europe stands at a crossroads with respect to its Muslim population. Of the three main future prospects - everyone getting along, Muslims dominating or Muslims rejected - the first is highly improbable, but the second and third seem equally possible. In this context, the Swiss vote represents a potentially important legitimation of anti-Islamic views. The vote inspired support across Europe, as signaled by on-line polling sponsored by the mainstream media and by statements from leading figures.

The polling shows overwhelming support for the move. It should be noted that Pipes doesn’t support or condemn the Swiss decision; he’s merely observing. Mark Steyn, the Quasimodo of commentators, predicted a backlash against creeping Islamization—again without passing judgement. It’s just that you can’t be more European than the Swiss (or, in a very different way, the Dutch); and you can’t be less European than fundamentalist Muslims. Eurabian yes, European no.

Bonne chance.

I may not agree with Switzerland’s decision to ban minarets—even though it was made by the people in a referendum, not by a autocrat, and even though minarets had essentially been banned at the local level already.

But this guy is a pig:

Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe chairman Chakib Makhlouf has condemned the Swiss ban on minarets on mosques, saying that “the racist spirit that we as Muslims face is the same spirit that Adolf Hitler once harbored against the Jews prior to World War II.”

He added that the greatest danger was that the persecution of the Muslims was disguised as democracy, unlike the direct persecution of the Jews in the Nazi era.

Pig.

Pig.

Where others see problems and difficulties, I see opportunity:

The European Jewish Congress (EJC) on Tuesday reacted with “alarm and extreme concern” over reports that the Swedish Presidency of the European Union is leading calls for the division of Jerusalem and supports a unilaterally declared Palestinian state.

Moshe Kantor, president of the EJC, said potentially such a move could become “an impediment to peace”

According to reports, European Union foreign ministers are expected to officially call next week for Jerusalem to be divided to serve as the capitals of both Israel and a Palestinian state. A draft document authored by Sweden, the current holder of the rotating EU presidency, implies that the EU would recognize a unilateral Palestinian declaration of statehood.

Maybe we’re just a little slow (maybe?), but plucky Sweden can show us the way. How ’bout it, Bjorn? Why not offer half your capital to, say, Nicaragua? Call it Stock-agua. Sounds like something you use making gravy.

Other Israel-bashing nations could get in the act. Norway’s and Poland’s merged capitals would become Oslaw. Mmm, delicious. Syria and Russia would yield Damascow.

This is just the latest in anti-Semitism practiced by Sweden. Just make sure your stomach is empty before clicking the link.

Looks like Switzerland’s Muslims are going to have to text their calls to prayer—in a follow-up to our earlier post:

Swiss voters have supported a referendum proposal to ban the building of minarets, official results show.

More than 57% of voters and 22 out of 26 cantons - or provinces - voted in favour of the ban.

The proposal had been put forward by the Swiss People’s Party, (SVP), the largest party in parliament, which says minarets are a sign of Islamisation.

The government opposed the ban, saying it would harm Switzerland’s image, particularly in the Muslim world.

But Martin Baltisser, the SVP’s general secretary, told the BBC: “This was a vote against minarets as symbols of Islamic power.”

The BBC’s Imogen Foulkes, in Bern, says the surprise result is very bad news for the Swiss government which fears unrest among the Muslim community.

With respect to the lovely and talented Ms. Foulkes, what the [bleep] does she know what’s good for the Swiss government—and why should the Muslim community automatically be assumed to turn to unrest? They may well torch the whole country—French Muslims would—but I am deeply offended by the gratuitous and bigoted presumption that they will. In fact, the only vandalism so far has been anti-Muslim.

Another point:

Switzerland is home to some 400,000 Muslims and has just four minarets … and planning applications for new minarets are almost always refused.

Only four minarets? And they already have a method for preventing more? Not very pluralistic.

Europe. Feh.

Why can’t we be more like that nice continent Europe? They’re always so polite and tolerant:

Swiss voters are deciding in a referendum Sunday whether to accept a ban on the construction of minarets, which right-wing parties regard as symbols of militant Islam.

The move - led by the Swiss People’s Party, which has campaigned in previous years against immigrants - has stirred fears of boycotts and violent reactions from Muslim countries.

Polls indicate growing support for the proposal, but doubt remains about whether it will pass. The seven-member Cabinet that heads the Swiss government has spoken out strongly against the initiative.

…

Business leaders say a ban on minarets, the distinctive spires attached to mosques, would be disastrous for the Swiss economy because it could offend wealthy Muslims who bank in Switzerland, buy the country’s luxury goods and visit its resorts.

I suppose that’s as good a reason as any to abandon your national identity and sacrifice women’s rights.

I’ll confess I’m torn. Obviously, any government ban on religious expression is detestable. But what if the religious expression is the burka, as the Swiss People’s Party suggests? I get a little itchy and sneezy around European political parties with the word “people” in their name, but I’ll accept their point.

Countries are comfortable with immigration as long as the immigrants make an effort to integrate themselves into their host country’s society. They get a little twitchy when the immigrants remain insulated and segregated, intentionally, and when the newcomers hold on to ways that are anathema to the mores of their new home. The ban on minarets can’t be the best way to solve this problem, but we must at least acknowledge that Switzerland—and all of Europe—has a problem.

Is this how Switzerland sees its future?

We’ve pretty much thrown in the white towel on Iran’s nuclear ambitions (which Iran has in turn wrapped around its head in triumph). But let’s not fool ourselves into thinking that the mullahs intend to stop with Mr. and Mrs. Khomeini switching on their 70-inch plasma TV at night to watch Stoning With the Stars.

Oh no, they have higher ambitions—and to deny or ignore them is a lie:

Today the West must make one of the most important decisions of our era. Will we defend what remains of democracy and freedom in Iran, or will we succumb to Tehran’s murderous government?

It’s a question that goes to the heart of our own security. Iran is a thugocracy of Islamic mullahs, and it will soon have nuclear arms. Any misconception about the intentions of fanatics with nuclear bombs will have grave consequences.

I know because I spent years alongside them as a CIA spy working under cover in Iran’s Revolutionary Guards starting in the 1980s.

…

The Guards – and the hardliner clerics they protect – are vulnerable, however. This summer’s grass-roots uprising has put them on the defensive. A strong Western hand now could tip the balance.

We don’t have a moment to lose. If we can’t upend the Guards now, how can we do so once they have nuclear bombs?

…

Such a stand would mark a radical policy change. For the past 30 years, the West has tried very hard to appease Iran’s mullahs.

In the 1980s, I helped make known a secret pact between Iranian mullahs and some European governments. Thirsty for Iranian oil, the Europeans gave the go-ahead to Iranian agents to assassinate opposition members abroad without interference, as long as European citizens were not at risk. Hundreds of dissidents were gunned down.

The US has also been guilty of trying to appease the mullahs. Almost every administration after the 1979 Iranian Revolution has tried in vain to create better relations through back channels. Yet those efforts haven’t stopped Iran’s rulers from arming terrorists, taking hostages, and suppressing their own people.

The brutal killing of Iranians by their leaders that we’re seeing today is nothing new. Ruling clerics have been killing political opponents, along with their families and friends, for 30 years – but inside prison walls.

I’ve been inside those walls and I’ve seen teenage girls who were raped before execution so they were no longer virgins and therefore, according to their Islamic beliefs, couldn’t go to heaven. I’ve seen hundreds hung on cranes. I’ve seen women and men lined up in front of firing squads after being severely tortured; their families would be forced to pay for the cost of the bullets. Western officials were quite aware that this was happening, but they let their thirst for oil blind them.

…

So far, the West has kept fairly quiet about Iran’s unrest. President Obama and others say they don’t want to give credence to Tehran’s claims of a Western conspiracy behind the protests. And by not ruffling the regime’s feathers, they hope to negotiate improved ties and resolve the nuclear impasse.

But how do you negotiate with a government composed of terrorists?

Right now, the Revolutionary Guards have near-complete control of Iran. This terrorist organization is expanding its power throughout the Middle East. Its ultimate goal is to bring the demise of the West.
With the help of North Korea, the Guards are working on long-range ballistic missiles in tests that are concealed by their space project.

I think we need to coin a new word to describe this craven cowardice in the face of criminal and alarming behavior.

How about “appeasement”?

What’s that, it’s been done? When? What were the results? Did it work?

He may bow, scrape, fist bump, and man-hug the leaders of the world, but President Obama isn’t leading them. Perhaps they’re over-awed by his magnificence.

In every case, Mr Obama seems to say, this administration starts afresh – and if it can break with the diplomatic and strategic failures of George W. Bush, remaking the world as well as the US economy is so much the better.

…

Can one begin to talk of an “Obama doctrine”?

If style and temperament can constitute a doctrine, the answer is yes. The intellectual traits that Mr Obama says he most prizes in himself and those around him are pragmatism and perseverance. Many would say that Mr Bush also had perseverance, carried to the point of dull-witted obstinacy, but nobody ever accused him of pragmatism. Mr Obama’s willingness to start anew, ask what works, offer respect to governments that crave it (even if they may not deserve it) and patiently seek progress where he may is refreshing.

One aspect of this pragmatism is the president’s desire to build alliances and cool old enmities, and work towards US aims through co-operation rather than confrontation. The trouble is, most US presidents – including Mr Obama’s predecessor – felt the same way until the world beat it out of them. Foreign policy doctrine is put to the test only when co-operation in pursuit of mutual interests fails to achieve results, and the hard choices that Mr Obama insists he is willing to make actually present themselves.

Though it is much too soon to write off Mr Obama’s friendly overtures, you could hardly describe them so far as a notable success. He travelled to Europe this month and received ovations at every step; presidents and prime ministers jostled like giddy teenagers to be photographed with him. Yet he went away with nothing: no co-ordinated fiscal stimulus; no meaningful commitments of new military support in Afghanistan. Judged by the outcome, could his predecessor have done much worse?

The world agreed that North Korea’s missile test should be opposed; the US even hinted it might shoot the rocket down. The launch went ahead without repercussions. The US and its allies could not agree on a response.

The world believes that Iran should be stopped from developing nuclear weapons, but the allies drag their feet over sanctions. Privately, the US tells Russia it would not build missile defence sites in Poland or the Czech Republic if it received help on Iran in exchange; publicly, Russia says no. Next, the new administration tries outreach, signalling a willingness to talk to Iran without preconditions – and an American-Iranian journalist is sentenced to eight years in jail for spying. At this, Mr Obama and Hillary Clinton, his secretary of state, say they are “deeply disappointed”.

He concludes:

Soon, the leaders who say they so admire Mr Obama will have to return more than warm feelings. Europe should bear more of the burden in Afghanistan. Iran would be better induced to co-operate if US overtures were combined with solidarity among the allies should those overtures be rejected. If US allies keep demanding the benefits of co-operation without the costs, Mr Obama’s respect for them will evaporate and so will his country’s – and that will be that for the Obama doctrine on foreign policy.

Pardon me for asking, but hadn’t more than a few countries come around to our way of thinking? Didn’t France and Germany—the core of Old Europe—throw out their obstinate, calcified leadership in favor of heads of state whose thinking was more in line with President Bush’s?

Maybe, just maybe, these giddy presidents, prime ministers, and chancellors of Europe are keeping their distance from the Messiah because they know what eventually happens to all false messiahs. And they don’t want to be nailed up on the next cross to his.

When they turned their feeble little fifteen-watt bulb lights off at night and huddled under their threadbare woolen blankets, they must have felt safe knowing that Dick Cheney was awake 3,000 miles away and five hours earlier, lights blaring, Kenny Chesney blasting, a bottomless tumbler of Jack Daniels by his side, poring over maps, charts, and threat assessments. Now, Joe Biden (searching for his misplaced left slipper) is the foreign policy czar, and they’re not sleeping so well anymore. No wonder they’re cranky.

They are so sophisticated and I just love the food and beer.

Ex-Nazi guard freed on technicality in Austrian court
By (Reuters)

A former Nazi concentration camp guard who was deported from the United States on Thursday is now a free man because he cannot be prosecuted in Austria, the Austrian justice ministry said on Friday.

Josias Kumpf, who by his own admission, aided in the killing of 8,000 Jews the Trawniki labor camp in Nazi occupied Poland in 1943 , arrived in Austria on Thursday after the United States deported him following the revocation of his citizenship.

Austrian justice ministry spokeswoman Katharina Swoboda said Vienna had warned U.S. authorities in the past that Austria would be unable to prosecute Kumpf because the statute of limitations relating to his crimes had expired.

“We have always pointed out to the United States that he cannot be charged here with the crimes of which he is accused,” Swoboda said.

The main reason was that Kumpf was younger than 20 at the time of the crimes.

The fact Kumpf had never been an Austrian citizen, and that the crimes which he is accused of were not committed in Austria, also made prosecution in Austria impossible, she said.

Kumpf was born in the part of Yugoslavia that is now Serbia, as a member of the ethnic German minority there. After joining the SS as a guard in the Sachsenhausen concentration camp in Germany, he moved on to Trawniki in German-occupied Poland.

The U.S. Department of Justice said on Thursday that Kumpf helped guard around 8,000 Jewish prisoners — including some 400 children — who were shot and killed in pits at Trawniki in a special operation in November 1943.

The department cited Kumpf as saying his assignment was to watch for victims who were still “halfway alive” or “convulsing” and “shoot them to kill” if they attempted to escape.

Kumpf was deported to Austria because it was the country from which he came when he entered the United States in 1956, she said.

Swoboda said with his U.S. citizenship revoked, Kumpf was now stateless and had no residence permit in Austria, which technically made him an illegal alien.

But since he could not be extradited to another country, he would be able to stay on. He would have to register his address.

Pass the Wiener schnitzel, please.

- Aggie

Birds do it.
Bees do it.

Even educating Austrian Muslims do it:

Austria’s Islamic Community says it has revoked the license of a Muslim religion teacher who allegedly gave his students anti-Semitic pamphlets.

The announcement Friday came a day after the Islamic Community suspended the man for allegedly encouraging students to abstain from shopping at businesses he listed as “Jewish.”

The teacher in question taught at a regular school in the Austrian capital but has not been identified. He was banned by the Vienna School Authority on Thursday.

An Islamic Community spokeswoman said the teacher and officials mutually agreed it was best to revoke the license.

Nice of them. I’m not sure other countries would be so understanding:

The number of anti-Semitic attacks on British Jews rose sharply after the start of the conflict in Gaza, a Jewish charity said Friday.

The London-based Community Security Trust, which monitors anti-Semitism and works to safeguard the Jewish community in Britain, said 250 anti-Semitic incidents were recorded in the four weeks after Dec. 27, when Israel launched attacks on Gaza to stop Hamas rocket attacks.

That compares to 40 incidents from the same period the year before.

Dave Rich, a spokesman for the trust, said Jews in Britain are unfairly seen as local representatives of Israel - a view that fuels some of the anti-Semitic attacks.

“This is racism,” he said. “And like all forms of racism, it is unacceptable.”

…

Police figures echo this rise. London police have recorded about three times the number of anti-Semitic incidents from Dec. 27 to Feb. 3 as compared to the same period last year.

…

Around Europe, several attacks were reported against Jews and synagogues in France, Sweden and Belgium in the weeks after the Israeli offensive, Rich said.

Check that—around the world:

A delegation of European Jewish students raised their profound concern for the security of the Jewish community in Venezuela, during a meeting with this country’s ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva.

…

The EUJS, an organization representing European Jewish youth at the European level and at the European Youth Forum, urged the Venezuelan ambassador to strongly condemn anti-Semitic attacks against Jewish communal and individual property while ensuring that the Venezuelan Government extends the same guarantee to its Jewish citizens as it would to any other.

In recent years, anti-Semitic sentiments have increased dramatically in Venezuela, according to various reports.

On January 30, 15 heavily armed men broke into and desecrated the main Tiferet Israel synagogue in Caracas, destroying Torah scrolls and calling for the Jewish population to be expelled from the country.

“European Jewish youth … urged the Venezuelan ambassador to strongly condemn anti-Semitic attacks against Jewish communal and individual property while ensuring that the Venezuelan Government extends the same guarantee to its Jewish citizens as it would to any other.”

Nice idea. But I don’t see it happening any time soon.

Complain about Hugo Chavez and this is the response you’ll more than likely get:

Venezuela on Friday expelled a Spanish member of the European Parliament after he called President Hugo Chavez a dictator and criticized Chavez’s handling of a referendum on term limits that the lawmaker had been set to observe.

…

Venezuela’s Globovision television reported that Herrero was escorted to the Maiquetia airport on Friday by what appeared to be members of the national guard.

“Following his comments, in a sequestering operation, they took him by force from the hotel without even allowing him to take his personal belongings and his passport,” opposition member Luis Ignacio Planas told Globovision.

Tubby the Two-Bit Dictator will end up hanging upside down in the public square. The only question is when.

An occasional glance at how Secretary Clinton and President Obama are doing in the new era of Smart Power, or SmaPo, for short:

Kyrgyzstan’s government said Friday that financial concerns and the killing of a citizen are among the reasons the country will close a U.S. base that has been a key operations point for U.S. efforts in Afghanistan.

The decision came as the United States makes plans to send an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan to halt a resurgence of the Taliban.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has called the decision to close Manas Air Base “regrettable.” Just a few weeks ago, during a visit to the region, Gen. David Petraeus — who oversees U.S. operations in the Middle East and Central Asia — talked about how important the base is.

Regrettable? That’s all?

I guess those 30,000 troops will have to go by way of Atlanta, like everybody else.

But the administration is undeterred:

Vice President Joe Biden emphasized a “new tone” in Washington and around the world as he delivered his first major speech Saturday in Munich, Germany.

…

“We reject as false the choice between our safety and ideals,” Biden told the Munich Security Conference audience, which included German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy. “America will vigorously defend our security and our values, and in doing so we will all be more secure.”

That policy will be in force at Guantanamo Bay detention camp, the U.S. prison that the Obama administration intends to close, Biden said. Watch Biden address security conference »

“America will not torture.”

Not for the first time, the Vice President is singing from the wrong hymnbook:

“If we had a ticking bomb situation, and obviously, whatever was being used I felt was not sufficient, I would not hesitate to go to the president of the United States and request whatever additional authority I would need,” Mr. Panetta said in his nomination hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee.

But that’s not the only problem I foresee:

“America will do more. That’s the good news,” Biden said. “The bad news is, America will ask from more from our partners as well.”

What’s that, Mr. Vice President? I DON’T THINK THEY CAN HEAR YOU! YOU’LL HAVE TO SPEAK UP!!!

NATO chief Jaap de Hoop Scheffer on Saturday criticised European allies who have refused to step up their efforts in Afghanistan, as the United States prepares to send in thousands more troops.

NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer warned the Europeans that they were undermining their leadership credentials and upsetting the balance within the world’s biggest military alliance, as it battles a Taliban-led insurgency.

“I am frankly concerned when I hear the United States is planning a major commitment for Afghanistan, but other allies ruling out doing more,” he said, at a major international security conference in Munich, southern Germany.

“That is not good for the political balance of this mission. That is not good for the balance inside the North Atlantic alliance,” he said. “Leadership and burdens — they go together.”

Not to worry, Jaap. In this era of goodwill toward America, I’m sure our European allies will rush forward to fight terrorism and Islamic extremism.

And if they don’t, a dose of Hillary’s SmaPo will sort them out.