Swiss MPs Vote for Burqa Ban

Sydney Morning Herald, September 28, 2011

Swiss MPs have approved a far-right move to impose a ban on the burqa or other face coverings in some public places, including on public transport.

With 101 votes against 77, the lower chamber of the house approved the motion, which was titled “masks off!”, on Wednsday.

The draft bill will still have to be examined by the upper chamber.

Put forward by Oskar Freysinger, a politician of the Swiss far-right SVP party, the motion requires “anyone addressing a federal, cantonal or communal authority exercising his or her functions, to present themselves with their faces uncovered.”

Burqas would also be banned on public transport, while “authorities can ban or restrict access to public buildings to such individuals in order to guarantee the security of other users.”

{snip}

France was the first European Union country to impose a ban on the burqa in public places, while Belgium joined it some months later.

On September 16, the Dutch government also agreed to a ban on the full Islamic veil under a deal with the far-right party of the anti-immigration MP Geert Wilders.

Topics:

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Anonymous

    I really do admire Mr. Freysinger. We could use his kind in the U.S. Here is a very powerful speech he gave on Islam and its encroachment upon Sweden, very very well spoken man!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUvbJ8uM6Qw

  • Anonymous

    YES, BABY STEPS.

    GOOD! The baby is walking!

    What we have lost sight of here, is that you don’t stop a groaning behemoth of a sociopolitical order like multiculturalism overnight. (Actually, it has been creaking to a standstill because it is out of gas, but it has to roll further based on sheer momentum…it took forty years to get here. )

    Look, we started the counter-counter revolution years ago. It IS rolling. It TAKES BABY STEPS!

    Unless you want a war…? I don’t.

    It may happen anyway, but the point is, step forward. Congratulate, encourage, and lunge forward again.

    God, if I hear one more whine here!

  • Anonymous

    With 101 votes against 77, the lower chamber of the house approved the motion, which was titled “masks off!”, on Wednsday.

    “Masks off!” I like it! Very catchy! I hope other countries pursuing the own burqa bans will adopt their own version of this, it strikes me as a real winner of a slogan for deislamization legislation. We are constantly told that Mohammed’s HazMat suit for women is a religious expression, and that therefore we should “tolerate” its “diversity” — but really the burqa is just a huge mask. And people don’t like those who hide behind masks. Nobody trusts a masked man — we associate them with robbery — so it’s only natural we shouldn’t trust a masked woman either. Especially a masked woman from some far-off (and clearly hostile) culture hailing from somewhere over on the other side of the world.

    Also, I can’t help noticing that within this very brief article they manage to drop the smear term “far-right” twice. Not just “right of center” or even “right wing”, but “FAR right.” Zero use of the word “conservative.” Zero use of other, more accurate synonyms such as “traditional” or “patriotic”. I wouldn’t even complain about “nativist.” But the lamestreamers have spent the past several decades equating the words “far right” with words like “skinheads” and “neo-nazis” and “white hoods” and “burning crosses” etc, that this usage is (deliberately) damaging to our credibility in the mind of the average reader.

    Considering most conservatives really aren’t “right wing” these days, the smearing of moderate, traditionalist patriots like Geert Wilders with the “far-right” label, is really unfair. It only goes to show just how far the left has succeeded in dragging the ideological middle over towards them. As other posters on AR have mentioned over the years, the left currently possesses the power to define the terms of debate. We’re constantly forced to argue on THEIR terms. This puts us at a considerable disadvantage in EVERY discussion of any importance.

    But then, you probably already knew that.

  • Anonymous

    That should have been *Switzerland, not Sweden, my apologies.