Liberal Gulf Writers: Muslim Groups in Europe Are Exploiting Europeans' Openness

MEMRI.org

Two recent articles in the Gulf press discussed the attitudes of European Muslims towards the West. On December 2, 2008, Bahraini liberal Shi'ite cleric Dhiya Al-Mousawi published an article in the liberal Kuwaiti daily Awan on the Mumbai terrorist attacks, some of the perpetrators of which were Muslims who were naturalized British citizens. The second article, by liberal Kuwaiti columnist Khalil 'Ali Haidar, was published October 5, 2008 in the UAE dailyAl-'Ittihad. Both writers criticized Muslim groups in Europe for harming the West while at the same time enjoying Western freedoms and services. Haidar treated the subject more broadly, criticizing all Islamic movements and parties in Europe on the grounds that they are promoting Islamic extremism, that they have taken control of the lives of the European Muslims, and that instead of attempting to bridge the gap between the East and the West, they have consciously brought about isolation, alienation, and, ultimately, jihad-motivated terrorism against the West.

Following are excerpts from Al-Mousawi's and Haidar's articles:

European Muslims Are Spitting Into the Well from Which They Drink

In an article titled "When the Terrorist is British Born," Al-Mousawi wrote: "…It is sad that in Western countries there are thousands of Muslims who receive citizenship for themselves and their families after having been expelled from their respective homelands. [The West] gives them asylum, work, shelter, and health insurance - [yet] they are the first to turn their backs on their second homeland. Worse, some of them think nothing of committing suicide in the squares, in the very countries that have granted them and their families protection… It is odd that some sheikhs curse and revile the West from the pulpits of the Western [mosques,] and wish for the destruction of the [Western] countries, as the police of those countries guard them…" [1]

The Islamists Have Taken Control Over the Lives of the Muslims in the West

Al-Haidar wrote, in a similar vein: "The problem of Europe and the U.S. is neither the Arabs nor the Muslims. It is the Islamists, both parties and groups, who have taken over the political, religious, social, and cultural life inside and outside Islamic and Arab countries. [These parties and groups] have influence over the Muslim minorities of the Western countries… They have focused on imposing restrictions on the first generation [of immigrants], on brainwashing the second generation, and on excommunicating unions, organizations, and mosques. For many years - in fact, since the end of the Second World War - Western countries have been welcoming Arabs and Muslims, and providing [them] with extensive opportunities for preaching and [other] activities. They have treated them with amazing kindness. With time, the Muslims grew in power, and tightened their grip on the very heart of these societies.

"The presence of Islamists [in the European countries], with all their different parties, groups, and schools of thought, has been a testing ground for relations between their Muslim minority, which has been influenced by the indoctrination [carried out by different] parties, and these democratic societies. For many years, Islamists, and especially the Muslim Brotherhood, have complained about the oppressive [policies] of Arab regimes, the freezing of freedoms, surveillance, etc. [Abu A'la] Al-Mawdoudi's [2]writings, [originally in Urdu], have gained popularity in the Arab world, corrupting the youth and distorting their outlook. [Al-Mawdoudi] proclaimed to the entire world, and especially to [his] liberal European opponents, the advent of a new social order superior to Western democracy on every count - in liberty, flexibility, religious tolerance etc. - that will be introduced under the leadership of Muslim youth uncontaminated by the filth of Western civilization and its materialist [values]."

The Islamists Have Wrought Alienation and Terrorism

"The ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Al-Tahrir party, [3] and Egyptian, Pakistani, and other Islamic groups has cast the Arabs and the Muslims in Europe into darkness and confusion. With their books, films, and extreme separatist ideas, they have paved the way for the proliferation of different forms of extremism, and hence to overt terrorism.

"The unceasing attacks on Western civilization, on man-made laws, and on Oriental studies, as well as on [what they regarded as] the cultural invasion and Western conspiracies - have made it difficult for [Muslims] to integrate into the new environment to which they migrated while hating it. [However, his integration] as far as his material interests or the aims of his party were concerned [was never impeded]…"

The Absence of a Culture of Revival and Innovation

"The Islamic party movement has not embraced the idea of revival and innovation; as a consequence, it has failed to see a positive side to Western society or to study Western literature, art, and culture so that it could create a model of modern culture, literature and art that combines Western and Islamic [elements]. Even the Muslim Brotherhood leaders, along with others who are proud of the Islamic civilization and profess to be heirs to the Baghdad and Andalusian civilizations - [even they], during the half century [of their sojourn] in Paris, London, or Germany, have not produced a [single] new idea, [let alone new] art or culture worthy of notice...

"True, they have established publishing houses to circulate their parties' books and publications; they never let up in improving their media weaponry, such as the press, television, and other [media outlets]; they developed their own financial institutions and banks [and called them] 'Islamic: no interest'; they established private schools, which only further isolated Muslim boys and girls from their European environment and thus enhanced the Islamic parties' control of their [lives] - and this is only a partial list. But what they have failed to do is to act as a bridge between East and West, as have, say, the poets of the [Muslim] diaspora. They also never helped plant seeds of modernization, democracy, and creativity - cultural, artistic, and literary - in the Arab and the Islamic worlds.

"Most reports on [Muslims in Europe], produced with great enthusiasm by the media, are about fights between [different] mosques, family honor murders, or extremist religious discourse. Not a single one of their associations has ever sponsored a useful cultural program, nor has any of their parties ever translated an encyclopedia or organized a study group to explore an aspect of culture, education, or ties between East and West. Neither have any of these circles invested effort [in a project] - not even to reexamine the writings of Islamic parties and modernize them by removing extremist ideas and the ideology of heresy accusations."

Abusing Tolerance

"Western tolerance towards Muslims in Europe and in the U.S. on freedom of religion in general, and its respect for Christian and Jewish converts to Islam in particular, has not been used as a model by any Islamic party. It didn't teach them religious tolerance; it didn't lead them to acknowledge that religious choice is a personal matter; it did not prompt them to protect non-Muslims in the Arab and Muslim world. On the contrary, they became increasingly offensive, since they perceived that the West was conceding to their demands and treating them with tolerance. Thus, they gained ground and popularity, and their arrogance was became boundless …

"The Islamist literature, publications, and sermons, even in the heart of Europe, have essentially retained the conceptual structure of ancient [Muslim] writings, in that they continue to treat any input from civilization as refuse, all the amazing technological innovations as purely material development, and the life and values of the West as decadence and degradation."

The Connection to Violence and Terrorism

"It has often been said that moderate Islamic groups have nothing to do with violence and terrorism. But this is an illusion. All the ideas of terrorist groups fit the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood, of the Al-Tahrir [party], of Al-Jama'a Al-Islamiyya in Pakistan, and others. Ideas like idol worship, the rule of God, the establishment of shari'a, and others, which have assumed new fundamentalist connotations associated with new ruling parties, were not invented by Al-Qaeda or Fath Al-Islam. The notions of cognitive isolation, the invalidity of man-made laws, and serving God; the undermining of the values of homeland and citizenship, as well as all facets of political realism; proclamations such as the Muslim Brotherhood's motto 'Death for the sake of Allah is our highest aspiration,' and numerous other [slogans] - all these have not been invented by Al-Zarqawi, bin Laden, or [Sheikh Abu Muhammad] Al-Maqdisi…

"What can we expect of a youth who encounters [the following] idea, [which appears] in a book frequently discussed by the Muslim Brotherhood: 'Today we live in a jahiliya [the pre-Islamic era of idol worship], akin to idol worship in [Muhammad's] time and worse. We are surrounded by idol worship. Human achievement and beliefs, people's traditions and customs, their traditional sources, their arts and literature, their laws and regulations, and even most of what we regard as aspects of the Islamic culture, Islamic authorities, and Islamic thought and philosophy - all these are products of idol worship."

"This is a simple passage from the book Milestones by Sayyed Qutb. This book has been translated into all the languages of the Islamic countries: Turkish, Persian, Urdu, Malaysian, Indonesian, and others, as have hundreds of other Muslim Brotherhood books. These books are brainwashing thousands of youths in the Muslim world, and drawing [many of them] towards extremist terrorist organizations.

"Is not this passage, which has been read [and reread] by Islamists for over 40 years, the main reason for the Muslim's deepening sense of alienation from both his own society and from the society in Europe, America, or Australia to which he emigrated?…

"There is no doubt that it is these ideas, texts and doctrines - some of which seem innocuously 'moderate' [to us, after] they have poisoned our souls - that have shaped the views of many Muslims, men and women, worldwide, and have brought forth a generation of jihadi terrorists.

"It is this [phenomenon] that has precipitated the clash between the Islamists and Western societies in America and Europe." [4]

Endnotes:

[1] Awan (Kuwait), December 2, 2008.

[2] Sayyid Abul A'la Mawdoudi (1903-1979)(1903-09-25), also known as Mawlana (Maulana) or Sheikh Sayyid Abul A'la Mawdudi, was a Sunni Pakistani journalist, theologian and political philosopher, and a major Islamist thinker. He was also a political figure in his home country of Pakistan, where he founded the Jamaat-e-Islami Islamic revivalist party.

[3] Hizb Al-Tahrir (Liberation Party) is a radical Islamic group whose agenda is to rally Muslims with a call for a new Caliphate.

[4] Al-Ittihad (UAE), October 5, 2008.

Muslims Slaughter Christians in Egypt.

Pakistan Christian Post By Lee Jay Walker, Tokyo Correspondent, THE SEOUL TIMES

Over half a dozen Coptic Christians were killed and another half dozen were hurt in a Thursday morning drive-by shooting following a Christmas midnight Mass in Nag Hamadi in Upper Egypt.
Another year may have just started but in Egypt the endless persecution of Christians goes on and the endless martyrs who follow the faith of Christianity “shine out” in a world of hatred. However, why does this suffering continue in Egypt and in other parts of the world?
This article is in response to the recent murders of Christians in Egypt and I aim to link the current situation with the bloody history of Egypt and its endless persecution of Christians.
According to popular myth Egypt is a moderate nation and this mainly Muslim nation is meant to be a moderate bastion within the mainly intolerant “Islamic world.” However, while Muslims in this nation highlight the fact that you have thousands of churches, they fail to say why and they gloss over the endless persecution and discrimination within Egypt.
After all, Egypt was mainly Christian before countless Islamic invasions and in time Arabization would limit the role of the Coptic language and colonialization took root over many centuries. The indigenous Christians of Egypt already had a rich Coptic culture and history and the Coptic Christian church was blessed with a strong-minded priesthood.
However, constant Islamic invasions, linguistic colonialization via Arabic, massacres of Christians, and systematic persecution of Christianity via Islamic Sharia law and dhimmitude; meant that Islam would rule supreme.

Of course, not all Muslim rulers were anti-Christian but Coptic Christians always had to rely on the given ruler for protection. Yet, irrespective if the ruler was moderate or anti-Christian, one theme remained the same and this applies to institutionalized discrimination and persecution which is part and parcel of Islam and Islamic Sharia law.
Therefore, from the early conquests and up until today, it is clear that converts from Islam to Christianity face persecution. Yes, Islamic enlightenment in Egypt means that in the past the convert to Christianity would be killed, however, now it is mere prison or persecution or a mixture of both.
Turning back to the reason of this article, I will now focus on recent events in Egypt in 2010. For on January 6 in Nagaa Hamady, which is near Luxor, Muslims killed six Christians and one security guard. They were gunned down on Christmas Eve (Christmas day is January 7 for Coptic Christians and other Orthodox Christians) and clearly the timing was important.
Yet for many Christians in Egypt this is all about the embedded persecution of Christianity in this nation. Therefore the recent massacre is further evidence that Islamic intolerance and systematic persecution is part and parcel of the traditions of Egypt since the first Islamic invasion began.

In recent times you have had many attacks against Christians and this applies to murders, riots against Christians, attacks against Coptic Christian churches, abduction and forced rapes of Christian females, and other insidious forms of discrimination and persecution.
In truth, ever since the first Islamic conquest of Egypt you have had systematic persecution because religious pluralism and freedom of thought does not exist in Islam. Therefore, from the very foundation of Islam in Egypt it was clear that Christians had to pay tax (jizya) in order to be protected and non-payment could mean death, enslavement, or forced conversion.
It is worth mentioning that Mohammed himself stated that Muslims must (Koran 9:29) "Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection."
Therefore, it is clear that Mohammed understood the power of tax and other draconian laws in order to subdue other faiths. After all, how can other faiths thrive when apostasy from Islam means death?

Prof. Kenneth Cragg sums up the dhimmi system by stating that the "Dhimmi, 'tolerated minority,' status under Islam has long made for a pattern of quiescence in ancient, local Christianity around the mosque. Traditional tolerance allowed only a freedom to remain, to teach the faith only within the family, so that adherence became a circumstance of birth, and continuity that of a closed community. There was no freedom to express faith, still less to recruit to it, outside that circle of one's origin."
Coptic Christians after the Islamic conquests were therefore faced with a bleak future. After all, if Coptic Christians were forbidden to propagate their faith freely in public then at best they could only survive. Yet this survival meant severe restrictions and systematic persecution, with the consequences of this being an ever diminishing minority and open to public ridicule because of their inferior status in law, education, and other important areas.
Therefore, in 2010 you have many minorities in mainly Muslim societies who are fighting for survival or who face open persecution because of state sanctioned laws which are based on Islamic Sharia law and maintaining massive inequality.

Minority groups who suffer open persecution in the modern world applies to the Baha’is in Iran; the Shabaks, Christians, Mandaens, and Yazidis who face persecution on a daily basis in Iraq; converts to Christianity in Somalia who are being butchered by radical Sunni Islamists; Buddhists in Southern Thailand have also suffered greatly in recent times including Buddhist clerics being beheaded; Hindus also suffer enormously in both Bangladesh and Pakistan; Ahmadiyya Muslims also face severe persecution in Pakistan and in 2009 several Christians were burnt alive in this nation; while Christians also face daily threats in Northern Nigeria and last year three Christian pastors were beheaded and other terrible attacks took place; the list is endless and of course Coptic Christians in Egypt suffer from both state sanctioned discrimination and being threatened by radical Sunni Islamists.

The current situation in Egypt does not look good for Coptic Christians because the “flawed” political system under President Hosni Mubarak means state sanctioned discrimination. However, you also have the fear that radical Islamists could fill the political vacuum and this would add greatly to the woes of the embattled Christian community in Egypt.
Sadly, major political leaders in many Western nations are in appeasement mode and they are not confronting this global menace. However, radical Islam is also growing in the streets of London and Paris, and in other major cities throughout parts of Europe and in other parts of the mainly non-Muslim world.
Therefore, the ongoing silence towards events in Egypt, Iraq, Northern Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Southern Thailand, Somalia, and other mainly Muslim nations; is impacting on other nations because this hatred is spreading wide and far and silence or appeasement isn’t working.

Leaving Failed States Alone By Rabbi Jeremy Rosen

5TJT January 15, 2010

I know this is going to sound harsh and unfeeling but we ought to leave failed states alone to stew in their own self-imposed cruelties. It is, in the end, up to their own citizens to either put up or shut up.
I really thought Obama was going to usher in a new era and stop trying to cure those sick parts of the world that do not want to be healed. But it seems his arms dealers, his scaremongers, his political allies and supporters all have a vested interest in keeping armed forces overseas, sending young men and women to their pointless deaths, and throwing away vast sums of money that could better be used improving the fabric of society and infrastructure at home. I remember in my youth the arguments for staying in Vietnam. There was the domino theory that all of Asia would collapse into Communism. The line had to be drawn. Failed states would present a danger to the USA and World Peace. And they all proved to be false.
If you cannot tend to everyone else's garden, at least you can make sure yours grows properly. And if you put all your energy and resources into trying to help someone who hates gardening to spend time weeding, you will inevitably fail. Have we not yet learnt that no matter how benevolent an occupier is, an occupier is a resented alien who will never be accepted?
I remember vividly the 1967 war in which Israel ejected the Jordanians from the West Bank they had illegally occupied in1948 (though no one in the UN seemed to mind if it was Arab occupying Arab). The Palestinians threw roses at the Israeli tanks as they passed through the villages, so hated were the Jordanians. Unbelievably, the victors simply refused to learn from what their own eyes were telling them--that any occupier comes to be hated, and certainly one who tries to subjugate and disenfranchise. About the only thing to be said in favor of Russia this last century was that she actually did give up on Afghanistan and get out.
So I say cut your losses and get out. Occupation does not work.
Will a failed state become a haven for Al Qaeda terrorists? So isolate that state. Track those who come and go, rather than try to change it from the outside. Any attempt from the outside will be regarded as a crusade, imperialism, or an American Zionist plot. It will only reinforce blind fundamentalism.
In Iraq, the US ended up in league with the very Sunnis it initially booted out of power. The Taliban rulers were ejected from Afghanistan. Yet most analysts now think the only chance of any kind of success is by making a deal with the new Taliban. Meanwhile, they and Al Qaeda are protected within Pakistani territory, because its own political and military system is riddled with fundamentalists and it is a nearly failed state with an already tested nuclear bomb. Look at all the failed states harboring Al Qaeda or other dangerous potential terrorists. Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. And in the case of Somalia the US left with its tail between its legs. The world cannot even deal with Somali pirates.
There is a mindset amongst many moderate Muslims that only outside intervention can rescue then from the oppressive Muslim regimes they live under. That is why it is argued that the USA should reach out to and support moderates in Iran or Saudi Arabia. Not that she will be thanked. Only when a sufficient number of oppressed citizens within a country feel so strongly about it that they are prepared to rebel can there be any hope of regime change. That, for example, is precisely what happened in Honduras, and in time it will happen in Venezuela too. Hopefully Zimbabwe as well. They are not as toxic as Iran and North Korea--two virtual nuclear powers. Yet no one I have heard is arguing that the USA should invade them.
In Iran the oppressive regime murders, tortures, and rapes its own people. That’s the way in the East. No one is making a fuss of Christians killed in Egypt or Malaysia. Who cares if in Abu Dhabi a royal prince gets off scot-free after torturing and maiming another Muslim. We don't expect justice or freedom in such places. Shall we invade them too?
Thanks to China's refusal to countenance any interference in the internal affairs of regimes, there is no way to impose universal sanctions or effective restrictions. Free countries have no alternative other than to rely on their own methods of self-protection.
As for locally born terror, stop pretending it is exceptional. Political correctness and appeasement will not protect anyone. Britain still refuses to acknowledge that its universities are centers of recruitment for aggressive Islam, something students have been telling anyone who would listen for years.
America's decision to require stricter security for visitors from certain Muslim states which harbor terror has been attacked both by American Muslims and Civil Rights campaigners. I hope the USA stands firm (I know Europe won't). I do feel very sorry for innocent peace-loving Muslims who suffer as a result. But they have it in their own hands either to help change regimes or bring the pressure to bear on those Muslims who give Islam a bad name. ♦

Muslim Europe – by Jamie Glazov. Frontpage Magazine

FRONTPAGEMAG.COM

Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Pamela Geller, founder, editor and publisher of the popular and award-winning weblog AtlasShrugs.com. She has won acclaim for her interviews with internationally renowned figures, including John Bolton, Geert Wilders, Bat Ye’or, Natan Sharansky, and many others, and has broken numerous important stories — notably the questionable sources of some of the financing of the Obama campaign.. Her op-eds have been published in The Washington Times, The American Thinker, Israel National News,Frontpage Magazine, World Net Daily, and New Media Journal, among other publications. She is the co-author (with Robert Spencer) of the soon to be released, The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America (forward by Ambassador John Bolton).

FP: Pamela Geller, welcome back to Frontpage Interview.

I would like to talk to you today about a mass Muslim immigration plan that is going into the works in Europe and not too many people know about it. Can you enlighten us please?

Geller: Thanks, Jamie.

The disastrous and suicidal pact called the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership is in the process of going into effect, with little fanfare or examination. It boggles the mind that such a consequential and seismic cultural shift could be mandated and put into play without so much as a murmur from the mainstream media.

The European human rights group called Stop the Islamisation of Europe (SIOE) has been working tirelessly to expose the mass Muslim immigration plan of the Euro-Med Partnership. A statement on the SIOE website criticizes the secrecy of the process:

“It was shocking to hear about the plans and at the same time knowing that Danish politicians and a [cowardly] Danish press — who is otherwise proud to be critical — has told nothing to the Danish people about this project which begins already in January next year [2010]. This also showed clearly at the conference. Only very few politicians showed up and no media. Those politicians who showed up had obviously never heard about the Euro-Mediterranean project.”

The goal of the Euro-Mediterranean cooperation is to create a new Greater European Union encompassing both Europe and North Africa, with the Mediterranean Sea becoming a domestic Eurabian sea. The goal is to establish a “comprehensive political partnership,” including a “free trade area and economic integration”; “considerably more money for the partners” (that is, more European money flowing into North Africa); and “cultural partnership” — that is, importation of Islamic culture into post-Christian Europe.

According to the SIOE, in the Euro-Med plan, “Europe is to be Islamized. Democracy, Christianity, European culture and Europeans are to be driven out of Europe. 50 million North Africans from Muslim countries are to be imported into the EU.”

FP: Who exactly is behind this agenda? Why is it being done so secretly and how come it is allowed to happen this way?

Geller: Jamie, this agenda is being pushed at the highest levels of the European Union. The official EuroMed Partnership website says it’s an initiative of “the EU and its southern neighbors.” And it’s huge in scope. Recently in Brussels there was a summit meeting of trade ministers from 43 countries in Europe and the Mediterranean. And it’s being done secretly because the European governing elites know the people of Europe wouldn’t go along if they knew what was happening.

FP: How does this effect America and Americans?

Geller: Americans have to care about this for a number of reasons. Short term the most obvious reason presented itself on Christmas day, when a jihadi from Amsterdam attempted to blow up a passenger jet carrying 278 people as it was landing in Detroit. A flood of Muslims into Europe, many of them “devout,” would increase the security risks to America.

And the destruction of national identity also bodes ill for us. This internationalism is already destroying what has made Europe free and great. And now Barack Obama seems to want to do the same thing to America.

Longer term, a Euro-Arab partnership would put control of the oil in the hands of the new Eurabians, leaving America at a distinct disadvantage. Oil is power, and we would be at their mercy.

More troubling is that we seem to be following the same European model of Muslim immigration. We have opened up Islamic immigration via diversity visas and religious visas to countries that are hotbeds of jihadist activity.

The European model is in play.

FP: So is all of this taking effect now?

Geller: Indeed it is. EuroMed agreements have already begun to take effect. The British newspaper the Daily Express reported back in October 2008 about “a controversial taxpayer-funded ‘job centre’ “that opened in Mali at that time as “just the first step towards promoting ‘free movement of people in Africa and the EU.’ Brussels economists claim Britain and other EU states will ‘need’ 56 million immigrant workers between them by 2050 to make up for the ‘demographic decline’ due to falling birthrates and rising death rates across Europe.”

To offset this decline, a “blue card” system is to be created that will allow card holders to travel freely within the European Union and have full rights to work – as well as the full right to collect welfare benefits.

FP: What can be done to block this project?

Geller: Europeans and Americans must become aware of what is going on and fight it. The EuroMed Partnership will destroy what is left of European civilization, and ultimately shake the foundations of this country. Free people must not allow that to happen. We must stand up and demand that our leaders protect our civilization and take our countries back.

FP: Pamela Geller, thank you for joining Frontpage Interview.

Euro-med Union article today in The Washington Times

The European media that is supposed to be the watchdog for the populations in Europe has been completely silent when it comes to the facts about the Euromediterranian cooperation.

However after SIOE told Pamela Geller about the Euro-med plans there has been an international interest of the subject.

Pamela Geller has a revealing article about the subject published in Washington Times today where she also explains the consequenses for America concerning the Euro-med cooperation.

Excerpt from the article:

…Come Jan. 1, 2010, a disastrous and suicidal pact called the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (Europe/Mediterranean) goes into effect with little fanfare or examination. It boggles the mind that such a consequential and seismic cultural shift could be mandated and put into play without so much as a murmur from the mainstream media.

Why should Americans care about this? Americans have to care because this global gobbledygook is coming to our shores, thanks to our globalist president.

The European human rights group called Stop the Islamization of Europe (SIOE) has been working tirelessly to expose the mass Muslim immigration plan of the Euro-Med Partnership…

Read the article in The Washington Times

MUSLIMS IN 21ST CENTURY AMERICA: POLITICAL CORRECTNESS ALLOWS RAMPANT INTIMADATION

By Frosty Wooldridge
December 7, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

Part 9: Dry run for another 9/11, Muslims in America honoring their guy who drove the airplane into the WTC towers on 9/11.

A Muslim book store in Houston, Texas closed on 9/11 in order to celebrate one of the hijackers that drove an airplane into the World Trade Center towers. Harwin Drive is a street in southwest Houston lined with shops that sell right off the boat Chinese junk and knock-offs. Muslims run the majority of shops. A Houston resident said, “Today I went to the Harwin Central Mall to pick up some crystals. The very first store that you come to when you walk from the lobby of the building into the shopping area had this sign posted on their door. It read, “We are closed today September 11, 2009 in order to commemorate Imam Ali.” I couldn’t stay in the building it made me so sick.

Imam Ali piloted one of the planes into the World Trade Towers on 9/11/01. Thus, we feature Muslim-Americans that celebrate his actions annually while we mourn our 3,000 dead at the same time.

This story occurred on November 17, 2009 as reported by FOX NEWS. Below, you may read the story from the man who reported it as an eyewitness:

“One week ago, I went to Ohio on business and to see my father,” said Tedd Patruna. “On Tuesday, November the 17th, I returned home. If you read the papers the 18th you may have seen a blurb where a Air Tran flight was cancelled from Atlanta to Houston due to a man who refused to get off of his cell phone before takeoff. It was on Fox.”

Here is what actually happened.

“I was in 1st class coming home,” Patruna said. “Eleven Muslim men got on the plane in full attire. Two sat in 1st class and the rest peppered themselves throughout the plane all the way to the back. As the plane taxied to the runway the stewardesses gave the safety spiel we are all so familiar with. At that time, one of the men got on his cell and called one of his companions in the back and proceeded to talk on the phone in Arabic very loudly and very aggressively. This took the 1st stewardess out of the picture for she repeatedly told the man that cell phones were not permitted at the time. He ignored her as if she was not there.

“The 2nd man who answered the phone did the same and this took out the 2nd stewardess. In the back of the plane at this time, two younger Muslims, one in the back, isle, and one in front of him, window, began to show footage of a porno they had taped the night before, and were very loud about it. They are only permitted to do this prior to Jihad. The 3rd stewardess informed them that they were not to have electronic devices on at this time. To which one of the men said, “Shut up infidel dog!” She tried to take the camcorder and he began to scream in her face in Arabic. At that exact moment, all 11 of them got up and started to walk the cabin. This is where I had had enough! I got up and started to the back where I heard a voice behind me from another Texan twice my size say “I got your back.” I grabbed the man who had been on the phone by the arm and said, “You WILL go sit down or you WILL be thrown from this plane!” As I “led” him around me to take his seat, the fellow Texan grabbed him by the back of his neck and his waist and headed out with him. I then grabbed the 2nd man and said, “You WILL do the same!” He protested but adrenaline was flowing now and he was going to go.

The pilots taxied the plane back to the terminal.

“As I escorted him forward the plane doors open and three TSA agents and four police officers entered. My new Texan friend and I were told to cease and desist for they had this under control. I was happy to oblige actually. There was some commotion in the back, but within moments, all 11 were escorted off the plane. They then unloaded their luggage.

“We talked about the occurrence and were in disbelief that it had happened, when suddenly, the door open again and on walked all 11!! Stone faced, eyes front and robotic. The stewardess from the back had been in tears and when she saw this, she was having NONE of it! Being that I was up front, I heard and saw the whole ordeal. She told the TSA agent there was NO WAY she was staying on the plane with these men. The agent told her they had searched them and were going to go through their luggage with a fine tooth comb and that they were allowed to proceed to Houston. The captain and co-captain came out and told the agent “We and our crew will not fly this plane!” After a word or two, the entire crew, luggage in tow, left the plane. Five minutes later, the cabin door opened again and a whole new crew walked on.

“Again…..this is where I had had enough!!! I got up and asked “What the hell is going on?” I was told to take my seat. They were sorry for the delay and I would be home shortly. I said “I’m getting off this plane”. The stewardess sternly told me that she could not allow me to get off. I said, “I am a grown man who bought this ticket, whose time is mine with a family at home and I am going through that door, or I’m going through that door with you under my arm!! But I am going through that door!!” And I heard a voice behind me say “so am I”. Then everyone behind us started to get up and say the same. Within two minutes, I was walking off that plane where I was met with more agents who asked me to write a statement. I had five hours to kill at this point so why the hell not. Due to the amount of people who got off that flight, it was cancelled. I was supposed to be in Houston at 6 pm. I got here at 12:30 am.”

Look up the date. Flight 297 Atlanta to Houston.

“If this wasn’t a dry run, I don’t know what one is,” said Petruna. “The terrorists wanted to see how TSA would handle it, how the crew would handle it, and how the passengers would handle it. I’m telling this to you because I want you to know….The threat is real. I saw it with my own eyes.”

As we import more and more Muslims into America, they will congeal into a powerful political, religious, linguistic, cultural and balkanized force. They repeat the same in every country they colonize.

We can expect those suicide bombers from Iraq and Afghanistan to morph into immigrant-citizens or children born of immigrants to begin blowing up malls, theaters and sports contests in the United States. It’s only a matter of time. It’s already happening with such examples as the “Fort Dix Six, Fort Hood’s Major Nidal Hasan, American born Muslim Najibullah Zazi in Denver last month, and a half dozen others from New York to Dallas, Texas.

“The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, or preventing all possibility of it continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities and languages.” President Teddy Roosevelt, 1908

Unfortunately, we’re doing it to ourselves. Apathy + tolerance= dying virtues of the American civilization.

Listen to Frosty Wooldridge on Wednesdays as he interviews top national leaders on his radio show "Connecting the Dots" at www.themicroeffect.com at 6:00 PM Mountain Time. Adjust tuning in to your time zone.

© 2009 Frosty Wooldridge - All Rights Reserved

BIOLOGICAL ATTACK PLANNED IN US IN JANUARY?

According to a man claiming to be a US army colonel, massive amounts of mutated swine flu and bird flu H1N5 viruses are being transported in refrigerated trucks to Texas and New Mexico for storage in military installations with air craft facilities ready for being released in January.

http://video.aol.co.uk/video-detail/h1n5-mutated-virus-to-be-released-early-january/2508251138

DANISH BOARD OF PHARMACEUTICALS MUZZLES A MEDICAL DOCTOR

By Louise Voller, Kristian Villesen

December 20, 2009

AFTER CRITICAL COMMENTS ABOUT THE DANISH GOVERNMENT’S PURCHASE OF TAMIFLU, A MEDICIAL DOCTOR FROM THE GOVERNMENT INSTITUTE FOR RATIONEL PHARMACOTHERAPHIA (IRF) HAS BEEN MUZZLED.

THE EXPLANATION IS THAT PURCHASES FOR FLU EMERGENCIES LIES BEYOND THE COMPETENCES OF THAT INSTITUTION, EXPLAINS THE DIRECTOR OF THE DANISH BOARD OF PHARMACEUTICALS

After critical remarks about the Danish government’s purchase of the flu remedy, Tamiflu, medical doctors from the Institute for Rationel Pharmacotheraphia are no longer allowed to talk to the press on this subject.

The order was issued by the director of Danish Board of Pharmaceuticals (Laegemiddelstyrelsen), Jytte Lyngvig.

In a news item in the Danish daily newspaper, Information, on December 8, several experts, among them Niels Heebøll-Nielsen, from the Institute for Rationel Pharmacotherapia critisized the Danish government’s purchase of significant quantities of Tamiflu.

Simultanously the daily Information and British Medical Journal published a new and extensive evaluation of scientific data concerning Tamiflu. The study made it clear, that Tamiflu has “a very limited effect” on the sickness accompanying swine flu and at best, might “suppress the symptoms one day”.

In Denmark one million doses has been purchased at a cost of 65 million Danish crowns.

REASONABLE

The Institute for Rationel Pharmacotheraphia gives advice concerning appropriate use of medicine, which would, so one might think, qualify medical doctor Niels Heebøll-Nielsen to give an opinion as to whether the state has acted irrationally and purchased too much.

To Information, he said among other things that the purchase was characterized by the atmosphere of panic prevailing after the outbreak of SARS:

“When fear arises and an atmosphere of doom and disaster is spreading then at the same time an expectation occurs that something will be done. It is understandable. And they must have believed in Tamiflu having an effect”.

Furthermore he criticised the foundation for the purchase:

“When you buy great quantities of medicine, it would be convenient if you knew more about what you get for the money. That knowledge it seems has been insufficient concerning Tamiflu. But they must have trusted that it was efficient. There were no alternatives,” he says.

RATIONEL

The Institute for Rationel Pharmacotherapia belongs to the Board of Pharmaceuticals, and in Board of Pharmaceuticals they don’t hold opinions at all concerning the handling of the emergency, explains the director of that institution, Jette Lyngvig.

“The Board of Pharmaceuticals has absolutely nothing to do with this. It is Danish Board of Health who is the purchaser” says Jytte Lyngvig.

Accordingly, Niels Heebøl-Nielsen as an employee of Institute for Rationel Pharmacotheraphia is not allowed to express opinions concerning the pandemic emergency.

“He may say whatever he wants as a private person. But this one is the decision of Danish Board of Health. Therefore it is only reasonable, that it is up to them to comment on this matter.”

It would be reassuring to know there are experts who are able to give a critical evalunation?

“Then you will have to speak to medical doctors at the hospitals”.

„Is Institute for Rationel Pharmacotheraphia generally allowed to be critical about the way we use medicines?

“Yes but only the daily use of medicine. Not in relation to a pandemic. The institute has no role to play in a pandemic. When he speaks on behalf of the institute, it has to fall inside the limits of the activities of this institute. When one profits by the name, people could get confused because the Institute for Rationel Pharmacotherapia holds an opinion about this matter.”

But he usually evaluates what is a proper use of medicine?

“No, for he has never been part of the purchasing for an emergency. If he criticises the efforts of Danish Board of Health, he must do so as a private person”.

Do you think he would like to do that in the future?

“I don’t know. But I could well image that he would”.

Dr. Julie Gerberding Named President of Merck Vaccines

This is the most disgusting and BLATANT example of the revolving door between the CDC, the government and vaccines. We really must revolt. Today, Merck announced that Dr. Julie Gerberding has been named president of Merck Vaccines, effective January 25, 2010. Dr. Gerberding was the director of the CDC from 2002 to 2009.

 

Merck NEWSROOM

Dr. Julie Gerberding Named President of Merck Vaccines

WHITEHOUSE STATION, N.J. – Dec. 21, 2009 – Merck & Co., Inc. (NYSE: MRK) today announced that Dr. Julie Gerberding has been named president of Merck Vaccines, effective January 25, 2010.

Dr. Gerberding led the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as director from 2002 to 2009. During her tenure at CDC, Dr. Gerberding led the agency during more than 40 emergency response initiatives for health crises including anthrax bioterrorism, food-borne disease outbreaks, and natural disasters, and advised governments around the world on urgent public health issues such as SARS, AIDS, and obesity.

“Vaccines are a cornerstone of Merck's commitment to health and wellness," said Richard T. Clark, chairman and chief executive officer, Merck & Co., Inc. "We are delighted to welcome an expert of Dr. Gerberding's caliber to Merck. As a preeminent authority in public health, infectious diseases and vaccines, Dr. Gerberding is the ideal choice to lead Merck's engagement with organizations around the world that share our commitment to the use of vaccines to prevent disease and save lives."

"I’ve had the privilege in my previous work in academia and in the federal government to be a passionate advocate for public health priorities such as vaccines, which are an imperative component of global health development," said Dr. Gerberding. "I am very excited to be joining Merck where I can help to expand access to vaccines around the world."

Dr. Gerberding will lead the company's $5 billion global vaccine business. Merck currently markets a broad range of pediatric, adolescent and adult vaccines and is a leading provider of vaccines in countries around the world; in the U.S., Merck markets vaccines for 12 of the 17 diseases for which the U.S. Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices currently recommends vaccines. She will be responsible for the commercialization of the current portfolio of vaccines, planning for the introduction of vaccines from the company's robust vaccine pipeline, and accelerating Merck's on-going efforts to broaden access to its vaccines in the developing world. Dr. Gerberding will also collaborate with leaders of Merck Manufacturing Division and Merck Research Laboratories to manage the critical linkages between basic research, late-stage development and manufacturing to expand Merck's vaccine offerings throughout the world.

She received her undergraduate degree and her M.D. from Case Western Reserve University. Her internship, residency, and clinical pharmacology training were all at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), where she worked in a range of clinical, research and teaching roles prior to joining the CDC in 1998. Dr. Gerberding received her Masters of Public Health at the University of California, Berkeley.

She is a member of the Institute of Medicine and a fellow of the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American College of Physicians, and is board certified in Internal Medicine and Infectious Diseases. She is also a Clinical Professor of Infectious Diseases at Emory University and an Adjunct Associate Professor of Medicine in Infectious Diseases at UCSF.

Dr. Gerberding has received more than 50 awards and honors, including the United States Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Distinguished Service Award for her leadership in responses to anthrax bioterrorism and the September 11, 2001 attacks. She was named to Forbes Magazine's 100 Most Powerful Women in the world in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008 and was named to TIME Magazine's 100 Most Influential People in the World in 2004.

About Merck
Today's Merck is working to help the world be well. Through our medicines, vaccines, biologic therapies, and consumer and animal products, we work with customers and operate in more than 140 countries to deliver innovative health solutions. We also demonstrate our commitment to increasing access to healthcare through far-reaching programs that donate and deliver our products to the people who need them. Merck. Be Well. For more information, visitwww.merck.com.

Forward Looking Statement
This news release includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the safe harbor provisions of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements may include, but are not limited to, statements about the benefits of the merger between Merck and Schering-Plough, including future financial and operating results, the combined company’s plans, objectives, expectations and intentions and other statements that are not historical facts. Such statements are based upon the current beliefs and expectations of Merck’s management and are subject to significant risks and uncertainties. Actual results may differ from those set forth in the forward-looking statements.

The following factors, among others, could cause actual results to differ from those set forth in the forward-looking statements: the possibility that the expected synergies from the merger of Merck and Schering-Plough will not be realized, or will not be realized within the expected time period, due to, among other things, the impact of pharmaceutical industry regulation and pending legislation that could affect the pharmaceutical industry; the risk that the businesses will not be integrated successfully; disruption from the merger making it more difficult to maintain business and operational relationships; Merck’s ability to accurately predict future market conditions; dependence on the effectiveness of Merck’s patents and other protections for innovative products; the risk of new and changing regulation and health policies in the U.S. and internationally and the exposure to litigation and/or regulatory actions.

Merck undertakes no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Additional factors that could cause results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements can be found in Merck’s 2008 Annual Report on Form 10-K, Schering-Plough’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2009, the proxy statement filed by Merck on June 25, 2009 and each company’s other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) available at the SEC’s Internet site: www.sec.gov.

The Senate’s Christmas Gift

Not so "merry christmas." If the Healthcare bill passes, the massive tax increases go into effect immediately after Obama signs the bill...and with it, booming unemployment as small businesses can't stay afloat. The real kicker? The healthcare benefits don’t start until 2014. All the taxes are designed to confiscate the wealth of Mr. and Mrs. Citizen and drive them into a public option—even as Senate Democrats say the bill doesn’t include one, yet. On Dec. 16 the president went on television and said if Congress doesn’t pass a healthcare bill the Federal government will go bankrupt. Poppycock. If a healthcare bill is passed it’s Mr. and Mrs. Citizen that go belly up.

 

December 21, 2009 by Bob Livingston

Senate Democrats are working overtime to get an Obamacare bill passed before Christmas. They no longer even pretend to be doing it to reform healthcare. Now they’re just doing whatever it takes to get a bill passed, even if it costs somewhere between $848 billion and $2.1 trillion, depending on which math you use.

Never mind that the Realclearpolitics.com average of polls shows that Americans oppose the Democrat’s healthcare bill by a 54.2 percent to 39.7 percent margin. Democrats have gone all in, as the saying goes, and nothing is going to stop them.

As an unnamed Democratic strategist told Byron York of The Washington Examiner, “Once you’ve gone this far, what is the cost of failure?”

Comparing Democrats to bank robbers—how appropriate—who have gone past the point of no return, the strategist said, “They’re in the bank, they’ve got their guns out. They can run outside with no money, or they can stick it out, go through the gunfight, and get away with the money.”

Of course, money is what it’s all about. Not saving it mind you, but stealing yours.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D.-Ill.) told The Hill that Democrats will have the 60 votes needed to pass a bill this week. They’re buying off reluctant Democrats left and right.

For Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu the price was $300 million in federal aid to her state. As columnist Charles Krauthammer said on Fox News, if Landrieu got $300 million, Sen. Ben Nelson (D.-Neb.)—said to be holding out for removal of a provision in the bill that allows federal funding to pay for abortions—gets a Caribbean island, or two. Or, if some news reports are correct, a threat to close a military base in his state if he doesn’t join in.

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I.-Conn.) is back on board. We don’t yet know what he got in return, aside from a lot of face time on television. In an effort to get one or more Republicans to sign on so the bill can be cast as bi-partisan, Maine Republican Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe are being courted as well. Look for Maine to get a bundle of cash for snow plows or something.

Meanwhile, Joe and Jane Citizen only get dunned. If you are a family with an annual income above $88,200 and your employer doesn’t provide coverage, prepare to fork out $15,200 a year for a federally-mandated insurance fee, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) as reported by CNSNews.com. And few employers are going to provide coverage for their employees once the plan kicks in.

Why? There is an incentive not to. If employers don’t pay their share of their employees’ premiums they’ll have to pay $750 per employee fine. That’s much less than the employer contribution on a complete health plan.

What’s more, there are tax increases in the bill. Lots of them. According to the Heritage Foundation, Medicare taxes increase from 2.9 percent to 3.4 percent, the top marginal tax rate goes from 35 percent to 39.6 percent and, in the House version of the bill, a surtax of 5.4 percent is put on incomes above $500,000.

Following is a list from the Heritage Foundation of other tax increases currently in either the House or Senate bill or proposed by the Barack Obama administration to “pay” for healthcare reform:

• An excise tax on high-cost "Cadillac" health insurance plans that cost more than $8,500 a year for individuals or $23,000 for families.
• An excise tax on medical devices such as wheelchairs, breast pumps and syringes used by diabetics for insulin injections.
• A cap on the exclusion of employer-provided health insurance without offsetting tax cuts.
• A limit on itemized deductions for taxpayers with a top income tax rate greater than 28 percent.
• A windfall profits tax on health insurance companies.
• A value-added tax, which would tax the value added to a product at each stage of production.
• An excise tax on sugar-sweetened beverages including non-diet soda and sports drinks.
• Higher taxes on alcoholic beverages including beer, wine and spirits.
• A limit on contributions to health savings accounts.
• An 8 percent tax on all wages paid by employers that do not provide their employees health insurance that satisfies the requirements defined by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
• A limit on contributions to flexible spending arrangements.
• Elimination of the deduction for expenses associated with Medicare Part D subsidies.
• An increase in taxes on international businesses.
• Elimination of the tax credits paper companies take for biofuels they create in their production process—the so-called “Black Liquor credit.”
• Fees on insured and self-insured health plans.
• A limit or repeal of the itemized deduction for medical expenses.
• A limit on the Qualified Medical Expense definition.
• An increase in the payroll taxes on students.
• An extension of the Medicare payroll tax to all state and local government employees.
• An increase in taxes on hospitals.
• An increase in the estate tax.
• Increased efforts to close the mythical “tax gap.”
• A 5 percent tax on cosmetic surgery and similar procedures such as Botox treatments, tummy tucks and face lifts.
• A tax on drug companies.
• An increase in the corporate tax on providers of health insurance.
• A $500,000 deduction limitation for the compensation paid by health insurance companies to their officers, employees and directors.

And the kicker is the taxes go into effect immediately after Obama signs the bill. The healthcare benefits don’t start until 2014.

All the taxes are designed to confiscate the wealth of Mr. and Mrs. Citizen and drive them into a public option—even as Senate Democrats say the bill doesn’t include one, yet.

On Dec. 16 the president went on television and said if Congress doesn’t pass a healthcare bill the Federal government will go bankrupt. Poppycock. If a healthcare bill is passed it’s Mr. and Mrs. Citizen that go belly up.

The spend-and-tax policies of Obama and the Democrats—stimulus bills, TARP bill, healthcare bill, etc.—are what is pushing us toward economic collapse.

Face it. The healthcare reform plan Democrats are ramming through is nothing more than the greatest transfer of wealth and most massive power grab in the history of the world.

Frankly, I don’t consider that much of a Christmas present.

Figures Indicate Declines In Net Worth And A Difficult Path To Recovery

Bob Chapman, The International Forecaster

real property value losses and a recovery hindered by more foreclosures and higher interest rates, employment to remain flat, figures indicate record losses, continued worries for the economy,

Congressional appropriators agreed Tuesday night to give civilian federal employees a 2 percent pay increase -- which includes a locality pay increase President Obama didn't want.

Government workers will get a 1.5 percent nationwide increase in base pay and a 0.5 percent average increase in locality pay. The final agreement goes against the wishes of Obama, who called for a flat 2 percent jump and no locality increase.

Locality pay helps address the gaps between federal pay and private sector wages in high-cost areas of the country. The Federal Salary Council estimates the current private-public gap is about 26 percent, on average. Locality increases mean a federal worker in Cincinnati might get a smaller increase than a worker in Washington, D.C., because of local costs of living. [Why aren’t Social Security recipients and disabled veterans receiving their COLA raises for the next few years as well?]

US homeowners have lost about $5.9 trillion in value since the housing market’s peak in March 2006 as mounting foreclosures and the recession weighed on prices, according to Zillow.com.

Almost half a trillion dollars was wiped out this year through November as housing headed for a third straight annual decline. New foreclosures and higher mortgage rates in 2010 may hinder a rebound, the property data service said yesterday.

“A phenomenal amount of wealth has been erased since the housing bust,’’ Stan Humphries, the chief economist for Seattle-based Zillow, said Tuesday in an interview. “For many households, most of their wealth is tied up in real estate.’’

The net worth of US households at the end of June fell 19 percent from two years earlier to $53.1 trillion, according to Federal Reserve data. Employers have cut more than 7.2 million jobs since the start of the recession in December 2007.

The slowing of property declines because of a government tax credit for first-time buyers and record-low mortgage rates will be tested as more foreclosures reach the market and borrowing costs rise, Humphries said. More than two-thirds of the 154 markets tracked by Zillow have lost value this year.

The value of US housing today is about $24.7 trillion, down 19 percent from the market’s peak, according to Zillow.

Wells Fargo & Co., the bank that gained a portfolio of option adjustable-rate mortgages when it bought Wachovia Corp. last year, cut the principal for delinquent borrowers in some loans by as much as 30 percent.

Wells Fargo has forgiven an average of $46,000 in principal, or 15 percent, for the 43,500 option-ARM loans it has modified this year through September, said Franklin Codel, chief financial officer at the bank’s home-lending unit. The San Francisco-based lender has cut as much as 30 percent off the loan principal in a few “rare exceptions,” with the ceiling typically capped at 20 percent, Codel said.

“Right away we decided we wanted to go after the highest- risk borrowers,” Codel said in an interview yesterday from Des Moines, Iowa, where Wells Fargo Home Mortgage is based. “Principal forgiveness is one of the arrows in the quiver.”

In the second-quarter, 15.2 percent of option-ARMs were seriously delinquent, almost triple the 5.3 percent rate for all home loans, according to joint figures from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision. As U.S. home prices declined, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and the Center for Responsible Lending have called for banks to reduce the principal for borrowers who owe more than their property is worth.

Wells Fargo has modified about $15.7 billion of option-ARMs in the first three quarters, Codel said. It wrote down $2 billion in loan balances, leaving $13.7 billion in modified mortgages that no longer qualify as option-ARMs, according to a third-quarter presentation.

The U.S. Freight Transportation Index fell in October to its lowest level for October since 1996, as industry shipments decreased for two months in a row.

Shipments suffered their biggest October year-on-year decline, falling 10.5 percent, since the department began calculating the index 20 years ago.

The Freight TSI measures the month-to-month changes in freight shipments in ton-miles, which are then combined into one index.

The index measures the output of the for-hire freight transportation industry and consists of data from for-hire trucking, rail, inland waterways, pipelines and air freight.

FROM A SHOPPER: This happened at Wal-Mart (Supercenter Store #1279, 10411 N Freeway 45, Houston, TX 77037) a month ago. I bought a bunch of stuff, over $150 worth, and I glanced at my receipt as the cashier was handing me the bags. I saw a cash-back of $40. I told her I didn't request cash-back, and to delete it. She said I'd have to take the $40, because she couldn't delete it.

I told her to call a supervisor. The supervisor came, and said I'd have to take it. I said NO! Taking the $40 would be a cash advance against my Discover card, and I wasn't going to pay interest on a cash advance!!!!! If they couldn't delete it, then they would have to delete my whole order. So the supervisor had the cashier delete the whole order and re-scan everything. This second time around I looked at the electronic pad before I signed, and an unwanted cash-back of $20 popped up. At that point I told the cashier, and she deleted it. The total came out right.

The cashier agreed that the electronic pad must be defective. However, it was obvious that the cashier already knew that the electronic pad was defective because the first time around, although the $40 cash back showed up on the receipt, she kept quiet and NEVER offered me the money, like she should have! She intended to pocket my $40.

Can you imagine how many people went through before me, and at the end of her shift how much money she pocketed?

Few employers plan to ramp up hiring early next year, two surveys show – evidence that the economic recovery isn't likely to create many jobs anytime soon.

That will mean fierce competition for job openings that do exist. Nearly 6.3 unemployed workers, on average, are vying for each opening, government figures released Tuesday show. When the recession began, only 1.7 jobless workers were competing for each opening.

More of America's largest companies will shrink their staffs than will hire in the next six months, according to a quarterly survey from the Business Roundtable, a group of large-company CEOs released Tuesday.

Nineteen percent of the CEOs expect to expand their work forces, while 31 percent predict a decrease in the next six months, the survey found. That's slightly better than the 13 percent who expected to increase hiring three months earlier. At that time, 40 percent forecast cuts.

More chief executives foresee higher sales and capital spending compared with three months ago. But "it still will take some time for these gains to translate into more jobs," said Ivan Seidenberg, CEO of Verizon Communications and chairman of the Roundtable.

Separately, a survey of 28,000 employers by staffing company Manpower Inc. found that hiring may improve in the first quarter of 2010 compared with the current quarter – but any gains will likely be slight.

Manpower said its hiring index rose to 6. It was the first positive reading since the first quarter of 2009. Still, that's far below the 18 the index reached in the fourth quarter of 2007, when the recession began.

Economists say employment at large firms is likely to remain flat through much of 2010. Many companies already have hit their hiring targets for what's expected to be a weak and bumpy recovery.

The number of U.S. workers filing new claims for jobless benefits rose more than economists expected last week, the Labor Department said in its weekly report Thursday.

Total claims lasting more than one week, meanwhile, fell.

Initial claims for jobless benefits rose by 17,000 to 474,000 in the week ended Dec. 5. The previous week's level was unrevised at 457,000.

Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires expected an increase of 8,000 initial claims.

An economist at the Labor Department said Thursday that an increase in claims is generally expected during this time of year because it reflects data from the week after Thanksgiving and because construction lay-offs tend to occur in that week.

"Generally...that week sees the biggest percentage increase in initial claims over the year, and this year was no exception," he said.

Although initial claims rose last week, the four-week moving average, which aims to smooth volatility in the data, still continued to drop. The Labor Department said the four-week moving average fell by 7,750 to 473,750 from the previous week's revised average of 481,500. That is the lowest figure since September 27, 2008.

Michelle Meyer, an economist at Barclays Capital, said in an interview Wednesday that despite the predicted increase in claims, she also expected the four-week moving average to continue to decline in a positive sign for the labor market.

"You are still seeing an improving trend," she said. "You are still experiencing an overall downturn in jobless claims."

In the Labor Department's Thursday report, the number of continuing claims--those drawn by workers for more than one week in the week ended Nov. 28 --fell by 303,000 to 5,157,000 from the preceding week's revised level of 5,460,000.

The unemployment rate for workers with unemployment insurance for the week ended Nov. 28 decreased to 3.9%, a 0.2 percentage point decline from the prior week's unrevised rate of 4.1%.

The largest increase in initial claims for the week ended Nov. 28 was in Wisconsin due to layoffs in the construction, service and manufacturing sectors. The largest decrease in initial claims occurred in California.

T he U.S. trade deficit narrowed unexpectedly in October, falling to $32.94 billion, as the rise in exports from September of goods such as cars was slightly higher than the increase in imports.

The figure, representing the U.S. deficit in international trade of goods and services, is 7.6% lower than the downwardly revised $35.65 billion trade gap the U.S. ran in September, the Commerce Department reported Thursday.

Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires had expected the October trade deficit would widen to $37.0 billion. The September trade gap was originally estimated to be $36.5 billion.

The real, or inflation-adjusted deficit, used by economists to measure the impact of trade on gross domestic product, fell to $38.0 billion in October from a downwardly revised $41.49 billion in September.

U.S. GDP, a broad range of economic activity, rose in the third quarter by an annualized 2.8%, the first increase in more than a year. However, the economy's expansion was limited by a wider trade deficit, with net exports subtracting 0.8 of a percentage point to GDP in the July-September period.

Thursday's report showed U.S. exports in October rose 2.6% to $136.84 billion, the highest level in nearly a year, from $133.38 billion the previous month.

Imports rose by just 0.4% to $169.78 billion from $169.03 billion in September, but that was still the highest level in U.S. imports since Dec. 2008.

The U.S. paid $17.44 billion for crude oil imports in October, down from $19.51 billion the month before. After rising for seven months in a row, the average price per barrel was the lowest since January 2000, falling to $67.39 from $68.17 in September. Crude import volumes fell to 258.83 million barrels from 286.22 million barrels.

The total U.S. bill for all types of energy-related imports fell to $22.45 billion in October from $24.87 billion in September.

Imports of foreign-made consumer goods rose $1.0 billion in October, with imports of auto and related parts rising by $0.4 billion from September. Purchases of capital goods increased by $1.1 billion.

U.S. exports of consumer goods, including artwork and jewelry, rose by $1.0 billion in October compared to the prior month. The value of U.S. exports of industrial supplies, such as steelmaking material and gold, increased by $0.4 billion. Auto and related products exports also rose by $0.4 billion from September.

Meanwhile, capital goods exports rose by $1.2 billion in October from the previous month.

The U.S. trade gap with China was the highest since Nov. 2008, rising to $22.7 billion in October from the previous month's $22.1 billion. The trade deficit with Japan rose to $4.4 billion from $4.1 billion in September.

However, the U.S. trade deficit with some other major trading partners narrowed slightly. The deficit with the European Union fell to $4.9 billion from $5.5 billion a month earlier, while the trade shortfall with Mexico was unchanged at $4.6 billion.

Foreclosure filings in the U.S. will reach a record for the second consecutive year with 3.9 million notices sent to homeowners in default, RealtyTrac Inc. said.

This year’s filings will surpass 2008’s total of 3.2 million as record unemployment and price erosion batter the housing market, the Irvine, California-based company said.

“We are a long way from a recovery,” John Quigley, economics professor at the University of California, Berkeley, said in an interview. “You can’t start to see improvement in the housing market until after unemployment peaks.”

Foreclosure filings exceeded 300,000 for the ninth straight month in November, RealtyTrac said today. A weak labor market and tight credit are “formidable headwinds” for the economy, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said in a Dec. 7 speech in Washington. The 7.2 million jobs lost since the recession began in December 2007 are the most of any postwar economic slump, Labor Department data show. Unemployment, at 10 percent last month, won’t peak until the first quarter, Quigley said.

Loan-modification programs and an expanded government tax credit for first-time homebuyers are helping slow the monthly pace of filings and “keeping a lid” on further foreclosures, James Saccacio, RealtyTrac’s chief executive officer, said in the statement.

Will Europe Put its Foot Down? – by Hege Storhaug

FRONTPAGEMAG.COM

“Either Islam will be Europeanized, or Europe will be Islamized.”  In recent years this prediction has been made by many major experts, among them the AmericanBernard Lewis, the Syrian-born German Bassam Tibi, and the French Gilles Kepel.  This is, without question, an uncomfortable and sensitive topic, but it’s one that is very pertinent now that the Swiss have put their foot down and said that they will not accept another minaret within their borders.

In recent decades, Islam has exploded in Europe.  You can see the changes with your own eyes from year to year – whether it’s the increasing presence of hijabs on the street in a city like Oslo, or the bearded men with ankle-high baggy pants, or the new and resplendent mosques that are under construction.  For my part, I’ve noticed an increasing insecurity and unease among “ordinary” people who feel like aliens in their own country.  People ask: what is the purpose of this project?  Don’t we, as a nation, have a right to pass our own cultural legacy, our traditions and values, on to our children and grandchildren?  Should we, in the name of tolerance, give in to the demands made by “others” whose influence is growing, and whose voices are becoming louder, as their numbers increase? Or as a Norwegian Labor Party politician said to me in a private conversation: “On the day that most of the members of the city council are Muslims, what do you think will happen to the right of Oslo bars to serve alcohol?”  Another leading Laborite with over a couple of decades’ experience in politics put it more bluntly when I asked him “What you think about immigration from the Muslim world?”  The answer was so crisp, merciless, and genuinely felt that I gasped: “What have they contributed?”  Period.

Let it be said that of course there are many Muslims in Europe who are getting along just fine and who get the same chills down their spines that other European citizens do when they think of Sharia and the lack of freedom that accompanies classical Islam.  But as a rule those aren’t the Muslims who are the most prominent members of their faith among us; they aren’t the ones who enjoy power in the Muslim community, and they aren’t the ones who are best organized and who have developed exceptionally strong connections to our public officials.

No, it’s not the secularized Muslims who are leading the way – far from it.  Ayaan Hirsi Ali made this clear when I and a colleague of mine from Human Rights Service in Oslo met her at the Dutch Parliament in The Hague in 2005.  As she put it, there most certainly are Muslims in Europe who want a Europeanized Islam – that is to say, a private, personal Islam without political and judicial influence.  But these aren’t the Muslims who are powerfully positioned in Europe’s community organizations, Europe’s corridors of power, and Europe’s universities.

Here is an interesting point: immigrants from Iran tend to be secular, well-integrated, and – very often – well-educated.  Here in Norway, Iranians have generally integrated themselves into our culture, accepting Norwegian values even as they’ve maintained Iranian traditions that don’t conflict with human rights, such as celebrating Iranian New Year.  But Iranians are not the leaders of Europe’s Muslim communities.  Nor can I think of a single mosque in Norway, or anywhere in Europe for that matter, that has been founded by Iranians.

If Iranians, generally speaking, have been an immigration success story, enriching Europe and becoming fully participating members of European society, this isn’t true of the members of many other major immigrant groups, whose origins are in traditional villages in other Muslim countries.  It’s precisely these people’s unwillingness (or inability?) to assimilate to European society – indeed, to appreciate such typically European values as freedom, equality, social participation, and personal responsibility – that may be a major reason why Switzerland said no to more minarets.  At some point, Europe must put its foot down if it truly wishes to continue to be the Europe we know today.  There is a limit as to how many minarets a society can live with, how many hijabs and baggy pants the streets of Europe can tolerate, before the public space becomes as ideologically charged and as palpably unfree as the streets of, say, Pakistan.  We need to stand up and preserve our culture – a successful culture that is itself the only reason why immigrants are streaming from the Muslim world to our continent rather than in the other direction.

Here’s a specific example of how misguided our politicians have been in their handling of the challenge of Islam – an example that I think provides a very clear picture of grotesque weakness.  In 1974, Muslim immigrants from Pakistan established the first mosque in Norway, the Islamic Cultural Centre (ICC).  The name has a comforting, harmless sound: a “cultural center” sounds like something very different from a mosque.  In reality, however, the ICC is a direct subsidiary of an extreme religio-political movement and political party in Pakistan, Jamaat-i-Islami (JI), which was established by one of the leading Islamist ideologues of the last century, Abu Ala Maududi (1903 – 1979). When Pakistan’s worst despot ever, General and President Zia ul-Haq (1977 – 1988), Islamized that country from top to bottom, his main inspiration was Maududi. Today Qazi Hussain Ahmad, who has been a top JI leader for several years and has been banned for security reasons from entering about 25 European countries, as well as Egypt.  He has been under house arrest in Pakistan several times for having instigated violent riots that took human lives. Unsurprisingly, he’s also a fan of Bin Laden. Yet he’s not prohibited from entering Norway, and when he landed at Oslo Airport in August 2004, the arrivals hall was packed with Norwegian-Pakistani men and boys who openly cheered him as a prophet.

The ICC, then, which has a grandiose new mosque with minarets in downtown Oslo, follows an ideology that is a carbon copy of Maududi’s terrifying, violent creed.  It doesn’t just belong to a philosophically dangerous movement; it belongs to a movement which preaches that Muslims should not become fully integrated members of Norwegian society.  This is exactly the same attitude that is preached at every mosque in Europe that has “respect” for itself.  And yet the ICC, like many other mosques that share its theology, was allowed to establish itself in Norway, and in Europe generally, without protest from anybody.  And that’s not all: today it’s one of the largest and most influential so-called faith communities among Norwegian Muslims and has, over the years, received tens of millions of kroner in government support because it is regarded – absurdly – as a purely religious body.

But Europe’s cultural elite is blind to this ugly reality.  On the contrary, that elite, which lives largely off of the dialogue industry – exchanging endless amiable platitudes with Muslim leaders – is all bent out of shape over Switzerland: it views the ban on minarets as an assault on free speech and on freedom of religion; the ban, according to the elite, is an offense against cultural diversity, an expression of intolerance, prejudice, and extremism that will lead to a clash of civilizations.  Not to mention that the ban violates international conventions.

Yet this same elite never gets worked up when Christians are murdered in Pakistan or when their churches and homes are burned down.  Or when women and men are stoned to death in Somalia, or when burka-clad women in Afghanistan are crammed together with goats in the backs of trucks.  Nor do they pay the slightest heed to a woman walking through the streets of Oslo in a burka – a garment that must be described as the clearest possible manifestation of antipathy to Western culture, a powerful statement of complete rejection of the society in which the woman lives.

It is not too much to say, then, that the elite is completely off-balance.  And it’s this lack of balance, this lack of sensible attitudes in the salons of the privileged, this lack of respect for their own culture and for the values on which that culture is founded, that the grass roots are reacting to.  Simply put, ordinary people are sick of being told by their “betters” what to do and think: they want with all their hearts to defend themselves and their own.  Their message is: By all means, come to Europe and become one of us.  But don’t come here to turn our culture and our values upside down. The people have, in short, begun to wake up and to say no to the utopian multicultural dream. For they realize that Norway will no longer be Norway, and the West will no longer be the West, if the country’s essential culture is not preserved; and Christianity is an indissoluble part of that culture.  Whether one is personally religious or not, that’s simply a fact.  If Islam is going to place itself at the heart of our culture, most Norwegians understand that what we now consider Norwegian will be dead and buried.  The only alternative would be a miracle: a revolution within Islam that would place all of Muhammed’s inhumane actions on the ash heap of history and reduce all of his “sacred” legal and political pronouncements to the status of fairy tales like A Thousand and One Nights. Of course, such a revolution would also require an end to all of the violence and hatred preached in the Koran.

For about a millennium, Islam has failed spectacularly to pull off such a revolutionary project.  It’s precisely for this reason that people are pouring out of these failed states (yes, they’re also failed on account of other kinds of ideological despotism, including socialist projects, which when combined with authoritarian, oppressive religion produce something like gunpowder). The big question, however, is this: why should we expect a form of Islam to develop in Europe that is entirely antithetical to the form of Islam found in the Muslim world?

Of course Norway, and Europe as a whole, should not embrace any and every kind of culture or religion that finds its way here.  But where to draw the line?  There is no one answer to this question.  The answer will vary according to the nature of the culture or religion and the strength of the challenge that it represents.  But if we sell out our mainstream culture, and relativize it, accept a watering down of our rights, we may end up with a set of supposedly democratic but in fact empty and meaningless ideals that fail to provide us citizens with a values-related map or compass.  And what can happen in critical situations if the people don’t share a sense of community?  How can we ensure a sense of belonging if, for example, freedom of speech faces a major threat or if we suffer a terrorist attack?  Can we risk having civil war-like conditions, as we is already the case in Europe’s no-go zones?  Democratic order is, above all, a technical and practical matter, and it can thus never replace people’s need for a community, their need to be part of a common culture.

People must, then, have feelings – positive ones – about one another.  Last winter I had a thought-provoking experience on the east side of Oslo on my way home after work.  A thin layer of snow covered the icy streets.  A Somali women dressed in a tent slipped on the ice as I passed her.  Instinctively, I grabbed her and thus managed to prevent what could have been a bad fall, and helped her back to her feet.  I asked if she was okay, but she just hurried on with a completely expressionless look on her face.  Not a single sign of human connection, not a single glance at me.  I stood there feeling empty and alienated.

Awareness of a society’s and a culture’s need for a sense of community seems especially absent from the EU system.  The kind of communal feeling I am talking about contrasts sharply with the multicultural mentality of the pro-EU and antinational forces.  They refuse to understand that a nation’s culture – its folk songs, traditions, holy days, flags, and national anthems – is different from a broad-based constitution based on ideals of equality.  A text, simply put, cannot replace a feeling of community.  A national community with strong survival instincts is founded not on a text but on matters that are close to the heart, on traditions, on things that are palpable, on things as obvious as a common language and a sense of belonging to a fatherland.  And yes, this sense of community also has something to do with the churches and church spires, as well as the church’s rituals and traditions.  The principles that tie people together cannot be legislated by politicians; such bonds call for something more – trust between citizens, national loyalty, a high degree of agreement as to what freedom is and is not, and a broad sense of support for the obligations that a real community demands of its members.

The minarets, then, don’t symbolize community in the European sense – they symbolize the umma, the Muslim community.  They don’t represent loyalty to Norway or Switzerland or any other European country – they represent loyalty to Mecca and to the umma.  They don’t signify freedom, but illiberalism (women’s oppression, the punishment of apostasy with death).  The minarets, in short, embody the antithesis of the Declaration of Human Rights (as is clear to anyone who has read the 1990 Cairo Declaration about so-called “human rights in Islam,” which was formulated by the Organization of the Islamic Conference).  Nor are they, one might add, a part of our architectural tradition or any other Western tradition.  On the contrary, they bear witness to a state of mind that views us, the “others,” as strangers.

The policy of forcing oneself to tolerate something for which one has no sympathy whatsoever will, moreover, only erode the national culture.  Pointing fingers and making moral judgments is not the way to enhance tolerance.

In light of the immigration from the Muslim world, it’s very important for us to be aware of the history of our Western democracy.  It’s not true, after all, that we adopted democracy, with all the magnificent liberal values that accompanied it, and then developed a broad community of the people.  On the contrary, our free society is a historical consequence of a communal society based on trust, a shared culture in which Christianity has naturally played a central role.  Norway would not have managed to come together under our constitution, signed at Eidsvoll in 1814, if the country that produced it had been split along cultural and religious lines.  The people whose representatives met at Eidsvoll were a people who shared essentially the same culture and religion and who could hence agree on the text upon which their nation was to be founded.  The same thing happened when the Puritans settled in New England and built a society that grew into American democracy.  It is actually somewhat odd to think that America owes the liberal democracy enshrined in its founding documents to a group of original settlers whose strong sense of community was based on conservative religion and illiberal traditions.  It is, then, shared cultural norms, and not theoretical or abstract ideals of equality or international conventions, that lead people to stand shoulder to shoulder and to find community together.  A liberal democracy such as that of Norway or Switzerland is not and never has been self-sustaining.

The minaret case, then, can be very critical for Europe’s future.  How many minarets can Europe tolerate before our strong sense of communal connection is dissolved?  What will happen, then, to our democracy’s liberal values and to the social harmony we have enjoyed?  These are questions that most of the political parties in Norway and in a number of other European countries do not wish to address.  As I wrote a few days ago, they absolutely refuse to recognize that Islam is an ideology and a social system, a religion of laws – a religion with a political orientation and with political ambitions.   Yet Islam and Christianity are still treated by Norwegian (and European) officials as identical twins.  This misguided way of thinking may end up costing us heavily.  We must learn from the Swiss as quickly as possible – must learn, that is, to face up to, and respond appropriately to, the political and legal realities of the Islamic congregations in our midst.

This essay originally appeared in Norwegian on the website of Human Rights Service, www.rights.no, and was translated into English by Bruce Bawer.

Mosques as barracks, minarets as bayonets...

Kanchan Gupta Journalist & Writer, Saturday, December 05, 2009

Mosques as barracks, minarets as bayonets...

Turkey’s Islamist Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan was being faithful to his creed when he declared, “Mosques are our barracks, minarets our bayonets, domes our helmets, the believers our soldiers.” Sheikh Youssef al-Qaradawi, a fascist Sunni imam with a huge following among those who subscribe to the Muslim Brotherhood’s antediluvian worldview, was more to the point when he thundered at an event organised by London’s then Labour mayor Ken Livingstone, “The West may have the atom bomb, we have the human bomb.” Sheikh Qaradawi, who is of Egyptian origin, frequently exhorts Muslims not to rest till they have “conquered Christian Rome” and believes “throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the Jews people who would punish them for their corruption. The last punishment was carried out by Hitler”. Islamic schools in Britain funded by Saudi Arabia use textbooks describing Jews as “apes” and Christians as “pigs”. Theo Van Gogh, who along with writer Ayaan Hirsi Ali produced Submission, a film on the plight of Muslim women under sharia’h, was shot dead by Mohammed Bouyeri, a Dutch-Moroccan Muslim, in Amsterdam. Rallies by radical Islamists, which were once rare, are now a common feature in European capitals with banners and placards denouncing democracy as the ‘problem’ and Islam as the ‘solution’.

Such crude though accurate assertions of Islamism, coupled with the relentless jihad being waged overtly — exemplified by the London Underground bombings and the riots in Parisian suburbs — and covertly as exposed by Channel 4’s stunning investigation in its Dispatches programme titled ‘Undercover Mosque’, have now begun to raise hackles in Europe. The first signs of an incipient backlash came in the form of French President Nicolas Sarkozy demanding a ban on the burqa (the sharia’h-imposed hijab is already banned at public schools in France). Any doubts that may have lingered about Europe’s patience with Islam’s rage boys running thin have been removed by last Sunday’s referendum in Switzerland where people have voted overwhelmingly to ban the construction of minarets which are no longer seen to be representing faith. For 57.5 per cent of Swiss citizens, the minaret, an obligatory adjunct to a mosque which is used by the muezzin to call the faithful to prayers five times a day, is now a “political symbol against integration”. They view each new minaret as marking the transmogrification of Christian Europe into Islamic Eurabia. The Islamic minaret, according to Swiss People’s Party legislator Ulrich Schluer, has come to represent the “effort to establish sharia’h on European soil”. Hence the counter-effort to ban their construction.

Last Sunday’s referendum and the massive vote against Islamic minarets is by no means an unexpected development, as is being pretended by Islamists and those who find it fashionable to defend Islamism or are scared of taking a stand lest they be accused of Islamophobia, which Christopher Caldwell, author ofReflections on the Revolution in Europe: Immigration, Islam, and the West, describes as a “standing fatwa” against Islam’s critics. Resentment against assertive political Islam has been building up in Switzerland for almost a decade, triggered by refugees from Yugoslavia’s many civil wars seeking to irreversibly change the Swiss way of life to suit their twisted notions of Islam’s supremacy. For the past many years the Swiss People’s Party and the Federal Democratic Union, both avowedly right-of-centre organisations, have been trying to initiate an amendment to Article 72 of Switzerland’s Constitution to include the sentence, “The building of minarets is prohibited.” After doing the cantonal rounds, both the parties set up a joint Egerkinger Committee in 2007 to take their campaign to the federal level. The November 29 referendum is the outcome of that campaign.

The resultant vote — 57.5 per cent endorsing the proposed amendment to the Constitution with 42.5 opposing it — provides some interesting insights. For instance, the Swiss Government and Parliament, which are opposed to the amendment, clearly suffer from a disconnect with the Swiss masses. The voting pattern also shows that the spurious ‘cosmopolitan spirit’ of Zurich, Geneva and Basel, where people voted against the ban by a narrow margin, is not shared by most Swiss. The initiative has got 19.5 of the 23 cantonal votes — Basel city Canton, with half-a-vote and the largest Muslim population in Switzerland, barely defeated the initiative with 51.61 per cent people voting against it. This only goes to show that the Left-liberal intelligentsia may dominate television studio debates, as is often seen in our country, but it neither influences public opinion nor persuades those whose perception of the reality is not cluttered by bogus ‘tolerance’ of the intolerant.
Daniel Pipes, who is among the few scholars of Islam not scared to be labelled an ‘Islamophobe’, is of the view that the Swiss vote “represents a turning point for European Islam, one comparable to the Rushdie affair of 1989. That a large majority of Swiss who voted on Sunday explicitly expressed anti-Islamic sentiments potentially legitimates such sentiments across Europe and opens the way for others to follow suit”. As always, Pipes is prescient. An opinion poll conducted by the French Institute for Public Opinion after the Swiss referendum shows 46 per cent of French citizens are in favour of banning the construction of minarets, 40 per cent support the idea, while 14 per cent are indecisive. “That it was the usually quiet, low profile, un-newsworthy, politically boring, neutral Swiss who suddenly roared their fears about Islam only enhances their vote’s impact,” says Pipes. The post-referendum opinion poll in France shows that one in two French citizens would not only like to see minarets banned, but along with them mosques, too.

The ‘sudden roar’ heard in Switzerland has found a resonance in countries apart from France. A comment on the Swiss vote that appeared in the mass circulation German newspaper Bild reflects the popular mood in Germany which is remarkably similar to that which prevails in Switzerland at the moment: “The minaret isn’t just the symbol of a religion but of a totally different culture. Large parts of the Islamic world don’t share our basic European values: The legacy of the Enlightenment, the equality of man and woman, the separation of church and state, a justice system independent of the Bible or the Quran and the refusal to impose one's own beliefs on others with ‘fire and the sword’. Another factor is likely to have influenced the Swiss vote: Nowhere is life made harder for Christians than in Islamic countries. Those who are intolerant themselves cannot expect unlimited tolerance from others.”

Yet, it may be too early to suggest that the tide of Islamism will now have to contend with the fury of a backlash. Governments and organisations that find merit in toeing the line of least resistance have reacted harshly to the Swiss vote; rather than try and understand why more and more people are beginning to loathe, if not hate, Islamism, a case is being made all over again for the need to be tolerant with those whose sole desire is to subjugate the world to Islam. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Ms Navi Pillay, who is yet to utter a word about the suppression of freedom and denial of dignity in Islamic countries or the shocking violation of human rights by jihadis, has been scathing in her response, describing the Swiss vote as “a discriminatory, deeply divisive and thoroughly unfortunate step”. The Organisation of Islamic Conference has warned that the vote will “serve to spread hatred and intolerance towards Muslims”. The OIC’s complaint would carry credibility if it were to demand tolerance towards non-Muslims in its member-countries, especially Saudi Arabia, and denounce Islam’s preachers of hate. That, however, is unlikely to happen. On the contrary, the OIC will continue to defend, even while accusing others of intolerance and hate, the denial of religious, social and cultural plurality in Islamic countries as also the repudiation of the core values of a modern democracy by those Muslims who find themselves living in one. The absence of ‘multiculturalism’, which Muslims demand in non-Islamic countries, is one of the defining features of any Islamic country, including those touted as being ‘moderate’ and ‘modern’, for example, Egypt and Turkey.

It is amusing that Egypt’s Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa, whose salary and perquisites are paid for by the Government, should feel upset over the Swiss vote: “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.” In his own country, Coptic Christians live in increasing fear of Muslim attacks with anti-Copt violence fast becoming a regular feature. No less amusing is Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu’s response to the Swiss rejection of Islamic minarets. Mr Davutoglu finds the proposed ban on the construction of minarets “reminiscent of the sectarian wars of the Middle Ages” and has warned that the move could “incite clashes on a global scale if sufficient measures are not taken”. Had he been honest, Mr Davutoglu would have added that the posters exhorting Swiss citizens to vote for the proposed ban were inspired by his leader’s vivid description of Islamic minarets as Islam’s bayonets.

Hence, those who are crying foul over the Swiss vote and those who are pretending disquiet and anguish are perfectly at ease when Saudi Arabia ruthlessly deals with the faintest expression of faith in any religion other than Islam or Malaysia pulls down Hindu temples. Nor have Ms Pillay and those who blithely cite her criticism of the Swiss referendum to absurdly insist that the vote “represents a fundamental threat to millions of Muslims” ever bothered to protest against the discrimination meted out to Copts in Egypt or the raucous, coarse anti-Semitism of Iran whose President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad misses no opportunity to reiterate his threat of “wiping Israel off the map of the world”. Closer home, Muslims are not known to have disowned those of their co-religionists whose murderous campaign to cleanse Kashmir Valley of all Hindus resulted in 250,000 Pandits fleeing their ancestral land and being reduced to refugees in their own country. Nor were anguished voices heard when Muslims took to the streets to prevent the construction of temporary shelters along the Amarnath Yatra route for Hindu pilgrims, although Muslims in India and abroad would see any move to curtail facilities and subsidies for Haj pilgrims, which are paid for by non-Muslims, as a “fundamental threat” and a manifestation of Islamophobia.

We are yet to be told by Muslims who demand equal rights and more in non-Islamic countries – for instance, public funds for schools in Britain where children are taught Hizb-ut-Tahrir’s hate agenda and madarsas in India which excel in bigotry -- what they have to say about Hindus being asked to pay jizya to Islamist thugs in Pakistan and Afghanistan, or the abduction and rape of Hindu women under the Jamaat-e-Islami’s supervision in Bangladesh. What we have heard, most recently in India, are exhortations for Muslims to stand apart from the national mainstream, to maintain their separate Islamic identity, to banish women from public places and to reject all secular statutes.

Instead of indulging in manufactured rage and pretending imagined victimhood, Muslims across the world would do well to ponder over Bild’s pithy comment: “Those who are intolerant themselves cannot expect unlimited tolerance from others.” As for the limp-wristed Left-liberal intelligentsia, it is welcome to be tolerant of Islamic intolerance, but it should not expect the vast majority to meekly subjugate itself to Islam – if that is Islamophobia, so be it. The time to feign tolerance so as to be seen as ‘secular’ is over. The age of dhimmitude is drawing to a close. That is the real significance of the Swiss vote.
(This is an expanded version of my Sunday column 'Coffee Break' which appears in The Pioneer.)