The ban has sparked mixed reactions throughout the Arab and Muslim blogospheres: While some bloggers are outraged, others make the point that banning minarets does not hinder practicing the faith.

Lebanese-American Pierre Tristram, who blogs for About.com, opens a post with this paragraph, condemning the Swiss decision:

How can 59 million people be so dumb, Britain's Daily Mail famously asked in a day-after headline of the re-election of George W. Bush in 2004. The Daily Mail can notch a new one for its shame gallery: How can 3 million Swiss be so bigoted?

Tristram closes with this scathing comment:  “The difference between your average Swiss and Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the poster child of racist rants, has just gotten much narrower.”

Egyptian blogger Hicham Maged searches for an answer in his post, and concludes:

In a nutshell, I am looking forward for Swiss people to re-evaluate what happened; it is not only whether law protect citizen's rights or not, which is something important to debate and go for in the Swiss courts to correct for sure, but what is more important for me is that this fatal mistake should set up an alarm for not falling into the swamp of ignorance where nothing fill it but fear, anger and stupidity ~ Everywhere!

Another Egyptian blogger, whose blog is entitled Not Green Data, recognizes the credo that “a mosque is a mosque,” but laments the loss of the mosque's beauty in the Swiss ban:

Can you imagine a cube of Swiss Cheese, without its eyes - the holes in it? Or a Swiss Knife without the compass or the screwdriver? This is exactly what the Swiss people want to do with mosques. A mosque will remain a mosques without its Minarets, and it will still function the way it is supposed to function without them. But it will then loose its architectural identity and beauty.

British blogger Matthew Teller, a Middle East travel writer, focuses on the propaganda posters of various Swiss

A poster by the Swiss SVP calling for a ban of minarets

campaigners, picking apart both sides of the battle in this post, describing the poster to the left:

The repulsive SVP, who’ve used what the Financial Times called “strident populism” to target ‘foreigners’ of all kinds in Switzerland as criminals, benefit cheats or worse, kicked off the campaign with the poster opposite: “Stop! Yes to the minaret ban”. Look at the imagery: minarets as missiles, women as menacing, the burqa as concealment, black as a threat, the Swiss flag cast into shadow from the east, the cross obliterated.

Algerian-American The Moor Next Door, seeing the ban as a power struggle, remarks:

The minaret, for its opponents, symbolizes Islam’s “arrival” in the Alps. It stands to proclaim the Muslim presence above other faiths and peoples. Banning it, then, is to ban a symbol of Muslim power and existence

…

The aesthetics of identity, and therefore power, are what the drive is really about. It is a way for a people in doubt to affirm and define their confused identity by rejecting that of the newcomer’s.

Syrian blogger Maysaloon has a unique perspective on what the most important narrative of this story is.  Setting aside the issues of bigotry, fear, and architectural integrity, the blogger makes the following point:

Neither Swiss bigotry, nor the religious or architectural significance of minarets are what is important about this story. What is important is that for the first time in 400 years, at least since the Ottomans besieged Vienna, Muslims are having a real impact on what is happening in Europe.

The blogger goes on to highlight the ways in which Islam has influenced the “west” and vice versa, concluding:

To sum it up, I am not worried about the bigots. Minarets and sharia can be banned, headscarves can be torn off, and all the cartoons in the world will not stop the fact that Islam is now in Europe, and it is in America, and it is spreading throughout the world.

To conclude, Mauritanian Twitter user weddady's comment on the end result of the referendum sums up well the sentiment of many.  He says, ” Now no one can pretend that Europe doesn't have a problem with Muslims, nor can anyone deny the extensive Islamist presence there.”

Besides the statue's hyperbolic height and its staggering cost of 200 million Chilean Pesos (approximately $400,000), the most controversial aspect is its intended location. Proposed by the private San Sebastián University (USS for its initials in Spanish), the statue was to be erected in central Santiago, opposite the University of Chile's law school. There are Chilean bloggers like Cristian Cabalin who comment that the university could spend the money on better things:

Si esta Universidad estaba tan preocupada por devolver el favor a la municipalidad de Recoleta podría destinar 200 millones de pesos o más para que mejoren las escuelas o para que se entreguen becas a los estudiantes de menores ingresos de la comuna. Ahí sí que existiría un efecto favorable para los vecinos, a quienes el municipio dice defender.

The Council further complained that the proximity of the statue on top of an underground car park was undignified, and criticized the lack of a public consultation for the project. Another issue that is drawing criticism is the fact that the statue's sculptor, Daniel Cordero is the brother of the USS’ director. Cordero has already finished the clay model, which is now stored a warehouse in Central Santiago.

According to The Clinic [es], there is opposition because “the lack of public contest was one of the principal critiques to the real and conventional giant statue.” In addition, the USS neglected to first seek permission from the Monuments' Council, as is customary for such projects.

The discussion in the blogosphere quickly turned onto more basic questions concerning the relationship between laicism and religiosity in Chile’s education system and the country as a whole. Also discussed are the merits and shortcomings of John Paul II, who was a staunch anti-abortionist, one of the hot matters in the upcoming election.

On Aug. 13, 2007, the same Neva Express train was derailed due to an explosion; some 60 people were injured then. Coincidentally, in the past few days, there has been an increase in the Russian media coverage (RUS) of the trial of Maksharip Khidriev, one of the suspects charged in connection with the 2007 attack; an Ingushetia native, he is alleged to have links to Chechen rebels. (GV posts on the 2007 Neva Express train derailment are here and here.)

No witness reports of the tragedy seem to have appeared in the Russian blogosphere yet, but there are plenty of reactions still, and below is a small selection.

LJ user peresedov recalls the 2007 accident and the ongoing trial of one of the suspects, and posts this comment (RUS):

[…] Whether you want it or not, these two events [appear related].

I'd like to ask the experts: to which extent could these two events be interconnected, and is it really possible for Khidriev's associates (he has been proclaimed [Doku Umarov]'s person) to have prepared an attack like this in two days, and what the hell is going on here in general?

UPD. [LJ user] beri_llii links to a report claiming that the train explosion was carried out by yet another obscure nationalist group: [http://headshotboy.livejournal.com/137255.html]

(The post linked to in LJ user peresedov's update has since been deleted, replaced by another one (RUS) with an explanatory note, which says, among other things, that “the nationalists' statement” turned out to contain false claims of their involvement in the train blast.)

Some bloggers chose to draw parallels between Friday's train accident, the trial of Maksharip Khidriev, and Kurban Bayram (Eid al-Adha, the Festival of Sacrifice), a three-day Muslim holiday, whose celebration began on Friday. LJ user warsh wrote this (RUS):

[…] I won't be surprised if this turns out to be a Kurban Bayram “gift” from the North Caucasus rebels (as it was with the attack on the Neva Express in 2007). I'm wishing them to join [the Chechen guerrilla leader Shamil Basayev, killed in 2006] as soon as possible.

And LJ user uliana wrote this (RUS):

All things considered, the newest Neva Express blast is someone's kurban. A consequence of the fact that those guilty of the first blast have been “appointed”…

LJ user aneta_spb mentions the 2007 attack and the trial, too, but points out (RUS) to other factors that might have caused the crash:

[…] The suspect in the previous catastrophe [case] has just admitted [his involvement] (and how many more they kept trying to implicate in this case!)

I can imagine what this night is going to be like for Novgorod's doctors… With roads like these… […]

***

murys:

We were just driving from the countryside, gave a ride to a man who, as far as I understood, worked for the Ministry of Emergency Situations or a similar kind of place. He said that this segment of the railway near Bologoye is so rotten in general that they don't have to explode anything there, and this could've been a secondary explosion, too. […]

aneta_spb:

Exactly - you don't even have to make an explosion. A couple weeks after [the 2007 Neva Express accident], we were on a train and spent some six hours waiting [not far from the site of Friday's crash], because there had been some accident in front of us. And prior to the rushed launch of the [Sapsan high speed train route], they were doing some urgent repairs, and it's likely that they haven't finished something or done something wrong. […]

And here's a comment (RUS) on the rescue effort, posted anonymously in the ru_railway LJ community:

In this situation, I'm most upset about the fact that they've spent so much time bragging about the Emergency Situations Ministry's cool new rescue center in Moscow, about all the info that they've got showing on the little screens, and the fact that they are now capable of taking urgent decisions, but what's the use of all these decisions if the local rescue equipment is not in the working condition, and that's why they had to send some [all the way] from Novgorod. The accident took place at 9:34 PM, and the rescuers from Novgorod set out [to the site of the accident] only at 10:40 PM, and it takes two and half hours to ride along those roads, if you can call them roads at all, and that's the best case scenario. They've sent the planes out - but why don't they have anything locally?!

The compulsory display of a symbol of a given confession in premises used by the public authorities… restricted the right of parents to educate their children in conformity with their convictions.

The Polish parliament, however, has decided [POL] to continue allowing handing out crosses in Polish classrooms and on other public premises. And a Polish association of Catholics, Unum Principium, has also proposed including the symbol of the cross in the national emblem of Poland. Currently, the emblem has a white eagle in a golden crown on red background, but Krzysztof Zagozda, the association's spokesman, refers to the national emblem from 1927, when the eagle's crown had a cross incorporated on top of it. He explains the group's proposal [POL]:

Including cross in national symbols is important for patriotic reasons. For many Polish citizens it expresses separateness of a kind or fight for independence. Hence why we need to restore it.

Image source: Wikipedia

This proposal has generated over 500 reactions on the forum of Poland's main daily, Gazeta.pl.

Maruda.r questions the above statement [POL]:

It's not entirely right, as Polish eagles were wearing different crowns: […] Emblems, coats of arms change - they reflect certain status, which is not there any more. We might as well reach out for the chicken placed on coins in Piast times.

Feurig59 states [POL]:

Carry the crosses in your hearts. Not everything has to be shown off - worn off symbols, whose meaning is carried by very few in this country, but everyone is scrubbing and polishing their ‘gods', so everyone could see how strongly they feel about ‘tradition' and what a good Pole and Catholic they are. Makes me sick:(

Michelange75 points out [POL]:

As a Catholic I say - No. Those people do not understand that this leads to antagonisms within Polish society and a loss of trust in the church for many Poles. Are we to experience the mistake of Western countries, where churches stand empty. That is what those chauvinists and pseudo-Catholics want. If so, than in this entire war over the cross and entire aspect of moving crosses away from school ordered by Europe, and which we do not seem to have to respect, Polish Catholic church will lose. It's totally irresponsible.

This statement is followed up by a response from ludwigvanbeethoven, who is a Protestant [POL]:

Catholics believe themselves as the only right faith, but I am asking - why? As a protestant, I demand all churches in Europe to look like protestant ones. […] Religion should be an inner business of each citizen, and not a huge balloon and sour faces, that Brussels does not want to include common values into their constitution.

On another site, AdamM sounds very sarcastic [POL]:

But Poland is to be a province of Vatican, so it's easier this way. Of course during GCSA exams we will pass religion too, and on our CV's we will need to put dates of our baptism, first communion and confirmation as well as the exact amount of money given during each mass. We will let out on our streets policemen who will check if we all carry crosses and know how to pray, and for those who protest, we will build stakes. We could also do with dusting off the Middle Ages torture machines so that the conversion is smoother.

A Northern Irish Polish forum contains a discussion on how having a cross in the emblem differs from having it next to it one wall; the main thoughts are expressed by 33lncr [POL]:

Aaa, those are the guys from the Madonna concert affair [cancelled due to protest of Catholics], so the case is clear… Seriously, though, for me it's only an add-on to a picture with a bird. But when I think of it rationally, what has the cross to do with Poles - atheists or Poles-other-believers, who are also patriots, what does it have to do with Poles-Catholics who are not patriots at all (I know the last one is in our country almost an oxymoron, but logically speaking quite possible)?

There are a few supportive opinions, though, like the one expressed by Krzysiek [POL]:

I support them. Poland is a Catholic country and we should protect our faith and show it somehow. If someone is unhappy, they should go to France where Catholics have practically nothing to say, and the majority of people believes in Islam.

The Houthi rebels, named after Hussein Badreddin al Houthi, are Zaidi Shia who have been fighting the government of Yemen since June 2004, seeking greater autonomy in the north of the country where the Zaidis are a majority. Clashes between the rebels and Saudi Arabia began on November 4, with the rebels claiming they were responding to strikes by the Yemeni military from Saudi territory, and Saudi Arabia saying it was responding to incursions by the Yemeni rebels. The current conflict has affected civilians on both sides of the border, with casualties as well as large-scale displacement. Some commentators argue that this is just the most recent in a series of surrogate conflicts between Saudi Arabia (encouraged by the Yemeni government to fund anti-Zaidi Salafi groups) and Iran (accused of directly supporting the Houthi rebels), and the fear is that it may escalate into a greater regional confrontation.

Currently studying in the United States, Saudi blogger Khaled Al Ateeq is worried about the calls being made by some Saudi religious scholars, who are viewing this conflict purely in religious terms. He writes:

Khaled concludes by saying: