Two of the most neutral countries in Europe are Sweden and Switzerland. How they perceive the threat of Islam to their national and cultural identifies is as different as night and day. In Sweden, the critics of what Islam is doing to their country are frightened into silence while in Switzerland the Swiss are who see whatâs happening in other European countries are determined to nip and Islamofication of their county in the bud.
From the BBC:
Members of the right-wing Swiss Peopleâs Party, currently the largest party in the Swiss parliament, have launched a campaign to have the building of minarets banned.They claim the minaret is not necessary for worship, but is rather a symbol of Islamic law, and as such incompatible with Switzerlandâs legal system. Signatures are now being collected to force a nationwide referendum on the issue which, under Switzerlandâs system of direct democracy, would be binding.
Supporters of a ban on minarets say they have no intention of preventing anyone from practising their faith. âWe donât have anything against Muslims,â said Oskar Freysinger, member of parliament for the Swiss Peopleâs Party. âBut we donât want minarets. The minaret is a symbol of a political and aggressive Islam, itâs a symbol of Islamic law. The minute you have minarets in Europe it means Islam will have taken over.â
Iâd say that was a fairly logical perspective given the attempts of Muslims to impose Sharia law on non-Muslims in Europe.
âWe have our civil laws here,â insisted Mr Freysinger. âBanning minarets would send a clear signal that our European laws, our Swiss laws, have to be accepted. And if you want to live here, you must accept them. If you donât, then go back.â
That shows a real determination to defend their culture. And what about Sweden? How do they defend their national culture?
The state scientist Lisbeth Lindeborg on Swedish timidity to conflict around Islam:
Unlike our neighboring countries and the large countries of the EU, Sweden sweeps every inconvenient matter under the rug. Sweden is a European country characterized by a distorted and conflict-averse debate about Islam. In Sweden, representatives who offer constructive criticism of Islam are being attacked and pointed to as Islamophobes, with the purpose of frightening them into silence. This is particularly unfortunate, given that the UNâs Human Rights Commission recently adopted a resolution which in principle prohibits the criticism of Islam. The resolution is a scandal, since the UN commission ought to be aware that human rights exist to protect individuals, not religions. For the Muslims who risk their lives for the reform and modernization of Islam, the UN resolution is a slap in the face.
Sweden is essentially ending as a nation. Fjordman has a biting essay on the future of Sweden.
Gathering Storm Blog
JĂždeboykottens genkomst
Af Helle Merete Brix og Lars Hedegaard, redaktĂžrer af Sappho
I et indlÊg i avisen fredag peger kulturredaktÞr Iver HÞj Nielsen pÄ det mÊrkvÊrdige i, at det britiske journalistforbund i april vedtog en boykot af israelske varer. Vi er enige i kritikken, og det kunne vÊre interessant at hÞre, om Dansk Journalistforbund har protesteret over for de britiske kolleger. Men en endnu mere ubehagelig boykot blev i slutningen af maj vedtaget med et snÊvert flertal af Storbritanniens stÞrste organisation af undervisere, National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education (NAFTHE). LÊrerne vedtog ganske enkelt at boykotte israelske undervisere og institutioner, der, som det formuleres, ikke tager afstand fra Israels »apartheidpolitik«. [..]
– Hvordan er det kommet dertil, at man overvejer at boykotte et lands akademikere og forskningsinstitutioner pĂ„ grund af den politik, landet fĂžrer, og som her, helt grotesk, kaldes en apartheidpolitik? Ikke siden Anden Verdenskrig har vi i Europa oplevet sĂ„ massive angreb pĂ„ jĂžder og jĂždisk ejendom, som vi gĂžr i disse Ă„r.
De aktuelle boykotter minder mest af alt om den kampagne mod jĂždiske forretninger, lĂŠger, sagfĂžrere og dommere, som nazisterne ivĂŠrksatte i marts-april 1933. »KĂžb ikke hos jĂžderne«, stod der pĂ„ skiltene, nĂ„r stormtropperne tog opstilling foran Berlins jĂždiske butikker. Og ligesom det tyske jĂždehad havde tag i store dele af befolkningen, har antisemitismen, forklĂŠdt som antizionisme, et vist medlĂžb i den britiske befolkning. SĂ„ledes vedtog Storbritanniens stĂžrste fagforening, Unison, der organiserer 1,3 millioner offentligt ansatte, den 21. juni en total boykot af Israel â Ăžkonomisk, kulturelt, akademisk og sportsligt. Det var der trods alt ingen af Weimar-republikken frie fagforeninger, der fandt pĂ„.
Antisemitismen er blevet stueren og har tilslutning inden for journaliststanden, pÄ de hÞjere lÊreanstalter, blandt opinionsdannerne og i fagforeninger. Og blandt Europas rabiate muslimer. Den amerikanske (Israel-venlige) akademikersammenslutning Scholars for Peace in the Middle East har samlet flere tusinde underskrifter mod den britiske boykot og har fÄet tilslutning fra 20 nobelpristagere og 14 universitetsrektorer. Hvad mener de danske af slagsen?
