German Vice-Chancellor demands Saudis stop financing mosques

[Thanas]

IHT

Saudi must stop financing fundamentalist mosques abroad: Merkel's deputy
German Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel on Sunday said Saudi Arabia must stop financing fundamentalist mosques abroad which are accused of breeding extremism.

“From Saudi Arabia, Wahhabi mosques are financed throughout the world,” said Gabriel.

“In Germany many extremists considered dangerous persons emerge from these communities,” he told the newspaper Bild am Sonntag.

Gabriel, who is Chancellor Angela Merkel’s deputy in a left-right coalition, warned against alienating Saudi Arabia, a crucial player in the bid to end the Syrian war, with too much criticism.

“At the same time we must make it clear to the Saudis that the time of looking the other way is over,” said Gabriel, who is also economy minister.

Gabriel, head of the centre-left Social Democrats (SPD), urged decisive steps in Germany against radical mosques associated with Wahhabism.

“This radical fundamentalism taking place in Salafist mosques is no less dangerous than right-wing extremism,” he said.

The head of the SPD parliamentary group, Thomas Oppermann, also urged steps against preaching that contradicts the basic freedoms guaranteed in the German constitution.

“We will prevent Saudi help in the building or financing of mosques in Germany where Wahhabi ideas are to be disseminated,” he told the Welt am Sonntag newspaper.

Wahhabism provided the “complete ideology of the Islamic State and contributes in other countries to a radicalisation of moderate Muslims,” he said, adding that “this is something we don’t need and don’t want in Germany”.

The SPD leaders’ comments were published days after Merkel’s government was embarrassed by the release of a damning report on Saudi Arabia by its own foreign intelligence service, the BND.

The report accused Saudi Arabia of an increasingly “impulsive” foreign policy with the goal of becoming the “leaders of the Arab world”.

Merkel’s government Friday rejected the BND’s findings and called Riyadh, the world’s top oil exporter, a key partner in regional conflict resolution.

Finally.

[Welf]

Finally what? A few politicians say something everyone knows and promosises "measurements" and that "something has to be done" without giving specifics. What is the plan? Bare the state of Saudi Arabia in particular of financing mosques? Every Saudi national and organisation? Only the ones registered in Saudi Arabia, or also those controlled by Saudis, or also those who might be close to them? Maybe introduce a register of foreign NGOs, as known from Putinist Russia? And what about Salafism? Will it be declared an illegal religion? Not sure the Supreme Court or EU courts would like any of those measurements. This is classic beer table talk for the media, and nothing else.

[Channel72]

At least a politician is finally acknowledging this obvious problem. That's a start, at least. It's not likely to have much of an effect though, unless many other European and American politicians get behind this.

[Elheru Aran]

...yeah, because restricting the free practice of religious beliefs (even ones that seem reprehensible and disagreeable to you) by suppressing the establishment of places of worship never ends badly? I understand the desire to halt promotion of anti-Western doctrine, but I'm not sure this is the way to do it. Would you also suppress Liberty University missionaries or Westboro Baptist from starting a church in Germany?

I do understand the potential risks associated with permitting funds to be disbursed that would ultimately encourage anti-Western, Wahhabi Islamic fundamentalist beliefs being promoted. However you do have to balance your desire to prevent that with the need to permit free expression of religion among the various belief systems in your country...

[Thanas]

I understand the desire to halt promotion of anti-Western doctrine, but I'm not sure this is the way to do it. Would you also suppress Liberty University missionaries or Westboro Baptist from starting a church in Germany?

Yes and we already do suppress those things in the sense that they cannot claim official religion status or do things like schooling. Always have in fact.

[K. A. Pital]

How about the German chancellor along with Ursula von der Leichen stop selling tanks to Saudi Arabia. Instead of comments from the vice-chancellor demanding something from people who think Dark Ages and absolute monarchy are hot and cool.

That's all I have to say about this.

[Welf]

At least a politician is finally acknowledging this obvious problem. That's a start, at least. It's not likely to have much of an effect though, unless many other European and American politicians get behind this.

This isn't some taboo, this isn't something no one has said before. In 2006 a statement of the federal government identified Saudi Arabia together with Iran and Turkey as a foreign country who finances and influences religious groups in Germany. Politicians have been demanding less influence for Saudi Arabia for years. Which I wholly support. But you know this statement will lead to absolutely nothing, because they don't mention anything particular what they want to do, just the usual "something". A lot of talk and pretending that supplants actual measurements.

[Grumman]

...yeah, because restricting the free practice of religious beliefs (even ones that seem reprehensible and disagreeable to you) by suppressing the establishment of places of worship never ends badly? I understand the desire to halt promotion of anti-Western doctrine, but I'm not sure this is the way to do it. Would you also suppress Liberty University missionaries or Westboro Baptist from starting a church in Germany?

Do you not realise how ridiculous that question is? Liberty University is in your shit books for being politically incorrect by implying that Muslims commit spree killings. Westboro Baptist church are IRL internet trolls. At least choose the Christian Science church or Jewish synagogues - two groups that cause physical harm to children under their care in order to conform to their idiotic beliefs.

[LaCroix]

In Europe, we usually take separation of Chruch and State a bit more serious than the US does. Churches who preach political messages or are known to encourage violence will loose their status as church. And once they are identified as political entities, they can be hit with the banhammer, like many neo-nazi or far left organisations already have been.

This acknowledgement of some mosques being centres of hate-speech is basically the first step into that direction. Once this is politically accepted, there will be inquiries, and then, action. But this could take years, still...

[The Romulan Republic]

I have grave misgivings about shutting down a religious institution for any lesser reason than involvement in criminal actions (besides simply their beliefs being made criminal, obviously).

I also worry about the feasibility of enforcement. Because it seems to me that banning mosques, for example, would likely mean that the preaching is continued underground, in secret, with the group in question now able to claim they are being persecuted by Germany. Although I also acknowledge that difficulty of enforcement does not mean something shouldn't be illegal.

[LaCroix]

Hate speech is a criminal action.

Edit: Also, the mosque will most probably not be shut down. The preachers will be facing the pointy end of the stick, and then the mosque may reopen with new ones.

[Thanas]

I have grave misgivings about shutting down a religious institution for any lesser reason than involvement in criminal actions (besides simply their beliefs being made criminal, obviously).

Good news. Incitement to violence, recruiting jihadiis, promoting crimes like spousal rape and subjugation of the female sex as well as sponsoring terrorism are all criminal actions.

[The Romulan Republic]

I have grave misgivings about shutting down a religious institution for any lesser reason than involvement in criminal actions (besides simply their beliefs being made criminal, obviously).

Good news. Incitement to violence, recruiting jihadiis, promoting crimes like spousal rape and subjugation of the female sex as well as sponsoring terrorism are all criminal actions.

And therefore, of course, I would have no problem with shutting down mosques that engaged in any of those activities, provided it can be fairly proved in a court of law. If that is as far as it goes, I have no objection.

Well, "subjugation of the female sex" is vague. Without more information, that could be taken as covering promotion of any view short of complete equality for women. Which is something I personally support, but I don't think it would be appropriate to make "uttering any sexist beliefs" a crime.

What does German law say, if anything, on the subject of promoting sexist attitudes?

[LaCroix]

Code: Select all

subjugate
transitive verb sub·ju·gate \ˈsəb-ji-ˌgāt\

: to defeat and gain control of (someone or something) by the use of force : to conquer and gain the obedience of (a group of people, a country, etc.)

It's not vague at all. It means that people are denying females their legal rights in order to control them. (Not allowing them out of their homes, taking away legal documents, using violence to force compliance, etc.)

[The Romulan Republic]

Going by that definition, I obviously have no objection to shutting down organizations that advocate the subjugation of women.