Category Archives: Switzerland

A shining example of Muslim equivalence

Posted on by

Here, Turkish Muslims threaten certain actions in retaliation for the ban on minarets in Switzerland. This is very revealing at a few levels. For one thing, if taken at face value, what Muslims hold as things of equal value. That forbidding a specific component of architecture without forbidding any religious practice, or the building of more mosques, or any impediment to Islamic faith or practice at all, and most certainly did not threaten to kill anyone, is equivalent in this Turk’s mind as killing priests and destroying bell towers. Now it needs to be noted that in the Swiss referendum, there is no compulsion to remove any existing minarets, just a prohibition on building more.

I however do not take it on face value. The minaret is a token or a totem of Islamic primacy and expansion. It is a beacon calling to Muslims to come to prayer of course, but much more importantly it is to dominate the skyline and let the infidels know who the boss really is. So when turks make these threats it is in fact because the Swiss dared interfere with the process of Islamic dominance of a Western nation.

Eeyore for Vlad and with a H/T to Islam in Europe for the article:

Turks Threaten to Kill Priest over Swiss Minaret Decision

The Virgin Mary Syrian Orthodox Church of Diyarbakir
The Virgin Mary Syrian Orthodox Church of Diyarbakir
Slap to religious freedom in Switzerland leads to threat over church bell tower in Turkey.

ISTANBUL, December 15 (CDN) — In response to a Swiss vote banning the construction of new mosque minarets, a group of Muslims this month went into a church building in eastern Turkey and threatened to kill a priest unless he tore down its bell tower, according to an advocacy group.

Three Muslims on Dec. 4 entered the Meryem Ana Church, a Syriac Orthodox church in Diyarbakir, and confronted the Rev. Yusuf Akbulut. They told him that unless the bell tower was destroyed in one week, they would kill him.

“If Switzerland is demolishing our minarets, we will demolish your bell towers too,” one of the men told Akbulut. Continue Reading →

The man behind the Swiss Minaret ban speaks out.

Posted on by

First, thank you to Proud Kafir who sent me this excellent interview. But secondly, I am really sick and tired of European media referring to this man and his party, as well as Geert Wilders and frankly anyone who stands in the way of Islamic fascism as “far right wing”. This man like Geert is clearly a classical liberal. Someone who wants to defend women’s rights as people. Someone who believes that all should be equal before a secular and rational law, for which there is machinery in place where it can be amended as needs be. Machinery such as for example, the direct democracy that was used to create the minaret ban.

Banning a minaret is not racist as minarets are not a race. Muslims are not a race for that matter. Islam is a political philosophy of violent global conquest. A minaret is a symbol of that conquest. It should be banned along with political Islam.

Eeyore.


Minaret vote was a “lesson in civic spirit”

Freysinger feels the vote switched quickly from minarets to direct democracy in Switzerland
Two weeks after voters approved a ban on minaret construction, the rightwing Swiss People’s Party deputy Oskar Freysinger gives his reading of events.

In French-speaking Switzerland Freysinger became the voice of the yes side. He recently defended the minaret ban, accepted by 57.5 per cent of voters on November 29, in a debate on the Arab television channel al-Jazeera.

Freysinger rejects outright the argument that the yes vote stemmed from fear and ignorance and he deplores the fact that people have used the result to attack direct democracy.

swissinfo.ch: The anti-minaret vote has provoked a huge amount of comment and criticism both in Switzerland and abroad. What struck you most from what has been said and written on this subject?

Oskar Freysinger: What stays with me, is that the focus slipped very quickly from minarets to direct democracy. Two camps emerged: the elite who said that direct democracy was anti-democratic and against human rights, which is a total paradox, and the defenders of popular rights, who, while recognising that it is not ideal, nonetheless think that the system is the best possible, because it allows people to feel involved and to have an outlet of expression.

In Europe, people envy us. I’ve received a huge number of emails from France and elsewhere. People regret that they do not have the instruments to allow them to express their will. In fact Switzerland, at the heart of Europe, has just given an incredible lesson in civic spirit, against the politically correct, against the elites, against the media and against the monumental pressure of uniform thought. That could give ideas to the people who surround us, and that is feared by the European intelligentsia.

swissinfo.ch: But are the people truly always right? Can they not also make mistakes?

O.F.: Let’s say it’s like the dogma of papal infallibility: the pope is always right in questions of faith, not in the absolute. The people are always right because the system makes them right. Determining who is right and wrong is always complex.

As a politician I have lost plenty of votes with the electorate. You have to accept it and deal with the situation, even if that is extremely difficult, as with the free movement of people [between the EU and Switzerland] today.

swissinfo.ch: A lot has been said about this being a vote based on fear. What is your take on that?

O.F.: Based on the thousands of messages and reactions I received, I can detect the tendencies. Throughout the campaign, it was not fear that dominated but a cool reflection, relatively specific and neutral in tone about what Islam is and its doctrinal incompatibility with our state based on law. On this subject I also received some information that was useful to me during the debate. It is not therefore a purely irrational and ill-informed vote, as has often been said.

As for the yes voters, some of them are proponents of self-determination who believe that our identity should be protected during this time of open borders which make it impossible to regulate migration flows. There was also the yes vote of the Catholics who did not follow their leaders, as well as a yes vote by women. Many of them told me that they never vote for the People’s Party, but that on this subject, they felt the threat of a particularly patriarchal religion. Continue Reading →

OIC tells Switzerland to annul minaret ban

Posted on by

From The Ottawa Citizen

Switzerland. OIC asks anti-minaret vote be annulled

Canwest News Service December 11, 2009 4:03 AM

The Organization of Islamic Conference urged Swiss authorities Thursday to annul a vote banning the construction of minarets, saying it could fuel similar moves across Europe. Envoys from the pan-Islamic body’s 56 member states brought the request on Thursday to the Swiss ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva, Dante Martinelli, Pakistani ambassador Zamir Akram said. On Nov. 29, Swiss voters approved a move to ban the construction of minarets. The ban was opposed by the Swiss government, the bulk of Switzerland’s political parties as well as the economic establishment. However, given that most Swiss voters approved it in a referendum, the ban would now be inscribed in the country’s constitution.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

Iran warns Switzerland of consequences over minaret ban

Posted on by

From AFP

Iran urges Bern not to enforce minaret ban

(AFP) – 14 hours ago

TEHRAN — Iran warned Switzerland on Saturday of “consequences” over a referendum banning the building of new mosque minarets and urged Bern not to enforce the ban, the official IRNA news agency reported.

The vote went “against the prestige of a country which claims to be an advocate of democracy and human rights,” Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told Swiss counterpart Micheline Calmy-Rey in a telephone call, quoted by IRNA.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki

Mottaki said last week’s referendum would “damage Switzerland’s image as a pioneer of respecting human rights among Muslims’ public opinion.”

“Values such as tolerance, dialogue and respecting others’ religions should never be put to referendum,” he argued, warning Switzerland of the “consequences” of anti-Islamic acts, IRNA reported.

The foreign minister hoped the Bern government would soon “take necessary steps and find a constitutional way to prevent imposition of the ban.”

IRNA said Switzerland’s ambassador in Tehran was summoned on Saturday before the foreign ministry, which protested against the minaret ban which was backed by more than 57 percent of voters who cast their ballot on November 29.

Calmy-Rey said the referendum was carried out against the will of the Swiss government, which would “use all its means to support Muslims rights,” the IRNA report added.

The referendum on a constitutional ban on minarets was proposed by a rightwing Swiss party and had not been expected to succeed.

Besides the government, the ban was opposed by the bulk of Switzerland’s political parties as well as the economic establishment.

It drew widespread criticism from the United Nations, Muslim states, fellow European countries and the Vatican.

Turkey cries fowl on Swiss ban while Churches denied permits

Posted on by

From The Hurriyet Daily News, Turkey

Turkish Parliament speaker speaks out against Swiss ban

Wednesday, December 2, 2009

ANKARA – Hürriyet Daily News

Turkish Parliament Speaker Mehmet Ali Sahin says he opposes the minaret ban passed in Switzerland on Sunday, adding that basic freedoms cannot be put to a vote.

Parliament Speaker Mehmet Ali Sahin voiced his opposition to the Swiss ban on minarets on Wednesday, saying that it was wrong to put a basic freedom to a vote.

His remarks came during a meeting with his Finnish counterpart, Sauli Niinistö, in Parliament.

“In fact, it should have been expressed more loudly before the referendum that such a basic right cannot be the focus of a referendum. What were we going to discuss if the ‘yes’ vote emerged from the referendum instead of ‘no’ vote?” Sahin said. “Were we going to say, ‘Such a basic right cannot be the focus of a referendum’? I believe it is necessary to pursue a consistent policy toward this issue.”

The referendum put forth by the nationalist Swiss People’s Party labeled minarets as symbols of rising Muslim political power that could one day transform Switzerland into an Islamic nation. The initiative was approved 57.5 percent to 42.5 percent on Sunday.

“As far as I can see, Swiss government officials are also uneasy. The [Swiss] justice minister pointed to the European Court of Human Rights,” said ?ahin, hoping the situation, which worries Muslims living in Switzerland, would be corrected in the future.

The Finnish parliament speaker said this was not a usual issue for Finland, which believes that human rights and the freedom of expression should be respected. Such an issue cannot be submitted to a vote in Finland, he said.

In an interview with private broadcaster NTV, Swiss Ambassador to Turkey Raimund Kunz said the referendum result was a decision made by the Swiss people, not by the state. He made clear that the Swiss government was against the initiative and called on voters to say “no” in the referendum.

“This is not a vote against Islam and Muslims,” he was quoted as saying. “This is not a vote against their religion and praying. There are mosques in Switzerland. Muslims will be able to perform what their religion requires. This will not change in the future.”

The ambassador said the reactions would not cause the Swiss government to change its foreign policy, making clear that their policy of dialogue with Muslim countries would continue.

“I understand Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s reactions,” he said. “I hope we’ll continue our dialogue with Turkey.”

On Tuesday, Erdogan spoke out against the ban, calling it a reflection of increasing racist and extreme nationalist waves in Europe.

Meanwhile, as the Turkish Prime Minister likens the ban to European intolerance and extreme nationalism…………

Churches Impossible to Build or Restore in Turkey

Television debate on minaret ban with Tarek Ramadam. France

Posted on by

Tarek is truly an emetic personality. I do not think once here in this two part debate did he answer a question in any normal sense of answering one, but did walk across his own arguments several times, as clearly all that matters to him is establishing the primacy of Islam in Europe. On the one hand, he insists that a minaret is just a decorative unimportant non-political aspect of a mosque so to ban it is racist and shows European hatred of ‘visible Muslims’ and so minarets must be allowed. In other words, minarets are not important so they are really important. Get your Imodium ready, you will need it after you hear him. As to the rest of them as usual, they miss the point with a wide berth. Being opposed to Islam is not racist. A mosque is not an analogue of a Church. No church construction is permitted in most Muslim nations, ones that seem never to enter this debate. One interesting point, was that the content of the Muslim call to prayer made through these minarets five times a day, is in fact illegal content in France and many other nations, as it is a specific call not to obey the laws of the Kaffir etc. Enjoy. Thanks to Tundra Tabloid for the embed code.


Part II

For those of you unfamiliar with Tarek Ramadan, please enjoy the debate below with Tarek and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, author of the stunning and spell binding book, ‘Infidel’. And, for more taqiyya from Mr. Ramadan, read his latest contribution on the Canadian Islamic Congress’ site entitled ” Swiss Campaign to Ban Minarets Fuelled by Populist Party”. Continue Reading →

Jews prove that they are not smarter than other groups.

Posted on by

How amazingly and suicidally stupid of ‘Jewish organizations’ to buy in to the worst reasoning possible on the minaret ban and support the Muslims. It’s like cows supporting building abattoirs because they think it will help them build a greenhouse. A mosque is not an analogue for church or synagogue, and a minaret is not an analogue for a bell tower. Jewish liberals world wide seem to think that it shows character to imagine that the Muslims in Europe today are like the Jews of the 1930s, and defend them as if they were. Its insanely untrue. The Jews of Germany were the most integrated of Europe and maybe the world. They were in fact, merely Germans overall and were most certainly not rioting in the streets, constituting the majority of the criminal population and attempting to force Germany to live under Mosaic law.
Mosques preach the gospel of Jew hatred in sermons as part of the orthodoxy of Islam. It is a central dogma. No such analogy can be found in Christianity or Judaism and certainly not as it is practised today. Lastly, when invective is hurled at Islam, (and I do it as easily as breathing) it is not at a race or any group not defined by behaviour. For some reason people have lost the ability to discriminate between what racism is, and what healthy critique of behaviour is. Perhaps that is because for generations now, we are taught that discrimination itself, a thing without which nothing that lives can survive, is wrong.
Specifically, if a person decides to leave Islam as a bad set of ideas they can carry on as part of any other belief group they want. They no longer would be a recipient of my invective if that were to matter to them. However when Muslims repeat that oft used phrase about the last day and killing all the Jews, it makes absolutly no difference if that person is an atheist, agnostic, Buddhist etc. only that the label ‘Jew’ can be applied. In this, it is a real racism even if Jews are not a race. Islam is a belief system like Nazis (with whom it has a great deal in common) or Communism, another group that has slaughtered millions upon millions for its superstitious ideology. (And if you do not think communism is superstitious, read the Communist agricultural manifesto someday and try and grow something using it) but like Nazis or comunists, they are free to leave it and no longer wear that label as criticism of a belief based group is more than rational, it is the obligation of free people. For the Jews of the world to support Muslims in their plan for primacy of Switzerland and everywhere else using Mosques and minarets as footholds, is suicidally stupid and shows a dramatic lack of understanding of the real situation. Egyptian Christians however, who actually have lived with these kind of restrictions off and on since Moe and his slaughtering brigands swept through North Africa raping and killing and oppressing all the way like some kind of macabre Santa actually felt it was a little divine justice and point out the astonishing hypocrisy of the Muslim world for  objecting to it.

Eeyore for Vlad

From The Jpost. H/T GOV

Jews back Muslims on minaret ban

Citing religious discrimination, a diverse coalition of Jewish organizations is objecting to Switzerland’s ban of minarets on local mosques.

Swiss voters this week approved by a strong majority a referendum outlawing the construction of minarets. The measure, pushed by the right-wing Swiss People’s Party (SVP), was supported by 57 percent of the population.

However, Jewish organizations, realizing that a crackdown on Islam could have repercussions for Jews as well, have come to the defense of Muslim worshipers, arguing that the Swiss’s move was unjustifiable.

Rabbi Pinchas Dunner, executive director of the Conference of European Rabbis, an Orthodox organization, said “a war on religious freedom cannot defeat Islamic extremists. The best weapon against radical Islam is support for moderate elements in the Muslim community and promoting interfaith dialogue.”

In contrast, the Anti-Defamation League tied the move to religious discrimination against Jews.

“This is not the first time a Swiss popular vote has been used to promote religious intolerance,” said the ADL in a press release. “A century ago, a Swiss referendum banned Jewish ritual slaughter, in an attempt to drive out its Jewish population.”

For the rest of this suicidal article please visit the JPOST:

If Germany had a similar referendum to Switzerland…

Posted on by

Now if I understand this right, and keep in mind I do not speak one word of German:

Mail AttachmentIt kinda looks a little like Germans given the chance would back a ban on minarets as well. All accounts are, France would and probably most of Europe except maybe Kosovo and Dagestan. In fact it looks like Germans would be more adamant than even the Swiss. Kinda makes me think the Swiss referendum results might have been watered down a bit.

Mail AttachmentThis would appear to be from France. Now I don’t speak French either but….

Spain may have a different opinion. After all, Spain remembers how great things where as the BBC tells us, when Spain was under Islamic rule. It was after all the golden age of Spain so how could they want a ban on minarets….

Mail AttachmentWoops. Stupid Spaniards don’t know when they had it good I guess.

Below, a screen shot from a Swedish paper courtesy of Snaphanan:

ScreenShot001If I read this right it would appear that the Swedes may have had enough Islam for one century by a factor of about 9:1

H/T AA with thanks.

Swiss voters right to crush the architecture of dominance

Posted on by

From The National Post.

Barbara Kay: Swiss right on minarets

Posted: December 02, 2009, 9:24 PM by Matt Gurney

Switzerland’s official ban on the construction of new minarets has naturally elicited the usual reflexive cries of “Islamophobia” amongst multiculturally correct commentators, not to mention fears of Danish-cartoon style blowback fomented by excitable Islamist demagogues.

These emotional reactions obscure a crucial point about minarets, and all other tall, pointy architectural symbols that draw the eye upward. Like the Twin Towers for example. Whether they are religious or secular in conception, structures that physically dominate the landscape by means of height send a message to observers – and nobody can choose *not* to observe them – that what the structure stands for is a dominant cultural force in people’s lives. The twin Towers stood for the dominant role of capitalism and commercial hegemony that is a point of pride for Americans. That is precisely why they were chosen as targets for destruction. Continue Reading →

Huffington Post: The real reasons why the Swiss voted to ban minarets

Posted on by

From The Huffington Post:

The Swiss voted to ban the construction of new minarets — against all expectations and although their government and most political parties had rejected a ban. But this referendum had, in truth, little to do with minarets.

The surprising vote reveals rather a growing unease in Switzerland, which traditionally has been one of the most open and most tolerant countries of the continent: Many Swiss are worried about the rise of political Islam and religious rules in Europe that are threatening hard-won rights such as equal rights for women and men, the secular rule of law above religion or the right of each individual to decide for him — or herself.

A majority of Swiss voters obviously feels that there are problems with Muslim integration into civil society at the moment. This vague sentiment was fueled by a number of incidents over the last years: The former Imam of a mosque in Geneva, Hani Ramadan, a Swiss citizen by the way, publicly justified the stoning of adulterers or the punitive amputation of the hand of a thief. Muslim parents prevented their daughters from attending swimming classes, gymnastics or summer camps in public schools because they didn’t want their girls to be together with boys. Media reports about forced marriages, female genital mutilations and “honor killings” of Muslim women – all confirmed by authorities or in court — came as a shocking surprise. A university professor even went as far as to suggest in an official publication of a federal commission to introduce elements of the Sharia, the Muslim legal system, into Switzerland.

The nationalist and conservative Swiss People’s Party knew to take advantage of the wide-spread feeling that the government, the courts and the politicians do too little to defend Western values and basic rights. The party warned — highly exaggerated — of a “creeping islamization” of Switzerland. It skillfully chose the question of minarets as a very symbolic target and demanded a ban for the construction of new ones. As it is possible in Switzerland for everyone, the party collected 100,000 signatures within 18 months from eligible voters supporting the motion to force a referendum. A clear majority of 57.5 percent of the Swiss population and 22 out of 26 cantons (states) favored the ban.

It would be utterly wrong — and dangerous — to think that this was primarily a racist vote. I’m convinced that the post-electoral analysis will show that a significant part of the (anti-racist) left and an overwhelming majority of the women supported the ban — not because they are afraid of minarets, but because they are worried about the role (some would say: about the oppression) of women in Islamic societies and about the role of religion in public life. This is, in my opinion, an entirely legitimate discussion that we have to have and must not suppress. Continue Reading →

Europe unites to deplore Swiss ban on minarets

Posted on by

TIMESONLINE…The Swiss and European establishment united today in deploring yesterday’s decision by Swiss voters to outlaw the construction of minarets but conservative leaders warned that the referendum showed genuine fear over Islam on the continent.

Swiss officials, media and business leaders voiced shame over a vote that they say will stigmatise the country’s 400,000 Muslims and stain Switzerland’s name in the Muslim world. In contrast, hard right leaders in France, Austria, Italy and the Netherlands hailed what they depicted as a triumph for the people against the elite.

Le Temps, Geneva’s establishment newspaper, said: “The vote was inspired by fear, fantasies and ignorance.” Damage to the country’s international standing would be spectacular, it said. “Vengeance [ aka fear], boycotts [ aka fantasy], retaliation [aka ignorance] … this clash with Islam could cost dearly.”

Tagesanzeiger, the Zurich daily, said that the vote, staged on the initiative of the nationalist Swiss People’s Party (SVP), showed the country’s deep division between outward-looking modernisers and a traditionalist backlash. The 57 per cent approval of the minaret ban would “strengthen the international isolation of Switzerland even among western nations,” it said.

The Swiss Government, which opposed the vote, reassured members of the faith that “this is not a rejection of the Muslim community, religion or culture.” The Conference of Swiss Bishops also criticised the result, saying that it “heightens the problems of cohabitation between religions and cultures.”

Amnesty international and other rights organisations said that the change to the Swiss Constitution breached guarantees on religious freedom in the European Human Rights Convention. The Swiss Green party said that it may lodge a complaint at the Strasbourg court of Human Rights.

Swiss Muslims, who come mainly from the Balkans and Turkey, reacted with sorrow. “The most painful thing for us is not the ban on minarets, but the symbol sent by this vote,” said Farhad Afshar, leader of the Swiss Coordination of Islamic Organisations. “Muslims do not feel accepted as a religious community,” he said.

Anger was swift from more militant wings of the Muslim world. “This is the hatred of Swiss people against Muslim communities. They do not want to see a Muslim presence in their country and this intense dislike has made them intolerant,” said Maskuri Abdillah, the head of Nahdlatul Ulama, Indonesia’s biggest Muslim group. He urged Muslims not to take “revenge” for the decision.

Egypt’s Mufti Ali Gomaa denounced the ban on new minarets as an insult to all Muslims. “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.”

Beyond Switzerland, the vote was criticised by centre and leftwing leaders. Bernard Kouchner, a leftist who is French Foreign Minister, said that he had been shocked. Switzerland should reverse the decision quickly, he said. “If you are not allowed to build minarets, that means that religion is being oppressed.” Can someone please show me an Muslim dominated country where religions other than Islam are not oppressed?

However spokesman for Mr Sarkozy’s centre-right Union for a Popular Majority, took a different line, saying that the vote showed the degree to which radical Islam was alarming Europe’s citizens. Xavier Bertrand, the party leader, said that he was “not sure that minarets are needed in order to practise Islam in France”.

In Germany, Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrat (CDU) party reacted with similar caution. To criticise the Swiss ban would be counterproductive, said Wolfgang Bosbach a senior CDU MP. It reflected a fear of growing Islamisation “and this fear must be taken seriously,” he said.

France’s far right National Front welcomed the outcome, saying that the “elites should stop denying the aspirations and fears of the European people, who, without opposing religious freedom, reject ostentatious signs that political-religious Muslim groups want to impose.”

In Italy, the anti-immigrant Northern League, said: “Switzerland is sending us a clear signal: yes to bell towers, no to minarets.”

In Switzerland, Yvan Perrin, vice-president of the SVP, the largest party in the federal Parliament, said that the vote was a lesson to the elite. Swiss companies should not worry about suffering from a backlash from Muslim countries, he said. “If our companies continue to make good quality products, they have nothing to worry about.”

Statement on ban of minarets in Switzerland

Posted on by

The Rights of Freedom Consolidated

The Egerkinger Commitee who launched the minaret ban initiative, welcomes the vote in favour of a minaret ban by the Swiss Sovereign.

It was decided, that no further minarets are to be build in Switzerland. And the call of the muezzin is not to be heard.

With the “Yes!” to a ban on minarets the people confirmed that Swiss Law also applies to all immigrants without any curtailments. And any attempt to implement parts of sharia law in Switzerland has thereby been uncompromisingly rejected. Forced marriages – also if carried out during a stay on foreign ground – have no validity for persons with legal residence in Switzerland. And the same applies to other elements of sharia. The basic rights of freedom which are mandatory in Switzerland have been consolidated.

The “Yes!” to the minaret ban by the Swiss sovereign – our highest political entity – is now to be implemented in its exact wording. The Professorial ideas about undermining its actual implementation by filing a complaint to the European Courts of Justice, which were aired during the campaign, are unacceptable and a breach of constitutional law. Officials of the law, who are reluctant to enforce the expressed will of the Swiss Sovereign are to be discharged.

The Egerkinger Commitee observes with content that the public debate about the minaret ban – contrary to all the biased doomsaying of the opposition – has been passionate indeed, but orderly and our direct democracy worthy. The ones who went out of line, were the people who attempted to halt free speech regarding the issue, at times even through use of illicit means.

The role played by church-officials during the debate has been alarming. The neglect of their duty to counter the persecution of Christians especially in muslim lands, stands in disquieting contrast to their hasty partisanship against a ban on minarets

The Egerkinger Commitee

Walter Wobmann, National Council of Switzerland

Dr. Ulrich Schüler, National Council of Switzerland

29. November 2009

(Many many thanks for the Translation: Frank Kitman)

Switzerland: majority voters back nationwide ban on minarets

Posted on by

From The Telegraph U.K.

Switzerland appears to have backed minaret ban

Voters in Switzerland appeared to have backed a call to ban minarets from mosques, according to early exit poll results.

By Alexandra Williams in Geneva and Bruno Waterfield
Published: 10:16AM GMT 29 Nov 2009

A pedestrian walks past a display advertising the initiative against the construction of new minarets in Switzerland, in Geneva A pedestrian walks past a display advertising the initiative

Thirty minutes after the referendum finished at midday, Swiss television reported: “The initiative would appear to be accepted. There is a positive trend. It’s a huge surprise.”

According to the respected gfs.bern polling institute an estimated 59 per cent of voters backed the ban. A majority of cantons were also in support of the initiative.

“A majority have voted for a nationwide ban on the construction of minarets,” said the institute’s director Claude Longchamp, speaking on Swiss Radio DRS.

For the Swiss constitution to be changed, the majority of the electorate and a majority of the cantons are required to vote ‘yes’.

A survey two weeks ago showed 53 per cent said they would reject it. Both the government and parliament had rejected the initiative.

Commentators had said the country risked international pariah status and a backlash across the Muslim world if a ’yes’ vote was achieved.

If the exit polls prove correct it will be a huge shock and Switzerland risks international pariah status and a backlash across the Muslim world.

Sunday’s vote was forced by members of the far-right Swiss People’s party (SVP) which has provoked a national debate over immigration with powerful billboard images.

The stark “stop” posters depicting a Muslim woman in a burka against the backdrop of a Swiss flag studded with missile shaped black minarets have been banned in many towns.

Hanspeter Rentsch, an executive director at the watch company Swatch, has warned that the referendum, and the poster propaganda, could damage Switzerland in the eyes of the world.

“The ‘Swiss’ brand must continue to represent values such as openness, pluralism and freedom of religion. Under no circumstances must it be connected with hatred, animosity towards foreigners and narrow-mindedness,” he said.

Campaigners demanded the referendum to halt “political Islamisation” by amending the Swiss constitution to add a clause stating “the construction of minarets is prohibited”.

Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf, the Swiss justice minister, has suggested that a vote for a ban could fuel Islamist radicalism and violent protests, such as those that greeted Danish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed in 2006.

“This is not an appropriate instrument for combating religious extremism. It risks the opposite, of serving the cause of fanatics,” she said.

But Oskar Freysinger, an SVP MP, compares warnings of anger in the Muslim world to the arguments used by “appeasers” of Adolf Hitler and the Nazis.

“It is what Chamberlain thought in Munich in 1938. If these are the consequences, it is the proof that what we are doing to defend ourselves is legitimate,” he said.

The vote is required because campaigners got over 100,000 signatures on a petition against minarets triggering a vote under the Swiss constitution.

The campaign followed a row over a minaret in the tiny town of Langenthal, in the Bern canton of Switzerland.

Earlier this year Langenthal’s 750 Muslims asked for planning permission to add a minaret, 30 feet high, to their mosque in a town with 11 churches and 14,500 inhabitants.

The reaction to the apparently harmless request has polarised Switzerland and crossed borders to feed into British, French, Dutch and Austrian fears over Islam and national identity.

“This minaret is a symbol of conquest and power which marks the will to introduce Sharia law as has happened in some other European cities. We will not accept that,” said Ulrich Schueler, an SVP politician and leader of the “stop” minaret campaign.

Muslims have rejected the argument that a minaret symbolises Muslim power. Mutalip Karaademi, leader of Langenthal’s Muslim community and of Albanian origin, accused Mr Schueler of telling “dirty lies”.

“A minaret is a symbol nothing more. It s nice to see a house of god with a minaret or a church steeple or cupolas on a synagogue,” he said.

“They call us terrorists. They call us Taliban, so many labels all wrong. They insult us. We love this country, almost more than our own. Our children were born here.”