This isn't likely to end well.
Usually European politicians will not set comfortable deadlines in condemnations, but demand "immediate" apologies or retractions.
Here, the City of Copenhagen has given 30 days time for the Islamic Society in Denmark, also known as "Det Islamisk Trossamfund", to condemn statements made by some of its members.
Will the Islamic Supremacists back down?
If not, will the City of Copenhagen make good on its threat?
The Islamic group has until December 3, 2015, to apologize and condemn the remarks. A form of "collaboration" exists between the group, similar to the "jizrah" where Copenhagen takes money from its citizens and gives it to the Muslims, but this all may come unglued if the Supremacist sect refuses to back down, and the City officials stand their ground:
The Islamic supremacists could lose kaffir money.
What does the City Councel face?
A. They can show the city that they are strong leaders and refuse to yield and then will face "Muslim dissatisfaction", a euphemism for violence
B. They can claim a victory of sorts with an apologetic quote from an unnamed or low level employee of the Islamic Society which would then be quickly followed with a denial by the Islamic Society.
C. An agreement is reached in which the City is forced to admit it "mis-interpreted" or "mis heard" the imam's remarks.
It comes down to a choice between Islamic violence and Copenhagen dhimmitude.
What will they choose?
The city and the Islamics are supposed to be working together to "reduce radicalization" even though the group has accepted, through its invited speaker, violence against women, and have declared Jews "descendants of pigs and apes." It is not known if the group has any scientific data to support their evolutionary claim.
Council members for the City complained that they invited British imam Haiham al-Haddad to come speak to them early in 2015. He is the "scientist" behind the evolutionary claim.
The group would have to condemn him, and in a real sense, condemn the Koran's anti-semeitc hate speech against Jews.
The Islamic Society, however, swiftly condemned that contention in a statement on Tuesday and said that the city’s statements about al-Haddad were based on false claims made by Danish newspaper Berlingske.
“This is an unheard of and ungrounded demonization. That is the reason that Berlingske made an agreement with Haitham al-Haddad, paid him compensation and retracted an article,” the society’s spokesman, Imran Shah, said.
This is not to deny that al-Haddad made these remarks, only that the Danish journalism did not have enough to prove them to be "grounded."
Radio Netherlands Worldwide has previously confirmed that al-Haddad said that Jews “are the enemies of God and the descendants of apes and pigs” in a 2001 sermon and a YouTube video appears to show al-Haddad justifying domestic violence as a private issue.
City officials also pointed to remarks made by Kamran Shah, a frequent presence at the society’s mosque in Copenhagen’s Nordvest district.
In a video posted to YouTube, Shah tells listeners that they face punishment from God for listening to music and watching the Danish version of X-Factor, the popular amateur singing programme. Shah did not criticize the quality of the singing, or the fairness of the judging, but against music, itself. Islam is not a fan of music, arts, poetry, and so on.
“If you see it X-Factor, and watch it for just two to three minutes, it is haram. And what does it mean when we say haram ? It means God will punish you,” Kamran Shah said in the video. What he does not say is by what means Allah will punish the listeners to the program which may indicate a possible "call to arms" by jihadists to "punish" those who ridicule his statement.
If the city makes good on its ultimatum, the group loses its "official state approval as a faith society."
I do not think this is going to bother them too much. Put a hidden microphone in the mosque and learn what is suspected: the Koran is being taught. The koran teaches violence. The koran demands obedience.
The Islamic Society said it is considering legal action against city officials for “defamatory claims”. This is far different from threats of violence. What if a court were to rule against them?