Democrats and Republicans in Germany

(By Ray Drake)

We at Medienkritik recently contacted both the Democrats Abroad and the Republicans Abroad in Germany and asked them if they would like to present their views on the upcoming elections, German-American relations and the German media on our website. We hoped that this would be especially informative for our American readers who presently find themselves in Germany.

Here are the responses we received, first from the Democrats:

From: Ron Schlundt Chair Democrats Abroad-Germany

Thanks for your offer to address media coverage of America by German
organizations. We are so busy right now
in campaign activities that we couldn't spare any volunteer time for such
an analysis. If a Republican group provides such information and their
contact address on your site and you would like to provide information
about how to reach DAG as well , it
would be much appreciated. If that seems appropriate,.just give the contact
as the e mail address shown above.

Best wishes with your project

And here is the article that the Republicans Abroad Germany, also known as the GOPGermany, headed by Henry Nickel, submitted to us:

Communicating Reform to Germans and Not Turning Back

(By Eric R. Staal)
Press Secretary
Republicans Abroad Germany

Germans are well-informed about the United States. They read Spiegel and Noam Chomsky, watch CNN, go to Michael Moore movies, and travel. Many are at the ready to recite the countless injustices of American history, the blunders of U.S. foreign policy, and our social problems ranging from urban poverty and illiteracy to overconsumption, household debt, and obesity.

Moreover, American politics for Germans are quite simple to understand. The Democrats want to empower oppressed minority groups, abolish environmental pollution, foster international cooperation, and create global peace and harmony. The Republican Party, meanwhile, wants to destroy the environment, exploit the poor for the benefit of the rich, and indiscriminately bomb third world countries.

The problem is a familiar one and seems to have worsened over time: some European politicians and media commentators anticipate our next military defeat, predict our decline as a nation, and call for greater European unity, not to stand for any particular ideal – they can not even draft a constitution mentioning God – but to challenge U.S. influence in the world. For many European opinion shapers, U.S. power is illegitimate in and of itself. And they take no responsibility for the consequences of the anti-American vitriol they perpetuate.

What are the roots of European cynicism about the United States and the Republican Party, and what can we do counter it? This is an important question because European cynicism discredits U.S. motives in foreign policy, undermines our alliances and attacks our moral character. Across Europe and beyond, this ignorant anti-Americanism provides an intellectual foundation for terrorism.

Diagnosing European Cynicism

First, Europeans look at the United States and see what Europe is not – 45 million people without health insurance, crumbling public education, appalling numbers of men in prison, a disproprotionate use of energy resources coupled with an assumed disinterest in conservation, and budget deficits which Eurozone members can only dream about. For Europeans of the left and the right, the solution to American social problems is to be more like Europe; and the party that wants be more like Europe by expanding the government to solve these problems is the Democratic Party.

Second, cultural exchanges between the United States and Europe have a very left wing orientation. Whereas apologists for Islamo terrorism like Michael Moore and Noam Chomsky are consistently regarded as possessing the absolute truth among European elites, U.S. conservative intellectuals are completely unknown in Europe. Anyone who thinks the Heritage Foundation, National Review or Weekly Standard represent the political fringe of American politics has not paid attention to the outcome of elections and the wave of political reform that has swept the country in the past 25 years. Anyone who is more willing to consider the marxist propaganda of a Noam Chomsky and Michael Moore above the serious intellect of a William Buckley, Newt Gingrich, James Q. Wilson or Milton Friedman is probably too uninformed to engage in real political discourse.

Communicating Reform

During this election season we must proudly remind people of President Bush’s leadership over the previous four years. From inheriting both a recession and a decade or more of bloody terrorist attacks against American targets, the Bush Administration has returned us to economic growth and set us on long-term course for victory in the war on terrorism.

In the war on terror, the Taliban are out of Afghanistan, roughly 2/3s of al Qaida has been annihilated and the rest is on the run. Moreover, we are promoting political and economic reform in the Middle East – not just with words but deeds, by removing Saddam Hussein and enabling the Iraqi people to have self-determination for the first time. Representative government in Iraq will succeed and serve as a beacon of hope for reformers throughout the region. Meanwhile, the economy is roaring back after a stock market bubble and a spate of corporate scandals. Owing to President Bush’s tax cuts, GDP Growth this year will reach nearly 5% and we have seen job growth of over 1.3 million since last August.

We must communicate to Germans and Europeans that the Republican Party has been on the right side of reform in the United States since the Civil War. From Abolition to Ronald Reagan’s defeat of Communism and the reforms of the 1980s, it is the Republican Party, not the Democratic Party, that has cut taxes and put people back to work. It is the Republican Party that leads the charge for welfare reform, education reform, social security reform, real access to health care, tort reform and more. While the Democratic Party stays wedded to the empty promises of more taxes and more government, the Republican Party champions solutions for the 21st Century, empowering individuals with the decisions that impact their families and future.

Like earlier leaders of the conservative movement, President George W. Bush is continuing in the legacy of Ronald Reagan and the achievements of Newt Gingrich. He is reforming taxes for the benefit of working families, giving parents the right to make decisions about their children’s education, and putting more control over health care and social security in the hands of individuals. And it was President Bush, not a Democrat, that made tough choices about the Taliban and Saddam Hussein. George W. Bush will not wait for better days to bring democracy to the Arab world, no matter how loudly cynical elites in Europe and Hollywood scream that Arabs are uncapable of self-determination.

The agenda for reform is far from complete. We must continue to reform education to make sure no child is left behind, reform social security so that we do not bankrupt our children’s future, reform taxes to bolster growth and jobs, and promote democratic reform in the Arab world so that the diabolical appeal of terrorism does not outweigh the aspiration for freedom and a more prosperous future. This is a tall agenda. No amount of elite cynicism from Hollywood to Europe can be allowed to hold us back. The Republican Party is the reform party in the United States and the record speaks for itself, whether in the United States, Germany or anywhere else. As President Bush said last week, “we are turning the corner and we're not turning back.”

The Democrats lack of interest was clearly disappointing. Our thanks to Henry Nickel and Eric Staal for taking the time out this busy campaign season to submit such a long article for our readers' consideration. We at Medienkritik would still invite a submission from the Democrats in Germany.

We would also like to remind all of our American readers, whether Democrat, Republican or Independent, to register to vote. If you are abroad, be sure to inform yourself on the procedures for voting via absentee ballot before the deadlines pass!

NOTE: Eric Staal emailed me and asked me to make a few minor modifications to the article which we originally posted. I made the changes as he requested ---Ray Drake August 3, 2004, 6:00 PM.

Comments

[Joe N.]

I occasionally hear the Republicans Abroad and Democrats Abroad from time to time on the BBC World Service, and I suppose it's their American-ness that forces the presenter to just put them in a position that would just make me squirm. The Republicans Abroad representative always seems to have so much patience with the Bush slamming when they're put on the air. They had them on a few weeks ago, as well as with their almost obscene "What the world thinks of America" extra special television 'bash'.

On all three occasions that i've heard them on the BBC, the have been very persuasive and articulate, but are always put in the position of playing the goat, in a way. It's close to painful.

An aside: a very interesting Australian scholar and social scientist has linked David's Medienkritik on his blog. Take a gander or follow the "homepage" link next to my name. Follow Earl the URL:
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com/2004_08_01_dissectleft_archive.html#109140048201561367

[lost one]

While I don't necessarily agree with everything Eric Staal had to say about President Bush, I find most of his points to be on target, and the fact that he took the time to reply to Medienkritik very helpful. The Democrats Abroad letter , on the other hand, sounded very much like a form letter to me. I think it might be rather telling.

And yes, I'm good, I am registered, and will vote, even though I'm still not 100 percent sure whom to vote for. Though that snotty "Is Kerry too Smart for Americans" article tempts me to not even consider Kerry. After all, I might not be nuanced and smart enough for him. Yes, I know that's a childish reaction, but still...can you blame me?

[Don]

I for one have ALWAYS wanted to
"indiscriminately bomb third world countries". Not (perhaps) as much as I've wanted to very discriminately bomb certain sections of France and Germany (the ENA, Elysee Palace, and Speigel editorial offices come to mind). But still. Finally an organization which panders to my ignobly bestial tastes.

[Don]

P.S. Also certain parts of the UK. Would taking out Hampsted Heath (Guardian and BBC Central) be too indiscriminate, do you think?

[Kim]

Hi Ray, it's Kim from UMD's College of Journalism. Your site is excellent. Very informative. I found this post particuarly interesting. I'm disappointed at the Democrat lack of response as well.

[Gabi]

Great idea! Great post!

Joe N., thank you for the link! Much to read.

Lost one,
I think that is not the goal of David and Ray, that we all agree with everything. What is so frightening in German media is the hate with which they are writing and reporting, the hate of people towards the US, the unability to recognize attitudes like antisemitism and antiamericanism, this dumb way of thinking that everything what is "right" is nazi. You have to be "left" otherwise you are lost in Germany. No tolerance, no wish to discuss facts. Kerry is the new king. Basta. Every theme is on that level. Nothing good about the USA in our news. I wonder what the Presserat thinks about this. Are they not aware of it?

[Gabi]

Paßt nicht zum Thema, aber mich quält diese Frage:

Warum zeigt die Tagesschau gerade das "Folter-Foto" mit England und dem Mann an Kette, ohne ihn unkenntlich zu machen. Auch auf vielen websites sind die Gefangenen mit ihren Gesichtern zu sehen. Warum beteiligt man sich an der Verbreitung der Fotos und der Erniedrigung? Das müßte doch gegen deutsches Presserecht verstoßen.

[TM Lutas]

While it is important for the center-right in the US to forcefully and insistently spread their message, europeans have their own responsibilities. They do not have to agree with any particular US policy or America at all, but it is a mark of a real intellectual that you actually know where the political center is in the greatest military power in the world. You understand what are the important intellectual strains that shape its politics, and can reasonably explain and predict how the most influential nation on earth is going to jump.

The mainstream "intellectual" class in europe seems to be incapable of these basic feats. How can they pretend to be true academics, true intellectuals?

[Sandy P]

Kind of OT via No Pasaran, do you think the German media will cover this:

There's no good reason to suppose that the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development was trying to slip anything by anyone when it chose the busiest vacation period to release a study unfavorably comparing the economy of the euro area to that of United States. … Basically, the report's point was that alongside the euro zone's self-image as a succès d'estime, its inequalities in living conditions were greater than those in the United States. That meant that if you superimposed economic disparities in American regions against the euro zone's standards, only two states and 2 percent of the American population would be eligible for the structural fund assistance, or European Union cash aid to regions, that a disadvantaged 25 percent of the euro area can claim.

To understate things, this was no great advertisement for the EU's notion of economic justice and prosperity through integration and convergence.

The report's most striking detail: "U.S. income per capita is 30 percent above the euro area's, and the gap is widening." Roughly the same ratio also applies to gross national product. …

[WhatDoIKnow]

I don't know why the Democrats didn't show more interest in sending an answer. I think that they are understandably enjoying the 100% bad press that Bush gets in Germany. I really don't want to make any false accusations, but I have the feeling that some of them might be willing to ignore the instances where anti-americanism is hidden behind Bush critique.

Many Democrats in the US seem to use the European critique of Bush to give more weight to their arguments. I can understand that (hey, that's politics), but only to a point. There are definitely Democrats who realize that Europe is not what it pretends to be. Having said that, it seems to me that the predominant (or loudest) Democratic voices in this election believe that the US has all the reasons to get closer to the European (failed) position, rather than the other way around.

I just hope that in the event of a Kerry victory the rational Democrats will have more influence than the Dean/moveon.org devotees. The loud voice of the latter is very worrying and sure won't make the world a better place. The people (US voters) who believe that the September 10 world is just an election away are a danger right now. (I know a few of them and they know exactly what the root cause of terrorism is: Bush).

The US is a great democracy and will eventually win the WOT, no matter who governs. No doubt about that. I would hate though if the WOT took a detour, and nowadays that seems to be exactly what the loudest Democractic voices want.
====================================
Gabi, das Foto soll zeigen, dass die US "Opfer" ein Gesicht haben. Wahrscheinlich soll sich der deutsche Leser besser mit diesen identifizieren und dadurch immer weniger mit den Amerikanischen Barbaren. Begriffe wie Presserecht/Menschenwürde sind sehr flexibel, je nachdem was man gerade übermitteln will.

[Ralf]

@WhatDoIKnow

Warum setzen Sie das Wort "Opfer" in Häkchen? Sind sie etwa keine?
Opfer sind auch die USA, denn das ganze Land wird unkritisch in Kollektivhaft genommen für Taten einzelner Soldaten. Die Folteraktivitäten Saddams hat die dt. Presse nicht verschwiegen, aber es gibt davon keine Fotos. Ich finde diese Fotos der Frau England kennt nun jeder, ich will sie nicht mehr sehen.

@Gabi
Das Presserecht verbietet nicht die Ablichtung von Gesichtern, meiner Meinung nach sollten solche Bilder überhaupt nicht gezeigt werden. Das Informations- und Presserecht wird nicht beeinträchtigt, wenn nicht alle gräßlichen Details und dann in der Regel auch noch unvollständig und mißverständlich kommentiert gezeigt werden.
Zerfetzte Bombenopfer nach pal. Selbstmordattentaten zeigt auch kein Medium, müssen nicht auch diese Opfer gezeigt werden, fragt sich ein naiver Nachrichtenkonsument?

[Ralf]

@Sandy P

"The report's most striking detail: "U.S. income per capita is 30 percent above the euro area's, and the gap is widening." Roughly the same ratio also applies to gross national product."

Very interesting post!

Does the report you mention also tell how much each group within the compared contries earns?
Do the "rich", "middle class" and "poor" differ a lot?

German press tells me always that many rich in the US have a fantastic capita income, while the lower middle class and many poor people have a lot less than comparable europeans.

That could explain, why capita income differs 30 %, does it?

[Ralf]

@Ray

Thank you! Great idea to ask the Democrats Abroad and the Republicans Abroad in Germany to present their views on the upcoming elections, German-American relations and the German media.

I think the GOP answer is outstanding, informative and offers interesting analysis, while the DAG answer is a big joke, too bad.

I'd like to encourage your work, which I appreciate so much.

[WhatDoIKnow]

Es kommt darauf an was man unter "Opfer" versteht. Um es klarzustellen - Menschen die umbegracht und gefoltert werden sind eindeutig Opfer.

Wo fängt der Begriff aber an ? Ich glaube es ist bei jedem anders, und es hängt sehr viel von der Welt in der diese Person aufgewachsen ist. Tausende fühlen sich in DE Opfer weil der Chef sie angeschrien hat und, wie man in der Presse lesen konnte, viele Iraker fanden die Fotos als kein grosses Ereignis. Wie Sie sehen, ist es nicht so einfach.

Für mich ist ein Mann in Hundeleine kein Opfer, egal wie schwer sein Ego gelitten hat. (In Madonna's videos sieht man auch solche). Ein Haufen nackter Männer sind für mich kein Opfer, tut mir leid.

Ich habe nie behauptet und werde nie behaupten, dass es in Abu Graib keine wahren Opfer des US Personals gegeben hat. Nur sind die meisten der Fotos die ich gesehen habe nicht so schockierend wie die weltweite Presse sie darstellt. Es sind Verbrechen die man bestrafen und nicht wiederholen soll, und das war es.

Wenn ich Ihnen zu extrem erscheine, tut es mir leid. Das hat aus mir das Leben im komunistisch-sozialistischen Paradis gemacht. Ich kann einfach keine Tränen giessen bei der Ansicht unwillig nackter Männer. Aber ein Multikultureller wie Sie wird mich doch verstehen.

======================

Es stimmt, die deutsche Presse hat kein Saddam-Folter Fotos gezeigt. Sie sagen es gibt davon kein Fotos. Das zeigt mir eindeutig wie bereit Sie sind die deutsche Presse zu entschuldigen. Zu Ihrer Information: von Saddam-Folter gibt es zahlreiche Fotos UND Videos. Ich habe selber einige im Internet gesehen. Es war aber zu schwierig für die "objektive" deutsche Pressen diese zu finden. Wenn die nicht einmal im Stande sind diese Fotos zu finden, kann keine Mensch verlangen, dass die auch wahren Journalismus betreiben.

P.S. Um es nochmal klarzumachen - viele missverstehen gerne hier. Auch der "Hundeleine"-Fall war ein Verbrechen und die Täter sind 100% schuldig.

[Ralf]

@WhatDoIKnow

"Zu Ihrer Information: von Saddam-Folter gibt es zahlreiche Fotos UND Videos. Ich habe selber einige im Internet gesehen."

Ich verteidige keineswegs "die deutsche Presse".
Da gibt es ein Mißverständnis, selbstverständlich gibt es Fotos von Saddams Folteraktivitäten, die dt. Presse, z.B. Spiegel TV hat darüber ausführlich berichtet, ich kenne diese Fotos aus den 80er und 90er Jahren. Nur werden sie aktuell nicht mehr veröffentlicht. Deswegen sagte ich, es gäbe keine Fotos. Mich ärgert, daß ständig die auch nicht mehr wirklich aktuellen Fotos gezeigt werden.

Daß Sie den "Mann an der Hundeleine" nicht als Opfer sehen, wir reden hier über Gefangene, nicht über einen billigen Porno im Feriencamp, ist Ihre respektierte persönliche Meinung.

Bei allem Respekt bin ich aber froh, daß die amerikanische Öffentlichkeit, Herr Rumsfeld und Präsident Bush nicht Ihrer Meinung sind. Es dürfte zu recht einhellige Meinung sein, daß die Männer auf den veröffentlichten Fotos "Opfer" einer Foltertat (ganz weniger Soldaten, nicht der USA!) sind.

[WhatDoIKnow]

So wie ich (primitiver) den "Mann an der Hundeleine" nicht als armes Opfer sehe, so geht es in den meisten veröffentlichten Fotos nicht um Folter sondern um Misshandlung. Der Unterschied zwischen diesen Begriffen ist riesig. Aber was bedeutet schon ein Wort... ?

[Ralf]

@WhatDoIKnow

Warum die Ironie "primitiver"?
Ich respektiere Ihre Meinung ohne Unterton.
Mißhandlung ist keine ausschließlich zutreffende Beschreibung für die Taten. Auch der Begriff Folter paßt, insofern stimme ich Ihnen zu, nicht ausschließlich, beschreibt die Taten aber treffender.

Ich bin nicht nur als Jurist sehr froh darüber, daß die amerikanische Militärjustiz funktioniert, Frau England und ihre zweifelhaften Kameraden sehen einer gerechten Strafe entgegen.

The system works

[WhatDoIKnow]

der Begriff Folter paßt, insofern stimme ich Ihnen zu, nicht ausschließlich, beschreibt die Taten aber treffender

Und so wird der Begriff Folter relativiert. Er passt nicht zu den veröffentlichten Fotos, aber irgendwie passt er doch am besten...

Ralf, wenn Sie sagen, dass die veröffentlichten Fotos eher Folter darstellen, verliert der Begriff sein Gewicht und seine Bedeutung. Und das finde ich sehr gefährlich. Begriffe wie - Folter, Stalinismus, Nazi, Holocaust, Rassismus etc - sind viel zu wichtig und Ihre geladene Bedeutung darf nicht in hysterischen politischen Auseinandersetzungen untergehen (jetzt rede ich nich von Ihnen). Ich finde wir alle haben eine grosse Verpflichtung gegenüber diesen Begriffen.

In diesem Sinne, im Falle Abu Ghraib von fast ausschließlich Folter zu reden ist einfach unklug. Es ist sicherlich sehr nützlich für einige, um damit die Bush Regierung in Verbindung zu setzen, aber langfristig schadet das uns allen.

Es ist schon soweit, dass Begriffe wie Nazi, Holocaust usw. locker beim Stammtisch verwendet werden. Das finde ich eine sehr traurige Entwicklung. Wenn man im Fall Abu Ghraib von "schlimmesten Folterfällen" (Zitat aus der deutschen Presse) geredet wird, indem man eine nackten Man an der Leine zeigt, dauert es nicht mehr lange bis man mit dem Begriff Folter nicht einmal Kinder abschreckt.

Ich bin nicht so asozial um zu denken, dass ein nackter Mann an der Hundeleine nichts besonderes sei. Ich will damit nur sagen, dass Zurückhaltung in der Wahl der Wörter sehr angebracht wäre. Wegen der US Wahlen wird meisten argumentiert als wäre das Ende der Welt. Wilde Anschuldigungen werden gemacht und geladene Wörter werden gedankelos ausgetauscht. (Es geht meistens von der einen Seite hervor, aber das ist was anderes. Sie wissen schon was ich meine)

Vielleicht wird es später wie nach einer wilden Party sein, man sieht sich um am Morgen danach, erinnert sich nur wenig und man fragt sich: was habe ich für eine Scheisse angestellt ? Party bis am Ende der Welt, nur das Ende ist (zum Glück) nicht gekommen und man muss weiter machen wo man vor der Party aufgehört hat. Wird es aber noch möglich sein unter diesen Umständen ? Ich weiss es wirklich nicht.

(In meinem Beitrag will ich nicht abstreiten, dass wahre Folter stattgefunden hat. Alles was ich oben geschrieben habe bezieht sich auf die veröffentlichten Fotos, die meistens nackte und erniedrigte Männer zeigen. Beides, die Folter UND die Erniedrigung müssen bestraft werden)

[Sandy P]

Ralf, remember a couple of things when defining "the poor" in America.

1. Some is based on what a basket of food cost in 1948 - food is much cheaper now.

2. Another figure -- income, IIRC - was somewhat pulled out of the air in the 70s because they needed a base number.

3. While The Heritage Organization is conservative, they mined the 2000 US census. You should peruse their article summarizing what they found, of course with the grain of salt since it's written from that perspective.

There's a new study which theorized American poor are fat because they're getting too much in food stamps and can't spend it all.

When you hear of a child going hungry, it's once over 20 days, IIRC.

That would include my child, and we're certainly not "poor."

Actually, it would include me since I skip meals, too.

Hope this is a little more "nuance" for you.

Gabi said:Lost one,
I think that is not the goal of David and Ray, that we all agree with everything.

Oh, I understand that completely. I have actually been "lurking" here since almost the beginning of the year, and that's what I found so interesting here, the diversity of opinion. I guess I'm just always trying to show that someone can be more or less conservative, support the president to a certain extent and still be aware of his flaws. Because there does seem to be a certain amount of black and white thinking, though obviously in my experience it is not confined only to Americans.

And having someone I care about so much living in Germany, I get pretty worried about all the hate that seems to spew forth from the European press. The cavalier attitude towards the anti-semitism in countries with such strident "anti hate speech" laws makes me nervous. Those that do not learn from history, etc.

I might have to print up little business cards with this site's url on them and hand them out to my aquaintances in Germany.

[kid charlemagne]

To the last anonymous poster: The idea with the business cards is a very good one. I would also recommend to David that he make up stickers with the Medienkritik address on it. I see such stickers for indymedia posted all over Berlin; I would gladly distribute some for this site.

[Sandy P]

Heritage FOUNDATION - not organization, tho it might be .org.

[kid charlemagne]

Ironically, after making that last post, I saw an indymedia flyer, complete with tear-off tabs, at the internet cafe I was posting from. It may be corny, but I say we take a similar approach to publicizing Medienkritik. I still feel there are far too few German readers of this site.

[Joe]

Gabi - you're right, we don't always agree with David and Ray on everything.

Joe: Ray, get a haircut.
Ray: Geh weg! Beat it, freak!

See?

[lost one]

Does anyone know what the laws regarding posting such flyers would be? I don't exactly want to spend my time in Germany in a jail house (Though vacation slides of me getting cuffed might be more fun for my friends and family than me standing in front of the Heinzelmänchenn fountain )

But how about those keyring things with the token you put in the in the shopping cart in lieu of a Euro coin. If those aren't hugely expensive, we could hold a fundraiser, have the site address printed up on several gross of them and hand them out around Germany. People would at least be looking at the address, and would finally be curious enough to check out the site. It'd be a little subversive, but sometimes you have to be.

If not, I'll just go back to the business cards, and slip them into my friends's book bags.

[Joe]

Word of mouth, or e-mail as it were, is a wonderful thing. That probably stands the best chance.

[Fritz]

Woher kommen sie und wer sind sie? Ich glaube ich kenne sie! Meine Eltern haben mir von so etwas erzählt! Wenn sie Deutscher mit EINEM Pass sind, haben sie ein Recht zu schmieren! Wenn nicht, gehen sie dahin wo sie hingehören!

[frozd]

Wir wollen mal die Kirche im Dorf lassen. Klar waren die Handlungen in Abu Ghraib, die überwiegend an einem einzigen Tag von einem Dutzend Amerikaner an einer kleinen Zahl von überführten Verbrechern durchgeführt wurden (die übrigens zu einem grossen Teil Sprengstoffanschläge gegen zivile Einrichtungen geplant oder begangen haben, oder an Angriffen gegen amerikanische Truppen beteiligt waren), Straftaten nach amerikanischer Rechtsprechung. Ob es Nötigung war, oder welcher genaue Straftatbestand ermittelt wird, sollte man den zuständigen Militärgerichten überlassen.

--------------
http://www.bromastelefono.com/