So what about he bell towers that ring out before a standard Christian church service on Sundays and some times Wednesdays? Or is this just a "We were here first" relgious/xenophobic kinda thing. I do not see any real difference between the two as they both serve the same function.

Or is this just a "We were here first" relgious/xenophobic kinda thing
#2 | Posted by GotTruth

Sure sounds like it.

Wow. Banning a building style, how dumb. Although I did have to look up "minaret", so I prolly would've voted against it in the voter booth because I hate marionettes and this legislation sounds like it'd take care of that problem.

DEMOCRACY WORKS!

I've little doubt there are many political districts in the US where such a ban, if put on the ballot for popular vote, would pass.

From Bloomberg:

Legal heroin and illegal minarets hmmm....

Christians vs Muslims is brewing. One day there will be a global war with billions dying.

Their country, they are welcome to do as they wish.

Only four percent of their country is Muslim, yet the Swiss are willing to sacrifice their reputation as a tolerant and inclusive country in order to protect themselves against an architectural feature.

Say what you will about the United States -- and many Europeans have -- but our voters haven't passed a referendum this xenophobic and reactionary against our immigrants.

Good for them. I cannot believe how many Muslim-lovers there are here. Do you not remember anything about 9/11? We are infidels to them; we are vermin. They will be the downfall of our country someday.

Their country, they are welcome to do as they wish.

#9 | Posted by MSgt

That's a fact.

Ok, I have essentially no problem with societies melding together. The problem I have is when it is a one way street and not open both ways. Are "Christians" welcomed in any "Muslim" countries? Why not fix what is wrong in your country before bringing your problems to another? Look at the Central Americans and Caribbean Islanders coming into the US or the Malaysians/Indonesians going to Australia as other great examples. People want a better life, that I understand. But there comes a point you need to take charge and fix what is wrong in your own country instead of bringing the problems elsewhere.

Over 5% of Switzerland's population is now Muslim. When did this happen? I can tell you it was not so 50 years ago. The people feel threatened by a foreign influence in a country that has essentially had none in centuries. Don't the "native" swiss people have the right to determine what is right and wrong in their country? It hasn't been a country of mass immigration.

World wide people are feeling threatened by these influences on the status quo whatever the reason for these for the influence and are tired of it...

#11 | Posted by gotchamedia

Go ahead, chicken little-run in circles screamijng about the Sky falling.....

We believe you....really....

Damn that errant "j"-I've complained to Microsoft about it popping up whenever it wants too-and they won't do a thing about it....;>D

I'll bet they hate cell phone towers.

I cannot believe how many Muslim-lovers there are here. Do you not remember anything about 9/11? We are infidels to them; we are vermin. They will be the downfall of our country someday.

I can't believe how scared some Americans have become after 9/11. There are 1.57 billion Muslims in the world, including 2.4 million in the United States. They've been living peacefully in our country and many, many others. Blaming all Muslims for the actions of a few extremists is like blaming all Christians for the Oklahoma City bombing.

Over 5% of Switzerland's population is now Muslim.

Five whole percent? Run for your lives!

I'm surprised the swiss actually decided something. I thought they'd just claim neutrality and sell everybody some chocolate.

Are "Christians" welcomed in any "Muslim" countries?
Lebanon.

They WERE in Iraq ( as were the jews)until the God's Only Party aka the GOP installed a shia run theocracy. In fact they were a big chunk of the population.

In saudi arabia they are welcome to die to protect the royals' golden toilets, other than that, not so much.

Glad that's over with. Now what are we gonna do about all those jews?

---switzerland---

Organized relgions are all complicit in violence, fear, greed and ultimately raw power. They are all anti-democratic. They should simply be ignored by civilized people.

Maybe in another 500 years, if there is anybody still here after they have done their thing.

The countries that form the 56-member Organization of the Islamic Conference are now lobbying a little-known Geneva-based U.N. committee to agree that a treaty protecting religions is necessary.

The move would be a first step toward drafting an international protocol that would eventually be put before the General Assembly
The proposal may have some support in the General Assembly. For several years the Islamic Conference has successfully passed a nonbinding resolution at the General Assembly condemning "defamation of religions."

If the treaty was approved, any of the U.N.'s 192 member states that ratified it would be bound by its provisions. Other countries could face criticism for refusing to join.

don't say shit about mohammed.

"Turnout was 53 per cent, a relatively low figure by the standards of Swiss democracy. Opponents of the measure saw this as a reflection of apathy among many voters who would not have approved of the ban."

Games, and elections, are won by those who show up.

"It has now emerged that sharia courts with these powers have been set up in London, Birmingham, Bradford and Manchester with the network's headquarters in Nuneaton, Warwickshire. Two more courts are being planned for Glasgow and Edinburgh.

Sheikh Faiz-ul-Aqtab Siddiqi, whose Muslim Arbitration Tribunal runs the courts, said he had taken advantage of a clause in the Arbitration Act 1996.

Under the act, the sharia courts are classified as arbitration tribunals. The rulings of arbitration tribunals are binding in law, provided that both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their case.

Siddiqi said: "We realised that under the Arbitration Act we can make rulings which can be enforced by county and high courts. The act allows disputes to be resolved using alternatives like tribunals. This method is called alternative dispute resolution, which for Muslims is what the sharia courts are."

The disclosure that Muslim courts have legal powers in Britain comes seven months after Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, was pilloried for suggesting that the establishment of sharia in the future "seems unavoidable" in Britain."

Don't ever blame a liberal for having foresight -- that's for sure.

"The world is changing much faster than we realize. Europe will be a Muslim continent in less than 50 years. In fact, the only Western country that is currently regenerating itself as a Christian nation is the United States -- and the only reason that is occurring is due to the steady stream of immigrants flowing in from Mexico."

Eyes wide shut - the Liberal

I think all of Europe is looking at the muslim issue since some of the recent terrorism events over the last 8 years---this exemplifies those feelings--you can vocally appear tolerant (look at me, aren't I tolerant--I must be a good person) but when what you tolerate turns on you, most people change quickly---I would love to know if and how the European immigration policies and laws have changed as it relates to muslims.

>Over 5% of Switzerland's population is now Muslim.

>Five whole percent? Run for your lives!

I'm sure at some time England had 5% muslim population.

Eyes even wider shut - the Drudge Retort

#24 | Posted by happyending

...Seriously...We have similar ADR here. Conciliation Courts, Arbitration, Mediation, all can be legally enforceable but can also operate on whatever principles the parties agree to. I don't exactly see how this is a big deal when "both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their case." If people get divorced and their divorce decree has some messed up but legal clauses, they still get enforced.

"The Muslim way immigrate, procreate, populate, infiltrate, overtake
Unsustainable birthrates in France, Germany, Italy, England and Spain, combined with increased Muslim immigration to those countries, have created the "perfect storm" for the cultural transformation of Western Europe.

The strategy is based on immigrant families simply out-populating their host country. While it is difficult to imagine something like this occurring in a totalitarian regime like China or North Korea, in democratic countries it is not only possible, it is happening right now.

Take Great Britain, for instance. In England, family size averages 1.8 children per couple. Compare that to 8.1 children per couple for Muslim immigrant families and what we see is a little startling if not mind-blowing. The cultural transformation of Europe is driven entirely by Western society abandoning its biblical mandate to "be fruitful and multiply!"

The Muslim average of 8.1 children per family verses 1.8 for Brits produces a net gain of 6.3 children per family. Keep that up over three generations of voting age adults and the social, political, and financial control of Western democracies is not only likely, it is inevitable. Some European countries are now incenting natural-born citizens to have more children, but it is too late. Population experts say the trend is irreversible. Within 50 years, the European Union will be under Muslim control and Europe will cease to exist as we know it."

This is the kind of math even drudgies can figure out.

Under the act, the sharia courts are classified as arbitration tribunals. The rulings of arbitration tribunals are binding in law, provided that both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their case.

So if two parties agree among themselves to let their dispute be settled by a sharia arbitration tribunal, instead of putting it into the court system, this is a terrible thing and we all have to hide under our beds because of the scary scary Muslims?

Muslims are not going to overtake the West by outspawning the rest of us. Their birth rates will decline as they become more secular, affluent and Westernized.

Groups that have ridiculously high birth rates in the third world do not keep having children at that rate if they immigrate to more affluent countries. They move there for a better life, and their children have fewer children when they succeed at achieving one.

Groups that have ridiculously high birth rates in the third world do not keep it up when their countries become more prosperous. As Iran has become more affluent, the birth rate among its Muslims has dropped to a level lower than the United States.

All we need to do is import dingoes....

"Dingo ate your baby" and all...

#30 Posted by RCADE....You, sir, are a head-in-the-sand fool.

Only four percent of their country is Muslim, yet the Swiss are willing to sacrifice their reputation as a tolerant and inclusive country in order to protect themselves against an architectural feature.

Say what you will about the United States -- and many Europeans have -- but our voters haven't passed a referendum this xenophobic and reactionary against our immigrants.

#10 | Posted by rcade at 2009-11-29 12:53 PM

The vast, vast majority of Swiss are, uh, Swiss. If over 90% of Americans were WASPS's, do you really think things would be any different? No way, Jos. ALL Americans are immigrants.

Btw, who ever said the Swiss were tolerant and inclusive? Do you have any idea how difficult it is to move to "die Schweiz"? Forget it, you can't. Not unless you bring a LOT of Francs with you.

Here, RCade:

try to find some evidence of "tolerant and inclusive" in this:

You, sir, are a head-in-the-sand fool.

I can't believe how scared Americans have become. Are we really the same country that took back Europe from the Nazis? Oh, my God! The Muslims are going to outfuck us! We must not allow them to build minarets! Run for your lives!

"Are we really the same country that took back Europe from the Nazis?"

What, do you have a mouse in your pocket, rcade? You didn't do shit to take back europe. You're a pansy-assed nerd with a web site which continuously espouses efforts that demean US military.

>The Muslims are going to outfuck us!

Yes!, that's exactly the modus operandi, einstein. You can put your head in the sand all you want but facts speak for themselves. Google interpolation.

"Muslims are not going to overtake the West by outspawning the rest of us. Their birth rates will decline as they become more secular, affluent and Westernized."

Let me start w/ a classic DR retort when you are talking out your ass and are clueless...

Link, please?

But since you won't find one, how do you explain the FACT that that is exactly what muslims not only want to do but are succeeding in accomplishing just that?

To paraphrase a few good men, "who is going to stand on that wall...you lt. weinberg?

That's you rcade. You're lt. weinberg.

God help us all.

happyending-and gluon....

Two MORE chicken littles-from the "Gomers Only" Party....what a surprise........running in circles--screaming about the sly falling-filling their diapers........

I do have a question though.

If the Swiss ban Muslim Minarets--won't that just mean only criminals will have them?
Are the Police gonna be able to build their own Minarets to defend themselves?
I think the Swiss need their own version of the NRA on this issue.

#34 Posted by RCADE....No, we are not the same country that took back Europe from the Nazis. I lived through WWII and I can tell you as a fact that if the American population of 2009 had been around in 1940 we would have lost WWII. Too much the population of 2009 is a bunch of PC limp wristed twits.

Frank, I vowed 3 years ago to never respond to you since you're such an enormous dipshit, but I'll do so now in hopes you can enlighten me...just this once.

"The birth rate a society needs to break even and not start to disappear is 2.1 babies per woman. Anything less than that, the culture disappears in a matter of three generations or more. The math can't be argued. No culture has ever survived once it reached the breaking point 1.3 babies per woman."

Now imagine you had a brain that can perform simple arithmetic -- how do not understand this scenario?

"Now let's take a look at this globally. United States birth rate is 2.1, New Zealand 1.9, Canada 1.5, Germany and Austria 1.3, Russia and Italy 1.2, Spain 1.1. Now let's take a look at some Muslims countries. Afghanistan 47.02 per 1000 people, Albania 15.08 per 1000 people, Niger 7.46, Mali 7.42, Somalia 6.76, Afghanistan 6.69,Yemen 6.58. I think you can start to get the idea here. Muslim populations are filling up the birth shortfalls all throughout Europe and have already started taking over the European culture. They are imposing Sharia Law on old Europe already and very soon, the Europe we know will be gone."

Maybe not outfucking us, einstein, but certainly having mnore babies.

Enjoy!

"No, we are not the same country that took back Europe from the Nazis."

That's exactly right! Folks like rcade and frank would have been enscripted then repeatedly beaten by friendly fire for no other reason than being themselves.

#34 Posted by RCADE....No, we are not the same country that took back Europe from the Nazis. I lived through WWII and I can tell you as a fact that if the American population of 2009 had been around in 1940 we would have lost WWII. Too much the population of 2009 is a bunch of PC limp wristed twits.

#37 | POSTED BY GLUON AT 2009-11-29 07:25 PM | REPLY | FLAG: Geeee. Thanks Dad.

What, do you have a mouse in your pocket, rcade? You didn't do shit to take back europe. You're a pansy-assed nerd with a web site which continuously espouses efforts that demean US military.

I love people who use the Retort for years and make statements like yours about how much the site and I suck.

Thanks for earning me money, tool. I hope the Retort goes on sucking just as much for the next four years so I can continue to bank on your misery.

Since you feel so strongly about the Muslims outfucking us, I think it's fair to ask this question: Are you doing your part by having a giant number of kids? Or if you're too old, are you telling your kids to get out there and take nine for the team?

I'm from a family of Irish Catholics and married one. My mom's one of seven and grandmom's one of 12. My wife's one of nine herself. We had three kids and her other siblings have around 22. Those kids have around six kids.

So how many kids have you produced to fight this war?

Islam is a dangerous religion that should be outlawed.

are you telling your kids to get out there and take nine for the team?

Posted by rcade at 2009-11-29 10:18 PM | Reply

Huh????

Huh?

People who think the Muslims are fighting a population war should be out there having giant families to defeat them. It's the patriotic thing to do.

People who think the Muslims are fighting a population war should be out there having giant families to defeat them. It's the patriotic thing to do.

Posted by rcade at 2009-11-29 10:25 PM | Reply

Dude like I don't get it take nine for the team?? You mean take Nine months or what??

I don't agree that Americans of 2009 would lose WWII as the 1940 generation.

When 9/11 occurred, if it had been a Nation against us and this was war, Americans would have enlisted to fight without a draft.

9/11 showed the response of Americans.
I still remember the newspapers saying "the lion awakens". America woke up - for a short while.

I still fly the American Flag as I always have before 9/11. Most are gone these days.

But, the country is just quiet - not totally ignorant. Americans just don't like waking up quickly, but will when the alarm goes off.

#46 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-11-29 10:29 PM
***"Dude like I don't get it take nine for the team?? You mean take Nine months or what??"

He isn't talking "inches" Larry, I think R's saying "have a bunch of offspring for the team"...

Granted "inches" is a lot funnier though...

#46 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-11-29 10:29 PM
***"Dude like I don't get it take nine for the team?? You mean take Nine months or what??"

He isn't talking "inches" Larry, I think R's saying "have a bunch of offspring for the team"...

Granted "inches" is a lot funnier though...

Posted by Capt_Of_Uranus at 2009-11-29 11:34 PM | Reply

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR THE EXPLANATION !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have been racking My brain ever since He said that trying to figure it out. Thank You once again.

Larry

If you ever go hiking in the Swiss Alps, you'll notice that all the peaks have giant crosses on top of them.

hahaha

the ban won't last

all this will do is encourage more muslim migration and birthing in swizerland and denmark.

the more you hate
the more we show up

we seduce your men and woman.

birth half swiss half children and slowly take over.

ask south east asia.

you should go back to ignoring us. I guess because the population wasn't growing as quickly as conservative morons wanted it to the ban was put into affect.

once the fringe "afraid" conservatives get their mitts on public policy, all the problems ensue.

Will they be banning dwarfs as well?

"I love people who use the Retort for years and make statements like yours about how much the site and I suck."

I don't believe I ever said your site sucked, rcade. I've searched for other sitesblogs and yours is the easiest to navigate between articles and comments.

So you have that going for you...

But I do think you're sort of a candy-ass. But I think all liberals are so you're in great company.

At any rate, keep up the great site and as a capitalist, good luck w/ your profits.

you should go back to ignoring us. I guess because the population wasn't growing as quickly as conservative morons wanted it to the ban was put into affect.

once the fringe "afraid" conservatives get their mitts on public policy, all the problems ensue.

#52 | Posted by klifferd at 2009-11-30 08:18 AM | Reply | Flag

Klifferd why do Islamic immigrants refuse to integrate into the societies? Don't you see this as the real issue. Western countries are for the most part very socially tolerant. Yet Islamic immigrants bring their intolerant, failed social behaviors into these societies and the citizens don't want that. One gets the impression of the Islamic immigrants acting like Locus. There is a reason these civilizations have social order and economic stability. Unlike the countries where the immigrants are from.

we seduce your men and woman.
#52 | Posted by klifferd at 2009-11-30 08:18 AM | Reply | Flag

Only one?

"Oh, my God! The Muslims are going to outfuck us!"

LOL...they're ALREADY doing that.

What's the deal? Minarets are kinda pretty. This sounds about as obnoxious as saying "you cannot build a church with stained glass or a bell tower". I think it goes back to penis envy. Abraham's dysfunctional family has been adorning its houses of worship with phalluses for quite awhile, but minarets generally have more girth than a steeple. I think it's bringing out some lingering insecurity.

You'd think a some interesting architecture would go well with the nation's theme of chocolate, cuckoo clocks, and universe-destroying subterranean particle accelerators.

The Muslims are going to outfuck us!

"Klifferd why do Islamic immigrants refuse to integrate into the societies? "

this is a phallacy.

you just notice the muslims that stick to their culture and think they don't integrate. (hijabs and beards)

most muslims don't have head scarves or beards and you don't even notice them.

what you should be asking is why do Muslims integrate more easily into American society rather then European society.

i have an easy answer, euriopeans aren't as socially accepting as you think they are.

There is a lot more segregation in Europe then in the states.

Thus the issues they see are really the fault of their intolerant systems.

we seduce your men and woman

How terrible. Do your worst.

Not you personally, though, seeing how you're a dude... but you get the point.

Only four percent of their country is Muslim, yet the Swiss are willing to sacrifice their reputation as a tolerant and inclusive country in order to protect themselves against an architectural feature.-Rcade

If you haven't noticed, Britain is being overrun by Muslims at a terrific pace. It seems that the Swiss don't want the same thing happening to their country, and I say good for them. Put a stop to it in any way you can as quickly as you can and you just might save your country from being over taken.

I can't believe how scared some Americans have become after 9/11. -Rcade

Oh, big brave Rcade isn't afraid of no Muslim. Fear of another attack in this country is based in logic and it is not a shameful thing. If you fear something the more prepared you are for it. You libs amaze me with your attacks on people who have a very valid reason for being fearful. You act as if no attack will ever happen again and if it does it won't be a big deal.

You have learned nothing from 9/11 and other terrorist attacks. People who are very high up the chain and are responsible for our security are very fearful of another attack. They believe that the number one threat to us is a nuke going off in a US city. I have watched a special about this and one man said that he wakes up in a cold sweat having been dreaming of what could happen to us.

But you go ahead with you fearlessness, Rcade. It really shows your ignorance.

"I've little doubt there are many political districts in the US where such a ban, if put on the ballot for popular vote, would pass."

Why do so many posters immediately feel the need to shit on the US in any thread that portrays another coutnry negatively? Any time something "bad" happens overseas that hasn't happened here, someone feels obligated to turn it into a negative against the US anyway - often using hypothetical (aka imaginary) scenarios like the one above to do so.

What is the reason for this? Seems completely unnecessary - not to mention weird that people seem to be somewhat bigoted against their own nationality.

Klifferd why do Islamic immigrants refuse to integrate into the societies? Don't you see this as the real issue. Western countries are for the most part very socially tolerant. Yet Islamic immigrants bring their intolerant, failed social behaviors into these societies and the citizens don't want that. One gets the impression of the Islamic immigrants acting like Locus. There is a reason these civilizations have social order and economic stability. Unlike the countries where the immigrants are from.

#55 | Posted by midtowncowboy

Ha Ha!! You live in the United States, right? Why don't you run that statement past an American Indian and see if you get your teeth knocked out.
All three of the middle eastern religions push their crap on unwilling recipients.

Oh, big brave Rcade isn't afraid of no Muslim. Fear of another attack in this country is based in logic and it is not a shameful thing. If you fear something the more prepared you are for it. You libs amaze me with your attacks on people who have a very valid reason for being fearful. You act as if no attack will ever happen again and if it does it won't be a big deal.

#63 | Posted by everlong

By that logic we should all be afraid every time we get into a car. Fear is useful in short term emergency situations. It is not useful over the long term.

By the way, I know people who are constantly in fear while they're driving. It makes them horrible drivers and more likely to kill themselves or someone else.

I have no patience for the racism and mindless fluff regarding how banning 4 minarets can stop the population growth of a particular religion. It's just ludacris.

That said. Muslims need to do a better P.R. job. Currently the right wing is making all of the statements. I would day that Muslims should also crack down on extremists in thier midst, but it's not like every religion doesn't have their problems.

HappyEnding - you don't have to be a dick about it.

Fear of another attack in this country is based in logic

Do not mistake fear for prudence. Fear is illogical. Prudence is not. People who allow themselves to be motivated by fear act irrationally and do not consider anything beyond the immediate consequences their actions.

You have learned nothing from 9/11

I would say the same of you. You are too myopic to realize even now the terrible consequences of our post-9/11 fears. We sacrificed our civil liberties on the altar of "homeland security" because chickenshits like you were too weak at the knees to stand by our principles rather than our politicians.

People who are very high up the chain and are responsible for our security are very fearful of another attack.

Not quite. Those people tell you that they are fearful with the implication that you should be as well, but they rarely justify it with anything more than a lame reference to nuclear annihilation. A fearful populace does not question the policies its government enacts for their "protection".

one man said that he wakes up in a cold sweat having been dreaming of what could happen to us.

What a fucking chump. I'm sure the republicans aren't complaining, though. He's what they refer to as "the base". People like that are more of a threat to our freedom than al qaida. Terrorists can blow up our buildings, but they can't take away our freedom. Only our government, enabled by pussy-ass "patriots", has that power.

Everlong: Explain to me how it makes people safer to ban an architectural feature associated with Muslims or conjure hysteria about Muslim birthrates.

That's what we're talking about, not the threat of Islamic fanatics detonating dirty nukes.

"I would day that Muslims should also crack down on extremists in thier midst, but it's not like every religion doesn't have their problems. "

There is no other mainstream religion that is currently used to justify/inspire violence on anywhere near the scale that Islam currently is. I don't know why otherwise intelligent people feel obligated to pretend it isn't so.

"no other mainstream religion that is currently used to justify/inspire violence on anywhere near the scale that Islam currently is"

so banning minarettes helps curb islamic violence?

are their statistics that show how an increase in the number of minarettes in a country are directly related to the number of extremists in that country?

By that logic we should all be afraid every time we get into a car. Fear is useful in short term emergency situations. It is not useful over the long term.

#66 | Posted by RastaCyborg

No, it is not the same logic. People drive all the time but we are not attacked all the time. All I'm saying is it is perfectly natural and even healthy for people to fear being attacked by a crazed organization. I am more so saying that it is mean spirited to attack anyone who is fearful of something happening. Remember the cold war? People lived in fear every day of an impending nuclear attack. The same danger faces us today but it is closer to actually becoming a reality. Because as soon as a terrorist gets his hands on a nuclear device it will be used on us.

"Because as soon as a terrorist gets his hands on a nuclear device it will be used on us."

once again.. banning minarets will prevent this how???

"Do not mistake fear for prudence. Fear is illogical. Prudence is not. People who allow themselves to be motivated by fear act irrationally and do not consider anything beyond the immediate consequences their actions."

It is not irrational to have a fear that we will be attacked again. It is very natural actually. And I never implied that those who do fear are driven and controlled by that fear. It is more like something that is kept in the back of the mind. Knowing that it is very possible that we could be attacked worse than we were on 9/11.

"I would say the same of you. You are too myopic to realize even now the terrible consequences of our post-9/11 fears. We sacrificed our civil liberties on the altar of "homeland security" because chickenshits like you were too weak at the knees to stand by our principles rather than our politicians."

What liberties did you lose? Exactly what were you stopped from doing? And during every major emergency this country has gone through, the government has enacted policies that can be construed as too harsh and unreasonable. It doesn't excuse it but it does explain it.

"What a fucking chump. I'm sure the republicans aren't complaining, though. He's what they refer to as "the base". People like that are more of a threat to our freedom than al qaida. Terrorists can blow up our buildings, but they can't take away our freedom. Only our government, enabled by pussy-ass "patriots", has that power."

This was a guy who was in charge of the actual actions and response we would have after a nuclear attack. He awoke in the fear that something would happen before he could complete his work. It is sad that you would call someone a chump who is privy to much more information than you about the dangers that face us today. And if a nuclear attack occurs in Washington, the terrorists most assuredly could take away many of our freedoms. If that did happen, and it could, this country would be in more turmoil, confusion, and desperation than we have ever witnessed.

I just happen to be a realist and I know that a nuke attack is a possibility. You shun people who are worried that it might happen which is shameful. You talk big but we'll see how tough you are when the shit really hits the fan.

#69 | Posted by ZombieHunter

"so banning minarettes helps curb islamic violence?"

No. I'm not for banning minarettes - or mosques which is what this thing is really trying to do. Pretty sure that law would be illegal in the US and it should be.

"are their statistics that show how an increase in the number of minarettes in a country are directly related to the number of extremists in that country?"

Of course not. I

I just find it annoying that part of being PC these days includes not criticizing any other people (in this case the Swiss) without taking an obligatory potshot at Americans and pretending that all religions are used to inspire violence on the same scale.

i'm allllll for fighting terrorists, but you have to work with muslims not against them.

because the terrorists are the enemies of the muslim people as well... but when you ban things like minarets and headscarves, all you do is make the average muslim either apathetic to the terrorists or sympathetic.

i don't see how a minaret ban will make muslims more apt to fighting extremism when an obvious declaration of war has been silently started against mainstream muslims instead of extremists only.

Everlong: Explain to me how it makes people safer to ban an architectural feature associated with Muslims or conjure hysteria about Muslim birthrates.-Rcade

I never said it would make them safer. I said it would help slow the growth of Muslims in that country. If you make it less comfortable for them then less of them will come to live there. Like I said, Europe is being completely overrun by Muslims. It is totally out of control over there and it is their own fault.

It's a shame to have to punish people of a certain religion, but they are the ones associated with suicide bombings and much of the strife in our world today. Muslims are causing problems every where they congregate to. Just look at the world and its geography and the population of Muslims in certain places. They have caused nothing but grief for people and the Swiss did something that they hoped would help stifle the growth of the population.

It is not irrational to have a fear that we will be attacked again. It is very natural actually.

I'm not arguing that it isn't natural. I'm arguing that it isn't rational or productive.

What liberties did you lose?

Read the 4th amendment. Read the 14th amendment. Those bits about unreasonable searches, warrants, and due process? Under the Patriot act, those rights can be conveniently ignored because some schmuck says so - all with little to no oversight. No one is watching the watchers. You said it yourself, "...during every major emergency this country has gone through, the government has enacted policies that can be construed as too harsh and unreasonable."

I just happen to be a realist and I know that a nuke attack is a possibility.

So is a meteor impact. I don't see the right collectively soiling itself over that possibility.

once again.. banning minarets will prevent this how???

#74 | Posted by klifferd

Did I say, or even imply that it would prevent an attack? No, I didn't. The Swiss did something that they hope will have an effect on more Muslims coming to live there. They don't want to turn out like Britain. It may not have been something that was stern, but they are trying what they can in order to slow the population growth of Muslims in their country. And I don't blame them.

So is a meteor impact. I don't see the right collectively soiling itself over that possibility.

#79 | Posted by ZombieHunter

Not a very good analogy. The percentage of us being attacked with a nuke is much higher than us getting hit by a meteor. And no one is soiling themselves. You libs just exaggerate the rational understanding that we are a target and people are planning to attack us as often as possible.

I agree that if someone lives in constant fear that we will be attacked it is not healthy. But to have a reasonable understanding that an attack is highly possible is just being realistic.

The percentage of us being attacked with a nuke is much higher than us getting hit by a meteor.

You don't know this.

If only the US were more like, say, Switzerland.

-Liberals

Oh wait.

You don't know this.

#82 | Posted by rcade

Okay, we get hit by small space stuff all the time. But I still stand by my belief that we are under a real threat of a nuclear attack. All it takes is one terrorist to get his hands on the right material. They will come up with the ability to manufacture a bomb with it as well. Then it's just a matter of walking across the border.

If you don't believe that they are not actively and vigorously attempting to acquire such material then you just aren't thinking like a terrorist.

"but when you ban things like minarets and headscarves, all you do is make the average muslim either apathetic to the terrorists or sympathetic."

I'm not looking to start a chicken or the egg type arguement here but a case can be made that you have this backwards: The bans are in response to avarage muslims being apathetic/slightly sympathetic to the extremists. If regular muslims were perceived to be a partner in tracking down extremists, there would be no suspicion surrounding them. They are largely perceived to be apathetic about extremists, making it easy for extremists to hide amongst them - which equates to indirect support. In my opinion, that perception is somewhat earned. Look at how CAIR responded to the Ft. Hood incident: "We're worried about a backlash from non-Muslim Americans." What about worrying about the preachers who taught that maniac that what he did was a religious duty? Isn't that more damaging to Islam than some idiot yanking on a headscarf in a grocery line? If they disagree with this form of Islam, why would they allow themselves to be tarnished by it constantly without ever lifting a finger to weed these people out?

"There is no other mainstream religion that is currently used to justify/inspire violence on anywhere near the scale that Islam currently is. I don't know why otherwise intelligent people feel obligated to pretend it isn't so.

#71 | Posted by Sully at 2009-11-30 01:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

Capitalism.

Well said, Sully. There just isn't anywhere near enough outcry from the Muslim community against the Muslims perpetrating horrific acts of violence against innocent civilians. Until they start speaking out they will be viewed as sympathetic to terrorist Muslims. Quite frankly, I believe that many of them are sympathetic towards them. One thing is certain. They haven't shown any displeasure or opposition to what the terrorists have been doing.

Here's a perfect example. I know a guy from Iran who used to run a sports bar. After 9/11 he refused to have any of the 15 televisions programmed to a news station. He didn't want anyone of his customers to see any of the news about 9/11. And this was right after it happened when everyone wanted any and all of the information they could get.

After 9/11 he refused to have any of the 15 televisions programmed to a news station.

Good for him. It's a fucking sports bar, not an echo chamber for people to watch talking heads spout off about shit they have no idea about.

The coverage following 9/11 was an orgy of hysteria and speculation - facts were sparse. The "news ticker" became a permanent fixture of cable news broadcasts so other headlines could scrolled across the bottom of the screen while some idiot talked about how the next plane could be flying through your bedroom window any minute.

But I still stand by my belief that we are under a real threat of a nuclear attack.

I believe the threat is real too, but it's not cause to fear the millions and millions of Muslims who are not terrorists or to demonize their religion.

Religions are often perverted for evil purpose. Islam is hardly alone in that regard.

Ah, how Glenn Beck longs for those days!

I believe the threat is real too, but it's not cause to fear the millions and millions of Muslims who are not terrorists or to demonize their religion.

Oh, yeah, this thread was about minarets. Somehow we got stuck on mushroom clouds.

"There just isn't anywhere near enough outcry from the Muslim community against the Muslims perpetrating horrific acts of violence against innocent civilians"

i agree with you...

kind of

there is a huge out cry from people

but those people are not members of any organized group, thus our cries are not heard.

the organized groups i agree are too busy protesting cartoons instead of being outspoken about issues that actually matter.

thats why we aren't a part of those groups..

but people from my category are forming groups as we speak and in a few years you are going to see us taking over.

Good for him. It's a fucking sports bar, not an echo chamber for people to watch talking heads spout off about shit they have no idea about.-Zombiehunter

Yeah, it's a sports bar that always had at least two TV's on a news station. And I guess the fact that everyone wanted to watch the news shortly after 9/11 bothers you to no end. What a prick you are. The biggest tragedy to hit our country in several decades and you castigate people for wanting to hear every bit of news they could on the situation. You're a real winner.

I believe the threat is real too, but it's not cause to fear the millions and millions of Muslims who are not terrorists or to demonize their religion.

Religions are often perverted for evil purpose. Islam is hardly alone in that regard.

#90 | Posted by rcade

I never said anything about fearing Muslims. I don't in the least. I have little respect for them though since they don't seem to have a problem with the Muslims who are causing all of the problems. And the ones who follow the radical teachings deserve to be demonized. Millions of others don't. But then again, I never said anything about that either.

What I did say is that I can understand a country not wanting to be overrun by Muslims like what has happened in Britain.

i still think (wait i know) that banning minarets will encourage MORE muslims to go to switzerland then discourage them.

not understanding the muslim culture is the biggest failure of the modern western states.

we'll just build a steeple and call prayer from that.

what are you gonna do? ban the church steeple too?

"I don't in the least. I have little respect for them though since they don't seem to have a problem with the Muslims who are causing all of the problems"

wrong.

but how mr. shall we average muslims who aren't part of a organized group come out against them?

you expect my grandmother who can't walk to show up at the rally to speak out against extremism?

what will that do?

the corrupt as hell western installed governments would just kill her and her protesting friends anyways.

so what?

full scale rebellions? with millions of casulties?

what?

what has the african american community done to curtail gang banging?

what has the anglo community done against white motorcycle heroin dealing gangs?

what have you done to speak out against the false war in iraq other then be a prick on the DR?

what voice do you have?

what are you gonna do? ban the church steeple too?

Posted by klifferd at 2009-11-30 04:02 PM | Reply

Nah, just ban Muslims. First smart thing Switzerland has done since supermodels. Use Britian as your guide to why.

"what has the african american community done to curtail gang banging?"

Aborted more than any other group % wise with the full and complete blessing of the Half AA in Chief and his minions.

the chapel

try banning me bitch

you and your 6000 year old earth people are a bigger joke then flavor flave.

"what has the african american community done to curtail gang banging?"

They've done a lot more than Muslims have to condemn terrorist attacks. The black community has outreach programs, after school programs, and anti-gang organizations. Some neighborhoods have literally taken their space back from gang bangers. They do much to combat gangs.

"but how mr. shall we average muslims who aren't part of a organized group come out against them?

you expect my grandmother who can't walk to show up at the rally to speak out against extremism?

what will that do?"

This is so easy. You treat them the way any normal community treats a violent, ignorant and backward minority that is trying to drag them down. Shun them. Don't rent them rooms. Don't let them speak in mosques. Don't do business with them (including transferring money). Don't talk to them except to mock their ignorance. Being associated with or related to such people should diminish one's social standing in the community. They should be treated as an embarassment. Instead of acting like they are misguided by their dedication to Islam, act like they are evil individuals who are crapping all over Islam.

In most communities in the United States if someone were to openly spout the KKK's nonsense, that person would become a pariah. That is why the KKK is now toothless in most of the country. Communities that don't accept their brand of hate don't have the problem. And no violence was necessary.

In most communities in the United States if someone were to openly spout the KKK's nonsense, that person would become a pariah. That is why the KKK is now toothless in most of the country. Communities that don't accept their brand of hate don't have the problem. And no violence was necessary.

#102 | Posted by Sully

That is an excellent point and I have nothing to add to it.

you and your 6000 year old earth people are a bigger joke then flavor flave.

Posted by klifferd at 2009-11-30 04:27 PM | Reply

THAN Kliffy, THAN.

Another one you cannot make up folks. I agree BTW that Flavor Flave is a joke, much like you appear to be.

As you were. Yeah boi.

This is another JA persona I believe or should be........

"try banning me bitch"

You live in Switzerland than?

Get it. Than. LOL.

first smart thing the usa will do is force evolution down your kids the chapel.

And I guess the fact that everyone wanted to watch the news shortly after 9/11 bothers you to no end.

Not at all. I wanted to be informed, but it was obvious to me in the days that followed that people were just repeating the same analysis and footage over and over. Not what I want to watch when I'm eating or out for a brew.

It happens whenever there is "breaking news". Nobody knows shit, so the talking heads have to kill time by letting their imaginations run wild. It happened during the Mumbai attacks, and the first week or after the emergence of the new H1N1 flu. I do have a problem with that. The media exists to bring us information, not fuel mass hysteria with idle speculation.

With the internet Minarets are obsolete anyway. Can't they just have a twitter to prayer?

first smart thing the usa will do is force evolution down your kids the chapel.

Chapel's kids are evolutionarily disadvantaged. I'll leave the "why" and "how" of that to your imagination.

"Can't they just have a twitter to prayer?"

finally a real solution :)

haha

You treat them the way any normal community treats a violent, ignorant and backward minority that is trying to drag them down. Shun them. Don't rent them rooms. Don't let them speak in mosques. Don't do business with them (including transferring money). Don't talk to them except to mock their ignorance. Being associated with or related to such people should diminish one's social standing in the community. They should be treated as an embarassment.
Communities that don't accept their brand of hate don't have the problem.

Anybody else see a contradiction? Sully? Everlong?

If Europe does not act soon, it WILL become Eurabia. Its probably already to late.

Every place has zoning laws about what can or can't be built. There are also restrictions on the type of business -- Strip clubs and truck terminals do not belong near churches and schools.

I think it's interesting that when the king of Saudi Arabia wanted to build a second mosque in Geneva, the local authorities said a permit would be issued as soon as the Arabs allowed a Christian church to open in Saudi Arabia.

The Arabs refused.

The Swiss have identified the threat.

The stupidity is the failure to properly identify the threat. You cannot apply reason to an un-reasonable or non-reasoning people in an attempt to second guess their motives. There is no "why" because it is the nature of such to rob, rape and murder when prey is available and vulnerable.

As long as people subscribe to the belief that all cultures and religions are created equal, prey will be plentiful.

Switzerland bans minarets?

Well that's just dumb.

Who could possibly have a problem with a cute chick in a short dress twirling her baton in a parade?

Sorry, wot's that?

"Every place has zoning laws about what can or can't be built."

Tell that to the residents of Houston.

You cannot apply reason to an un-reasonable or non-reasoning people in an attempt to second guess their motives. There is no "why" because it is the nature of such to rob, rape and murder when prey is available and vulnerable.

But enuff about the Republican party!

PATTERSON, you're an ass.

"The Arabs refused"

Maybe but there are gothic churches in Pakistan.

ask Tosser about the enormous one in Karachi.

#107 | Posted by ZombieHunter

Whatever. No matter what you say you still sound like an insensitive ass. The fact that not one TV out of 15 was tuned to news doesn't bother you at all. Hey, it's just because the talking heads have nothing to talk about.

You tried to make it seem irrelevant what the bar owner did and you failed miserably.

Different countries, different peoples, different values. 'Viva La Difference!'

several major european countries, france, germany, netherlands have an exploding muslim population and cant do much to slow or stop it. islam will take over these countries in our lifetime without so much as one detonation in a market.

Maybe but there are gothic churches in Pakistan.

ask Tosser about the enormous one in Karachi.

Yeah... THAT one...

I was there once. Very pretty inside.

Had to take my shoes off, just like in a mosque.

However, Americans, when they visit any church here (or anywhere) never take their shoes off.

One of the many reasons I say Americans are not real Christians.

You know, it's lunch-time on the West Coast

Not for you, suppository-boy.

I wonder if Chairpoop takes his shoes off before stepping into a church?

Probably not, insolent chap that he is.

However, Americans, when they visit any church here (or anywhere) never take their shoes off.

One of the many reasons I say Americans are not real Christians.

That's a non sequitur. There a number of Buddhists temples as well as an ecumenical one in my area, and visitors, most of whom are Americans, take off their shoes before entering.

take off their shoes before entering.

Oh?

Why don't they do that in a church then?

I remember watching a show on National Geographic in which an American couple in India was pissed at having been asked to remove their shoes before entering a Hindu temple.

On their refusal, they were told they "had no respect" and were denied entry.

However, Americans, when they visit any church here (or anywhere) never take their shoes off.

It's a cultural thing. In America, churches would get sued every time some shoeless idiot stubs his toe. For a nonbeliever to visit a mosque in America, you have to sign a liability waiver that prevents you from suing in the event of injuries related to shoelessness.

Nobody in their right mind would remove their shoes in that dung covered part of the world you filthy shits call home.

I see mom made you clean your bedpan again.

"For a nonbeliever to visit a mosque in America, you have to sign a liability waiver "

really i've never seen that.. haha

#1 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Interesting link there Doc.

I am not sure that banning minarets will have the desired affect the Swiss want to achieve.

They are not banning mosques--just the steeples.

How are their immigration laws?

--------

And Rcade--it must be crazy at your family gatherings with that many people?

From "Minarets and Europe's Crisis" by Anas Altikriti:

"However, Americans, when they visit any church here (or anywhere) never take their shoes off.

One of the many reasons I say Americans are not real Christians."

Yes, because as we all know, Christ worked at a Footlocker. Christians take off their shoes when entering a Church in order to symbolize those who took over their shoes to have their feet measured while Christ preached to them/tried to sell them a pair of Reeboks. And of course, Christ's teachings mostly focused on when to wear or not wear shoes. Footwear is central to the Christian faith.

What a donkey you are.