The rest of Europe may perhaps follow suit as indicated by Denmark. It has hailed this vote and announced that it will make a similar move.
So, what to say?
1. Qaradawi has a political agenda. The paper should have noted that. Now, the paper is seen as supporting Qaradawi without reservations.
1a. The Gulf Times is published in Qatar which is categorised by Freedom House as “not free” with regard to political freedom and freedom of the press. So, is this the government of Qatar speaking?
2. The Gulf Times might be excused for not knowing the finer details of the Swiss and Danish constitutions (which are really different when it comes to referendums), but if the news desk had been worth its money, it would have noted the following:
2a. Denmark as a state has not taken any stance on the Swiss referendum. Gulf Times could have contacted the Danish Foreign Office for information. Alternatively, you could have checked Politiken’s news in English section. I think it is safe to say, that Politiken is not unnecessarily positive towards the Danish government and the VKO majority.
2b. Did some Danish parties and politicians make positive comments about the Swiss vote? Yes: The Danish People’s Party (well, duh) and (more troubling) Søren Pind, the foreign policy spokesman of the Liberal Party. Needless to say, Pind makes use of the “I don’t support a ban, but…” rhetoric. I should note that the Liberal spokesman on immigration rejected any ideas of a ban on minarets or other architectural symbols.