The Case for Changing Switzerland’s National Flag in the Name of Political Correctness
A group of Muslim immigrants wants to force Switzerland to abandon the current flag – a white cross on the red background. They say that it violates the rights of the representatives of non-Christian confessions.  They seem to have been hurt by the recent ban on minarets construction by the Swiss government. However, unfortunately for them, their proposal is unlikely to be welcomed by the native Swiss and will only increase the number of votes in favor of the treasury of the local far-right People’s Party.  The first suggestion to remove the cross from the Swiss flag was made not by a Muslim, but (judging by the name) an ethnic Croat and Catholic vice-president of the association of immigrants Secondos Plus Ivica Petrushich. “The cross does not fit today’s multicultural Switzerland,” he said.  The organization of the Turkish, Albanian and other immigrants from Muslim countries followed with a similar initiative. The muslim community is not only arrogant but also imaginative. Instead of the current flag, they suggested using a green-yellow-red flag of Helvetic Republic that existed at the turn of the 18th-19th centuries. It has no cross on it.  It is hardly coincidental that the issue of replacing the flag was raised by the representatives of immigrant organizations. At first immigrants beg to be accepted/tolerated. When it’s done they usually pass to the next stage, “accomodation,” in which they make moves to be politically “recognized” and “respected.” Finally they get to the final stage, “dominance,” where they seek to impose their views of the rest of the population. This has to come to this in the case of Islam because this religion claims to be the “only” true religion and claims are made that it will one day dominate the whole world. Dominance is an undamitted alway present goal which is written everywhere in their holy book. More than a goal it’s a promise.
At Least Some People are Seeing the Absurdity of the Request
Today, over 20 percent of seven million-strong Swiss population is immigrants. Naturally, the Muslims will be more than others insistent on replacing the flag. There are nearly 400,000 of them (more than five percent of the population). The largest “ethnic Muslim” community is Albanian, followed by the Turkish one. Arabs and Bosnian Muslims also reside in Switzerland. Many of them certainly do not like the sight of the cross. The vast majority of Swiss Muslims virtually broke off with the religion of their ancestors. No more than 50 thousand of the faithful pray five times a day. However, women in headscarves have become an integral part of the cityscape of Zurich or Geneva. Furthermore, the birthrate in religious Muslim families is much higher than among the other population. Finally, all Swiss followers of Islam are not natives, but immigrants and their descendants. Their support of changing the appearance of the flag is, to say the least, ambiguous and maybe even hypocritical.
Apparently, this fact was taken into account by the head of the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Switzerland Mayzar Hisham, who, seeing the ridiculous in those demands, brought some nuances into the debate and called the idea of changing the flag “counterproductive.”  He said that they did not demand anyone to change the ancient traditions of their countries. It is hard not to agree with his words. The relations of the indigenous Swiss and immigrants have already passed a difficult strength test. The desire to change the flag will only add fuel to the fire. Two years ago the Muslim community wanted to attach minarets to the existing mosques. However, Switzerland is different from all other countries in a way that each more or less relevant issue is solved by holding a referendum. Negotiations with the government officials were not sufficient, and they had to ask the opinion of the population. This opinion was not in favor of the Muslim immigrants. The initiator of the referendum two years ago was the ultra-right Swiss People’s Party that called to stop the “creeping Islamization”. A deputy of the Swiss Parliament Ulrich Shlyuer said that minarets were a political symbol of the implementation of Islam. Step by step, Sharia was conquering Switzerland, acting in parallel with the Swiss law. Statistics show that the degree of religiosity of the local Muslim population is exaggerated, but for the ordinary Swiss even a hint of a violation of their habitual way of living was sufficient.
Major Swiss Compagnies Capitulated over “Muslim Sensitivities” and Banned the Cross from their Products and Advertisements
Prostituting themselves and bowing to muslim sensitivities, Switzerland’s leading companies have already removed Switzerland’s cross-shaped flag from their products for the Islamic market. Swatch, Tissot and Victorinox logos, as iconic of their brand as NIKE”s check or McDonald’s golden arches, are voluntarily censored, removed, in a breathtaking act of submission to a radical racist ideology that oppressses and subjugates all non-believers and women.  Tissot, maker of Swiss watches since 1853, yes 1853, is removing its 158-year-old identity.
Victorinox, which sells the famous Swiss army knives, replaced the cross symbol on its product with a letter ‘V’. In the past, Victorinox had problems selling its products in Saudi Arabia: deliveries were blocked; cargo was seized at customs. It decided to switch to the ‘V’ symbol for an easier life. This has provoked complaints from some customers that the knives on sale in Saudi Arabia are not authentic because they lack the original cross logo. 
Swatch justified its action claiming that “Saudi Arabia is a Muslim country. It does not allow the cross to be shown in public. …We respect the laws of the countries we are active in.” Some members of the Saudi religious police were interviewed for a Swiss television programme, however, and said they weren’t bothered by the Swiss cross symbols at all and were mystified about why Swatch was doing this. 
It goes without saying that any company (or individual) that cannot stand up for what they are or does not know who and what they are, will inevitably disappear. Worse, capitualting to an ideology that lashes women, covers them in cloth coffins, cuts off clitorises, and denies non-Muslims basic human rights, is beneath contempt. I, for one, will never buy from these cowards. As for the Saudis demanding (under the sharia) that the cross not be shown in public, like Pamella Geller said on her blog:
The West should respond in kind. No crescents and stars anywhere. Everywhere the sharia is imposed on the West, freedom lovers should respond in kind. Tolerance when applied to evil is a crime.