Why? Because the Swiss People’s Party is, with noticeable success, fighting to bring massive immigration, including Islamic immigration, under control in Switzerland before this rigidly neutral, quite independent, non-European Union country loses its uniquely Swiss character. (Hardly unimaginable given that 21.1 percent of Swiss residents are foreign.) This makes men like Freysinger a dire threat to the multicultural world order. Hence the very nasty, but meaningless names.
(…)
Discussing the “long progression” of Islam — now 4.3 percent of Switzerland’s mainly Christian population of 7.5 million — into Swiss life, he explains that what concerns him is “not the (Islamic) religion, but the law,” meaning Islamic law, or Sharia. And while there is religious freedom in Switzerland for new mosques, this same freedom does not extend to minarets, which he sees as political more than religious symbols. “Minarets are not necessary for the practice” of Islam, he explains.
Indeed, historically, the minaret has often served as a sign of Islamic political power. In our own era, it may be seen to symbolize the introduction of Islamic law into formerly non-Islamic societies.
“In that case,” Freysinger continued, “we said: `OK. We’ll attack the symbol. It’s always about symbols because symbols have a big truth behind them. And so we attack this symbol of conquering Islam and we say: You are welcome in our country, but there is one law, and one constitution for every person in this country. And there is no special law for an Islamic girl, or an Islamic man. There is no Sharia. Nothing.”
