Minaret ban ´wins Swiss support´

"The initiative would appear to be accepted, there is a positive trend. It´s a huge surprise," French-language Swiss television said, 30 minutes after polls closed at mid-day.

The proposal to ban the building of minarets must win the support of voters in a majority of Switzerland´s 26 cantons for it to pass.

My comment: why don´t they ban Synagogues too

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2009/11/2009112912250816889.html

Exit polls from a national vote in Switzerland suggest that the country will accept a call by far-right parties for a ban on the construction of minarets on mosques, Swiss public television has reported.

One exit poll after the vote on Sunday said that approval for the ban stood at 53 per cent, while partial results from the poll indicated that the German-speaking canton of Lucerne accepted the ban.

Turkish Teacher: again, please translate your Turkish text into English. 

in switzerland if you say that you dont believe in armenian genocide, you end up in jail.

that´s ridiculous.

ETT

It is also ridiculous that if you say in Turkey that there is Armenian genocide, you may also end up in jail!

First of all, banning a synagogue does not equal banning a minaret... a minaret is not the same as banning the mosque itself. I think banning a minaret is also stupid though

I was suprised this bill passed... 57%..who would have thought. A guess the lobbyists did their job The ban is crazy, in the entire country there are like what...a handful of minarets?

Would you please let us know if you have any evidence?

And also note that they passed a law for it in Switzerland. There is not any such Turkish law for it.

True, I don´t have any evidence, yet.. although it would be interesting to look into it. There IS a LAW in Turkey about insulting Turkishness, that is even more ridiculous, you must admit. And I´m pretty sure someone went to jail for denying "armenian genocide" under the Law 301.

 Subject is Switzerland´s law and you changed it to Turkish law 301 to defence these laws. We call it "kıvırtma" in Turkish. FYI then many countries have that similar ridiculous laws. It is not unique to Turkey. You can begin with checking Polish one for  example. Btw Turkish one has changed, there is no "Türklük" anymore since it is uncertain.

One of the terms for this tactic is called  digress in English........it´s a very effective.....

Catwoman, in a previous post I made references to the xenophobic nature of European culture. I believe if this referandum was made in any other European country (maybe except for Britain) the result would be more or less the same.

You usually take matters like this: they made a mistake and you also made a mistake therefore you have no right to criticize others. This is not a constructive approach. We must pay utmost care to maintain the focus on the problem at hand.

The decision of the Swiss people though predictable is a bid for a blatant violation of basic human rights. It is despicable, unacceptable, seperatist and it is a huge backward step taken by ignorant and narrow minds. Let us protest this without mixing it with other subjects.

I agree that this law banning denying the Armenian genocide is ridiculous, it kind of shows the hypocricy of Europe - that the freedom of speech rule only applies when it´s convenient.

Having said that, I think that Turkish policy of denial and restricting freedom of speech is what has ultimately led to this backlash.

I like it. It´s nice to see Europe nations´ evolution. They rolled the ball so we should expect similar laws in other European countries. Last night I saw a Dutch party leader demanding the same kind of poll in Holland. We´ll see.

Again could I ask for an evidence for it? I don´t know any. Please share it with us if you know any.

Maybe you refer to Orhan Pamuk case. They filed a case about it against Pamuk, which is a democratical right anyone can file anything. But no one went to jail.

Let’s admit that if there was such a referandum in Turkey, results would be like 80 % no, 20 % yes. So please do not try to exclude yourselves from the situation. I think the danger is that intolerance to others ( religions,races,ideologies, genders etc.) is rising intensely. Conservative  or nationalist parties accede even in the most modern countries which means in my opinion people are hating eachother more and more each day despite newest means of communication like internet that is supposed to make people know eachother better. 

Yes another diversionary post. The fact of the matter is the vote was taken in Switzerland......NOT Turkey............deal with the issue at hand, not some hypothetical "if"...........and I guess you have not taken note of all the churches already in Turkey?..........but that is another issue.......

I agree with that. The most striking aspect of the country in the eyes of many foreign visitors after having seen Turkey for the first time how hospitable people generally are. Where I live, there are churches and synagogues kept in excellent condition regardless of how big their communities are.

Young people take photographs of these buildings, some light candles, some observe prayers although they don´t believe in this religion at all. This attitude can easily be generalized. There are also a few monsters here and there raised with the hatred of the world outside typical of the nationalist sentiment. Their attitude can hardly be generalized...

Nevertheless, in Athens majority thinks there is no room in the city even for a single mosque.

In Switzerland, they don´t want to see the minarets. They have no problem accepting petrodollars in their ´private´ bank accounts.

During the WWII they felt nothing wrong about robbing the Jewish of their property and money in association with the Nazis. There must indeed be a certain profound attitude towards foreigners. Prime Minister Erdogan refered to the result of the referandum as a new type of antisemitism.

Not sure what people want to accomplish by banning minarets!  It´s obsurd and does nothing to ease relations between Western and Islamic culture.  I am finding more and more intolerance as the months and years go by.  We are supposed to be evolving as a spesis....we seem to be regressing rapidly.  I wonder what they will ban next...Church steeples, people wearing crosses, people with dark skin? 

I don´t see the point of the ban either. Why minarets? Are we dealing with architecsism?

 Uhmmmm....no. Firstly, it´s not "European culture".... xenophobic reactions are human nature... evolution and all that, protect your own, spread the genes, all that. So to attach it to a single culture is unfounded... Secondly, there is no "European culture", it is a area with a lot of different histories and cultures that are sometimes intertwined, but really different. And thirdly, saying that in other European countries the result would be the same is just crazy. You underestimate people, and make you own assumptions based on nothing. The fact that the xenophobes scream the loudests makes it seem like they are the only people in certain countries, but that doesn´t mean they actually ARE the only people.

Orhan Pamuk did not go to jail only because of severe international pressure, many before him did. Do you really think that it´s so democratic that people get to be sued for saying "so many people died and you can´t talk about it in Turkey"?

Man has a life span of say 70-80 years. I have completed more than half of it. I have made the acquaintance of thousands of people from various countries. This experience entitles me to say a few words about them, writers do that too, philosophers rave about them and poets elaborate on their pecularities. They all rely on their first hand experience to be able to that.

Somehow, there is a typical anti-muslim, anti-turkish sentiment producing all sorts of political consequences throughout Europe. They use this sentiment to win elections. Referandums turn out negative.

I am sorry that I disagree with you but Europe is against Turkey and Islam and this is evident in their visa policies, unconditional support of the other thesis whenever Turkey forms one of the parties. Isn´t this a tell-tale proof of a deep rooted prejudice?  What did you think about Turkey before coming to see it? I know many people have been positively surprized on finding a country quite different from what they were told back home. 

There is no denying some of these also apply to Turkey but the sophisticated, iron-clad anti-Turkish sentiment prevalent in Europe is beyond any comparison.

There are millions of potential  tourists and businessmen who for all intents and purposes are eligible for entering a European country but they are daunted at the consulates where they are asked reports of bank balance sheets whereas this is private information from a legal point of view. Should there be the smalles suspicion about your intentions, you are denied of entry. You might obtain the visa and travel to a European country, there a policeman may send you back home. Everyone else is potentially good regardless of how they actually are but if you are a Turk you are potentially bad.

How can you send someone to jail when there is no law that punish saying there was a genocide? In Switzerland there is such a law. Yes there would be some reactions by masses and even death threats if somebody does so as in Pamuk case but our law system doesn´t have something like that law in Switzerland.

If you know someone jailed in Turkey because they said there was a genocide, let us know. You sound like knowing something that we don´t know.

 I tend to agree with you vinyards, especially with regards to visas.  I live in the US and my husband is an immigrant from Turkey.  We still have to "prove" that we are a legitimate couple even though we have been married for some years now and have a child together.  If he were from a European country, we would not be so scrutinized.  What chaps me even more, is that Turkey is a member of NATO, considered an friend to the US.....this is a fact that is quicky forgotten in the immigration process, yet quickly remembered when it seems convenient to politicians.  My personal opinion is that politicians are currently exploiting fears that people have about muslims in general.  I think most people are fairly tolerant but when their fears are fed, they become very irrational! 

According to Ifop (french institute for public opinion) 41% of french are against the minarets vs 22% in year 2001.

Lefigaro recent poll showed that 73% of french are against building new minarets in france and Dr spiegel´s poll reported 78% of germans against minarets.

According to the article, a minaret ,even without a muezzin, shows "too much" the presence of muslims in France.

(le figaro : http://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/2009/12/02/01016-20091202ARTFIG00629-les-francais-de-plus-en-plus-hostiles-aux-mosquees-.php)

The International Publishers Association (IPA) and the Writers in Prison Committee of International PEN strongly condemn the sentencing of publisher Ragip Zarakolu in stanbul on 17 June for "insulting the State" (Article 301 Turkish Penal Code - TPC). The organisations are especially alarmed that this is the first conviction since this article was slightly amended on 30 April 2008, after over 1,000 people, including writers, publishers and journalists, have been brought to the courts in the three years since its inception in 2005. IPA and PEN have been calling for the repeal of this law ever since it was presented in draft form, and are deeply disappointed that rather than remove this legislation, the amendments are simply cosmetic. Around 29 writers and journalists are on trial today under Article 301. They are among a total of 79 charged under a range of laws that impinge on the right to free speech, including Article 318 that has led numerous commentators on conscientious objection to the courts, and a raft of articles under Anti Terror legislation and against "incitement" that have been used against writers on the Kurdish issues. There is clearly much more to do to bring Turkey in line with its international requirements that safeguard free expression.

...

The case leading to the conviction of Ragip Zarakolu was initiated in December 2004 for the publication of London-based author George Jerjian´s book entitled: The truth will setus free/Armenians and Turks reconciled.

http://www.internationalpen.org.uk/go/news/turkey-publisher-sentenced-under-article-301 

OK but I was asking the name of someone sent to jail because of saying there was a genocide. Please pay attention to the red bold text. Was I  not clear to you or was it a misunderstanding on your side?

By that standard, I can judge heavily about Turkish men. I have met many Turkish men from different regions in Turkey, since I have travelled around the country for a bit. This experience entitles me to say a bit about them. About 10% of the men had serious gambling problems, and their families suffered for this. About 95% of the Turkish men were cheating on either there wives, their fiancees, or their girlfriends. Some of them, were even cheating on their first wife with a second wife, on their second wife with a serious girlfriend, and with their serious girlfriend with one night stands. About 60% had used women to get visa´s or money or both. This would mean that by my experiences, those rules European countries have about Turkish younger men having difficulty to get a visa, are actually pretty sound.

What I could also do, is just recognize the limit of my own experiences, and recognize my lack of knowledge on the issue of ALL Turkish men, instead of generalizing.

Barba, you are spot on with your description of Turkish men. The scope of that could be increased to cover most men on earth. You could safely say most, many, too many or whatever you like. We are not merely talking about observations though. On the contrary, what I mentioned in my previous post was about bureaucratic formalities, results of referandums etc.

Hayallah

It seems you again managed to divert the thread to TCK 301.  We have also similar laws that punishes insulting symbols, amblems, flags and president of foreign nations. Why does not anyone want it to be abolished as well? EU missed those i think . As far as i remember Turkish Minister of Justice  once exampled convictions because of similar laws like 301 in other countries...

When they passed a law banning crosses on the walls of schools in Italy, it resulted in a protest and those classrooms that hadn´t had crosses pinned up yet, did so Analogically, all Muslims in Switzerland should protest by building minarets in their houses. How cool does that sound?

(Sorry for making light of this thread but these bans are just absurd! Could it be that we´ve already reached the peak of tolerance and are now just bouncing back? That´s definitely not the world I´d like to live in! Let´s not make a European version of Saudi or I´ll have to emigrate somewhere less restrictive. Antarctica?  I hate cold!!!)

True but one needs to sit on the tip of an iceberg to be able to say that. Follow this reasoning:

- determine what is good and what is bad for the world

- establish institutions, rules and regulation to enforce it

- define what tolerance is and how much of it is healthy

- take financial and military action against those outside the circle

- and finally, question whether too much tolerance has been shown

I guess everyone else in Europe is already thinking along these lines. In my opinion, Europe is not the center of tolerance. On the contrary, Europe is the stronghold of a certain type of conservatism.  

That´s a good point Vineyards. The problem lies in the fact that establishing what´s best for the world is not something that can be easily defined. Values and traditions differ worldwide so it´s next to impossible to come up with a solution to satisfy all. Religious people will always argue it´s their religion, whichever it is, that should be the moral point of reference while non-religious people will argue otherwise. Furthermore, once a compromised world order is established, everyone outside the circle will be perceived as a threat to the values. Then the right of might takes place and the mightier side´s norms are imposed on the rest.

Europe, let alone the US, are perfect examples. On the one hand, they emphasise their internal  cultural differenciation, on the other, unless the minorities sit quietly and play according to the majority´s rules, they are demanded to change and accept the rules.

Having said that, I still think that minorities have more rights in Europe and the US than those outside it. It might be because of the number of immigrants, though.

Why would there be so many immigrants in Europe and US? There is no denying part of the incentive comes from the fact that those are wealth states and they advertise this point thanks to their being a center for mass media productions. A poor young man living in Kenya would not care a bit if American media did not target him giving him the idea that the US is a country of dreams, it is a place where dreams are fulfilled. This point is knowingly and strategically emphasized by the American propoganda machine. The ultimate purpose here is to create a pro-US sentiment in the third world countries. It is through this way that the US has that abnormal weight in the world´s economic and political scenes.

The Kenyan boy could ask you this question, how come the US and Europe have all these brands operating over here and everywhere? Who is the winning side in this equation? That guy will pay the US interest, profit and all sorts of other fees. He is free to love the US but he is not allowed to touch.

The punch line is, if you fly your flag all around the world, getting into financial, cultural, political relationships of all sorts, you end up with the migration problem.

The same thing happened to all the great empires including our own...

I think you covered the answer here. However it´s not the question of why there are so many immigrants here, but rather who should change their lifestyle. Should it be the host countries or maybe the immigrants, in the situations where compromise can´t be reached.

It´s easy to criticise the other side, regardless of whether you´re an immigrant or the person whose country is appealing immigrationwise. Immigrants criticise their new countries (that they have deliberately chosen) for not allowing their traditions or lifestyle. And they have a fair point, why should they not be able to practise their religion and traditions? The new countries, however, deal with immigrants from all kinds of states and it´s impossible to ensure everyone the rights that they ask for. That´s why I´m not surprised some aspects of the immigrants´ culture are not accepted. Let me just bring back the issue of burka(or niqab) and burkini - due to hygienic and safety regulations they´re not allowed in some places. Like it or not, but that´s how it is.

But, back on the subject, it´s easy to criticise west for how it´s treating eastern citizens while we lack the comparison. I mean, the number of westerners emigrating east is incomparably smaller than the other way around. Hypothetically, imagine that there are as many western immigrants in the east as there are eastern immigrants in the west. Do you expect the eastern countries suddenly changing their rules to cater for the western idea of freedom? Allowing alcohol, more revealing clothes, being constantly criticised from within? I don´t think so...

You could ask say LIR about this. As far as I know she lives in Turkey. It would be curious to know whether anyone in this country has ever questioned what she wore, what she thought and how she acted. I bet she enjoys complete freedom here. I have friends from the US or the Britain who live in Istanbul. They form their own groups and socialize themselves just as they would back home. Some of them don´t even speak Turkish although they are employed here.

But then we do not even refer to these people as immigrants nor do we expect them to comply...

At any given time, I believe there are more people from West thant there from East. They have the freedom to travel relentlessly. They are welcome to settle down wherever they wish but they naturally prefer to be where the money is.

I think you missed my point, Vineyards. I´m not talking about tourists who are gladly accepted as a general rule. I´m talking about a huge, regular flow of immigration.

Of course there are immigrants in every country, but I doubt the number of people in their productive age coming to live and work is comparable in the west and east. And I don´t mean highly-skilled management people and engineers, I´m talking about people with basic education, limited knowledge of the language and unwillingness to assimilate. In other words, people who chose a country to live in but want it to be like it was in their homeland but for the economic situation.

I´m not saying that immigration is a bad thing, I am an immigrant myself, but one needs to be aware of the fact that they´ll have to adapt to new conditions, new rules and new situation. Coming to a new country, you know what you can expect, what laws are there and so on. So why choose to go somewhere you can´t adjust to?

I know Turkey is very welcoming, you deal a lot with tourists, but what is accepted in Turkey would not necessarily be accepted in Syria, Arab Emirates or Saudi.

My point is not that the east is bad and intolerant and the west is great and full of love. Of course not! I´m merely trying to point out that the west has a more difficult task dealing with immigration. Sometimes absurd situations arise when in a predominantly catholic country, you can´t put up a Christmas show with traditional Christmas carols because people of other beliefs (or none) might consider it insulting or insensitive of their religious feelings. I don´t think people in Muslim countries would enjoy being forced to eating during Ramadan so that their non-Muslim colleagues are not offended by being left alone at lunchtime.

Some ways of accomodating for other people´s beliefs are ridiculous - like the ban on Christmas carols, some are ridiculous in the exactly opposing manner - like the ban on minarets. It is difficult to find balance in a society that varied culturally, religiously and ethnically.

Why the crappy Polish users in this site are good at digressing the topic? Could somebody tell me about it?

narrow minded Switzerland

http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2009/12/2009124171829382892.html

Something interesting for those who said Turkish people were being discriminated with visa´s... A friend of mine is getting a visa for Holland, a semi-permanent one, so we checked for prices...For everybody applying for this is more then 250 euro´s....for everybody except for the Turks! For the Turkish people it´s...hold your breath.... 41 euro! More then 200 euro cheaper.

Oh my GOD! Discrimination!!!

read all comments with attention and must say coming back to topic that the world is going crazy and irresponsible,I don´t personally see anything wrong with minarets and islam in Europe.I guess there will be many who will support my point of view.Europen media seem to exaggerate and stereotype ppl´s opinion but i have a sad feeling one have to educate to understand that.

In EU once there was one perfect union between countries that was broken up due to partition not religious,political or social reason.It was Polish-Lithuanian union that lasted for ages and in which ppl florished as it encouraged them in culturall.political and sociological term

what is unknown will always cause fear..and Europeans do not bother to get to know others...

 I think you are giving a rather paranoid view of how Europe perceive Turks.  As for entering the UK now, it is much more difficult for anyone not residing within the EU or EEA and immigration is now restricted to highly skilled and skilled workforce and showing their bank balance is something they have to do in order to prove they have the required funds stipulated in the criteria for entry.  For short visits there are different rules and anyone outside the EEA have to prove they will return to their country of origin and not remain in the UK illegally.  I agree it is humiliating to show your personal things but we are now living in a society where no information is personal. 

Our island is becoming overcrowded and can only take so many people.  That is why there is such a restriction on immigration now. 

As for anti-muslim sentiment, can you not understand why there is this sentiment, when home grown muslims commit terrorist acts on home soil?  Many want to introduce Shaira law, ban alcohol, make women wear the Burka etc - why?  Should you not accept the law of the land you arrive in?  I think so.  There is not a problem with people wishing to practice their religion, but no one should ever try and impose their religion on to others.

I am afraid I have seen some examples lately in the UK where young muslims (and I will point out that they are not Turkish) have displayed themselves to be intolerant racist radicals and I wonder why those people have decided to settle in the UK.  And then when this sort of behaviour is displayed why UK nationals get upset.

Totally agree!

Libralady, basically you are saying these:

1- Europe is not very prejudiced against Turkey.

2- Only rich and highly skilled people are welcome in the UK.

3- Islam and Muslims are essentially bad therefore they deserve whatever they are subjected to.

And Trudy agrees with you. We can safely close this discussion and go ahead with our lives. The world will remain as it is. There will be forbidden islands, welfare zones open to only the previliged few. Those previliged few are welcome to running trusts, holdings, oil wells wherever they wish. In a nutshell, everything will go on the way it has always been. Just like some philosopher famously said, "Under the sun, everything is the same."

We all like to imagine there were a bit more decency in the world.

Imagine there´s no Heaven
It´s easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today

Imagine there´s no countries
It isn´t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace

You may say that I´m a dreamer
But I´m not the only one
I hope someday you´ll join us
And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world

You may say that I´m a dreamer
But I´m not the only one
I hope someday you´ll join us
And the world will live as one

Vineyards, I don´t think that´s what LL is saying. In some ways Europe IS prejudiced, no-one will deny, it´s only not always and every time as bad as some say / think, there are a lot of grey nuances between black and white. I don´t think immigrants should be rich to come to Europe but there is a difference between being rich and at arrival asking for social welfare - that´s what happens/happened a lot here (can´t talk about the UK). Skills? Yes, very much needed and welcome. But in no way it means only people with higher education as university, just people able to learn money for their living in a sufficient way. For your last remark: I sincerely hope you don´t really think that´s the idea around here. It isn´t. The idea is - like LL said - people are welcome to have their own religion with own houses of prayer though it´s not very appreciated when people are forcing their believes on to other people. I think every sane person will understand that only a minority of immigrants have ideas that conflict with the already existing culture of a country. 

maybe europe has reached the time where its better for european women to wear burkas?

as for minarets i would absolutely hate to hear that unpleasant noise from its top.

 A matter of taste

personally I have nothing against

yep, me neither, I think that the variety is great.

Now???  Harumph!!! I when I encountered UK Customs over 20 years ago with a ticket out in two weeks, plenty of funds, paid for hotel accomodation and still it was a damned hassle.  They went through every item in my baggage.  They all but took things apart. I had to open everything up, went through every item of my underwear.  It was damned insulting. It´s fortunate I travel light, just a few changes of garments, basic toiletries and some vitamines.  I guess it was the way they did it that was so insulting.  No problem, I can take my money and talent someplace else.

I have been in a number of other European countries, Britain was by far the worse as far as the demeanour of customs. 

You must be a suspicious looking person, Alameda

I went to Britain for a ten-day trip back in 1994 or 1993 and all I heard after presenting my Polish passport and explaining I was there to sightsee castles, was "Enjoy your stay"

Strange how people react....personally I would find it very reassuring that customs were checking people so thoroughly both before and after flying to protect MY safety!

When flying out of the UK I always find it very reassuring to see them checking everyone so carefully.

In addition, if you knew just how often customs officers found items (drugs, weapons, illegal goods, even live animals in horrible conditions) that were trying to be smuggled into this country, you may understand why they have to be so thorough!

My dear, if they checked everyone in the manner I was checked, they would have to employ many more agents, and the delays would be unacceptable.

That would seem to be the case, but other than most definitly not looking British, and having a name that was not Northern European, there wasn´t much I would think suspicious.  My garments were not in any way bizzar or unkempt, (other than the normal wear and tear of a trans Atlantic flight) and I did not have any strange cosmetics.  Perhaps they were too nice, who knows?  Of course, to me it seems it probably was my more exotic appearance and professional cloths that set off suspicion.........what ever it was, it´s was enough to cause me to never cross a Brittish Commonwealth country again.  The world is larger than the British Commonwealth countries, who are happy to see me and are hospitable as well.

Which is all to say, I think it was a result of racist, ethnic bias.........

I don´t like this comment....

My very Turkish looking partner was surprised about how easy going the Dutch customs were. In Turkey, Ataturk airport, he almost got into a fight with the pasport checkers there, since they asked for this pasport twice, and then tried to convince him that he was a criminal with a fake pasport. At the first check, they said everything was okay. He went out to smoke, and when he came back inside he was checked again. At this second check, a commander was asked to come, and took out one of this magnifying glasses, and said "this passport is fake"... What a load of...well, you know...

Getting out of the plane in Holland, ofcourse this very criminal looking Turkish citizen was scared that he would have to go through the whole LONG process of checking again. Instead, the passport control asked him "so, where are you going? Oh, and why are you going there? Okay, have a nice holiday and have fun in Holland!" and he even got a great smile from the policeman after this long round of questions.

The thing is...some people have bad experiences..some people have good experiences. These personal experiences don´t say much about the feelings of an entire country.

 You may think that....or you may just consider that Customs are merely working on "probability"!!!!  If 80% of illegal entries and/or smuggling comes from people of certain ethnic origin, then they are foolish to NOT search people of that ethnic origin eh?

You may call it racism (and maybe in some cases it is) but you can also call it "working effectively"

Well, I think (and there have been studies that prove my point, to which I will not provide a link) it´s a vastly exagerated claim.  Where you put the microscope is where you will find the germs.

It´s not intellegent, it is reactionary and racist..........and it´s not effective. 

BUSSIGNY, Switzerland — A Swiss businessman appalled by his fellow countrymen´s decision to ban minarets has extended a chimney above his company building into a minaret in protest.

"It was scandalous that the Swiss voted for the ban. Now we have the support of all the far-right parties across Europe. This is shameful," Guillaume Morand, who owns a chain of shoe stores, told AFP.

The businessman, who is not a Muslim, explained that the he had constructed the mock minaret at his building near western Switzerland´s city of Lausanne in protest, and at the same time, to "send a message of peace.

Assyrian Church Bell Tower in Turkey Threatened in Retaliation for Swiss Minaret Ban

Diyarbakir, Turkey -- Following the referendum banning minarets in Switzerland, 3 persons visiting the 1,750 year old Assyrian [also known as Chaldean and Syriac] Church of Virgin Mary in Diyarbakir allegedly threatened priest Yusuf Akbulut by saying "Switzerland is banning minarets and we will ban bell towers. You will demolish the bell tower."

More

***********

So far for ´open mindedness´.....

Interesting to know.....

ARCHITECT OF SWISS MINARET BAN IS A TURK

(ANSAmed) - ANKARA, DECEMBER 9 - One of the architects of the controversial Swiss referendum that resulted in a ban on the construction of minarets has a Turkish heritage, daily Milliyet reported on Wednesday. Born in the Aegean province of Izmir to a Turkish father and a Swiss mother, Soli Pardos family moved to Switzerland when he was 5 years old, the daily said. Swiss voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional ban on minarets on November 29, barring construction of the iconic mosque towers in a surprise vote that put Switzerland at the forefront of a European backlash against a growing Muslim population. Muslim groups in Switzerland and abroad condemned the vote as biased and anti-Islamic. The referendum by the nationalist Swiss Peoplés Party, or SVP, labeled minarets as symbols of rising Muslim political power that could one day transform Switzerland into an Islamic nation. Pardo also said minarets are used as symbols in Europe, but added: I do not have any reactions against Muslims, and I do not accept that there is Islamaphobia in Switzerland. Pardo, who is the leader of the Geneva Canton for the SVP, said his father was a small-scale industrialist and passed away in 1976 when Pardo was 21. Regarding the referendum, he said: We do not believe that the minarets are linked to worship because no calls to prayer are made from the minarets. We are not against building mosques but against 5- to 6-meter-tall minarets. The initiative was approved 57.5 to 42.5% by some 2.67 million voters. (ANSAmed).

Source

So it´s true...everything in the world IS Turkish... really EVERYTHING!