« Germany's Job Market: It's Bad, And It Gets Worse | Main | Germany's Media In Full Swing Over Powell Remark »

Comments

That actually seems pretty minor (although it's culturally strange with the two wives) compared to the US or say Canada. Criminals who even get caught trying to pass false passports may still be granted asylum in Canada or at least be allowed to stay for asylum hearings. There was that insane case of the terrorist that was eventually tried sneaking a trunk full of explosives (with the intention of exploding it at LAX) from Canada through US customs at Port Angeles Washington (via ferry). The whole history of how he was allowed to stay in Canada in the first place is mindbogling. The US has the bizarre deal where if certain asylum seekers (Cubans) float over by boat and make it to shore they can try for asylum, if they get intercepted in the water they're sent back.

Germany's "Insane Asylum" Laws would be another good topic.

this is seriously farked up... now they released motassadeq. lets surrender to the mullahs, together with the french.

...now they released motassadeq. lets surrender to the mullahs...
@neo
guilty 'til proven innocent? knock, knock, neo - this is a constitutional state! and he's only released on certain conditions.

David writes:
One sure couldn't expect German intelligence to deliver the required information...

Perhaps neither US nor German intelligence had sufficient evidence to strongly prove his guilt for 9/11? If the glove doesn't fit, ....

Speaking of trials: How are things going against the 20th hijacker in the US, Zacarias Moussaoui? He had been indicted in 2001 and the trial has still no result?

We either accept a real independent justice system - which might not be perfect and could produce unsatisfying results at times - or we give in to injustice. Because it could be tomorrow one of us who might be in a court without sufficient evidence against us.

>and he's only released on certain conditions

They are insane. Just imagine they had released suspected RAF-members in the 70s "on certain conditions", because another RAF member locked up in a foreign country may have said some BS. I think this is a political act. They want to point at the bad bad US, who didn't release the statements of a criminal.

Irak? 12 Jahre Inspektionen unter denen Hunderttausende Kinder starben. Giftgasanschlag gegen Kurden mit 5000 Opfern. Massengräber. Folterungen.


Debatte: Die Souveränität der einzelnen Staaten kann kein höchstes Gut mehr sein
von Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul

Fehlte der politische Wille, den Völkermord zu verhindern? Können die Vereinten Nationen niemals besser sein, als die Summe ihrer Mitgliedsländer? Es gibt viele Fragen und noch mehr Formen der Ablenkung... Frühe Warnungen wurden überhört. Tatsächlich hat bis auf vereinzelte Nichtregierungsorganisationen wie "Ärzte ohne Grenzen" damals niemand eine Intervention der internationalen Staatengemeinschaft gefordert. Es gab genug Frühwarnungen - sie wurden nur nicht genug gehört.


Wenn wir uns einig sind in der Überzeugung "Nie wieder Völkermord!" - was können wir dann in Zukunft tun, was müssen wir besser machen? Wir müssen das Völkerrecht entschiedener dort anwenden, wo es uns bereits gute Handhabe gibt. Wir müssen es dort weiterentwickeln, wo es als Recht gegen die Völker wirkt.

Wir müssen ernst nehmen, dass die Menschenrechtserklärung der Vereinten Nationen die Souveränität der Staaten zugunsten der Rechte der einzelnen Menschen einschränkt.

Vor dem Schießen kommt das Zielen. Völkermord lässt sich nur dann verhindern, wenn man rechtzeitig in seine Vorgeschichte eingreift. Wir brauchen Länder und Regierungen, die sich den Einsatz für Werte etwas kosten lassen. Wir brauchen die Aufmerksamkeit der Nichtregierungsorganisationen und die Nächstenliebe der Religionen, wir brauchen das Engagement der Hilfswerke und der Partnerorganisationen. Wir brauchen Prinzipien und nicht minder den Mut zur Selbstkritik.


Versöhnung kann gedeihen, wenn wir darin glaubwürdig sind, dass wir keinem Mann, keiner Frau, keinem Kind weltweit die Würde vorenthalten, in der wir selber leben wollen.
Die Autorin ist Bundesministerin für Wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklungshilfe


Artikel erschienen am 7. April 2004

I think this is a political act. They want to point at the bad bad US...
@jens schmidt

he has to show up at the police dept. twice a week and is not allowed to leave the town. they would have reacted in a similar way if another country but the u.s. were involved instead. if you think this is a political act hand-tailored for the u.s., if i interpret this correctly, you should point out why you think so. biased media (if existent) do not implicate biased jurisdiction.

Col. Klink wrote "We either accept a real independent justice system - which might not be perfect and could produce unsatisfying results at times - or we give in to injustice. Because it could be tomorrow one of us who might be in a court without sufficient evidence against us."

Perhaps Klink is the 21 terrorist! Or just another dumbass German, with his head in the clouds, smoking dope from a Netherlands coffee shop.

I think it is a bit unfair to pick on Klink.I believes he is none of the things you suggest. He is both European and German and as such represents all those things one admires, finds confusing and dislikes.

The El Motassadeq case shows the challenges the West faces in dealing with transnational terrorism. It will require each nation to look at its own institutions and laws as well as it freedoms and liberties.

It will challenge governments to assemble enough evidence to prosecute terrorist in a court of law as criminals. This level is of evidence for criminal prosecution is much higher than the levels necessary to prevent an attack or to punish those who carried out the attack.

Many times and probably most times criminal trails will be after the fact.

Each of us in our own nations can assemble almost everything we need to build a weapon that would cause death and destruction to the citizens of our nation. None of this is really illegal. We can associate with those who are suspected of wanting to carry out these attacks. Because we have done nothing that would allow prosecution in a court of law, we can continue our activities with a high degree of impunity.

We can do this because we are free and live in free nations.

Some have suggested we must live with an imperfect court system. At the same time others might suggest we establish a different system for those we believe that are trying to kill us. Both of these are real options. Time will tell which one we chose in the end. That choice may well be determined by the future body count of our fellow citizens who die as results of those who use our freedoms, the ones they enjoy, to kill us and destroy our societies.


Hey Daffy, dry up.

quack quack quack yourself Mike H.

Hey Joe,

I have to agree with you on most of what you have written. However, you or I cannot build an automatic weapon, (a machine gun). It is illegal to build or own one without the correct permit from the ATF.

It is also illegal to build any sort of bomb, this applies to a simple pipe bomb made of gunpowder and pipe as well as a fertilizer/fuel oil bomb or home made atomic weapon. All of these weapons can be made at home, but not legally.

All homes in the United States have all the necessary chemicals under the kitchen sink to produce explosives. Any high school chemistry student knows the what is explosive and what isn't. It is that simple, but again illegal.

Hi N!

True True. The weapon of choice seems to be a bomb and not an automatic weapon. We can assemble all of the parts we need to do this. We can do this without breaking the law and causing anyone to suppect what we are up to. We break the law when we put them together. But realisticly how long from assemble to delievery to detonation would it take. Not long. The only way we could be stopped is at any time in this chain of events we were to be observed. Then there would have to be some form of "probable cause" even for that intervention. If we were smart, and this does not require much in this case to be smart,there would be no reason to suppect us as we live in a free and open nation.

So this is a huge challenge to all of us. How we chose to deal with this.

Hi N!

True True. The weapon of choice seems to be a bomb and not an automatic weapon. We can assemble all of the parts we need to do this. We can do this without breaking the law and causing anyone to suppect what we are up to. We break the law when we put them together. But realisticly how long from assemble to delievery to detonation would it take. Not long. The only way we could be stopped is at any time in this chain of events we were to be observed. Then there would have to be some form of "probable cause" even for that intervention. If we were smart, and this does not require much in this case to be smart,there would be no reason to suppect us as we live in a free and open nation.

So this is a huge challenge to all of us. How we chose to deal with this.

Jens, I think I agree with you. People rot for months in German prisons in "Untersuchungshaft" waiting for their trial. I can only conclude that this result is partially an "in your face" gesture to the Americans. Even the pretext of him not having had a fair trial because he was not able to interview someone in a foreign prison sounds terribly strained. Is it generally German legal practice to free prisoners if they are unable to interview other prisoners around the world? That's almost as good as the trick that allows criminals to escape murder charges because they were drunk or on drugs. (Yes, readers abroad, this works in Germany because it defeats intent through reduced capacity. Go figure.) As a travel opportunity it rivals the (in)famous € 40,000 foreign vacations for youthful offenders.

America may have its quirks, but so does Germany.

He'll disappear.

As to Canada, it's just instituted sharia for some muslim-muslim conflicts.

That will turn out well.

Separate but "equal."

@Karl B.
Is it generally German legal practice to free prisoners if they are unable to interview other prisoners around the world?

Is it general practice that another country provides material to the German authorities who then in a last-minute-fax send parts of this evidence to the court as it might help the other defendant Mzoudi (a legal obligation), while someone else has already been sentenced on similar charges? No.

The court-case has been a farce for several guilty parties involved.

@Davids Update: Watch the unfolding discussion thread at LGF: "Germany to Al Qaeda: Hit Us, Please".

I love those headline-titles. So a few weeks ago, we indirectly heard that the Spanish shouldn't freely vote anymore and now apparently German courts shouldn't freely decide anymore, because it would indirectly send a wrong signal to the terrorists. Why not do away with elections and fair court-decisions then and let conservatives decide whom to hang and whom not, and whom to keep in Government, so we can make sure this way to never please the terrorists?

German courts won't let themselves influence by terrorists - not into the one way, not the other way. And I am still waiting for Judge Brinkema in the US to hear the decision on the 20th hijackers - I would not be surprised if US-judges are also more independent than one thinks.

And re: the linked forum: Tx for the thrill, but I stopped reading at entry #10 - the usual clueless Nazi-stereotype against Germany - somehow it seems that Germans have all the reason to scream "anti-Germanism", than vice versa:

#10  
Poitiers-Lepanto  4/7/2004 09:17AM PST

Germans who help nazis...
Nothing new here.

(Now someone answers that I don't understand and that Germany has changed. It hasn't. Save your words for a better cause.)

CK, I'm not sure I understand what you're talkng about with the cases being a "farce". These guys were hanging out with the likes of Atta. You can pretend that they had no idea of what was being planned, but I don't buy that for a minute. That they may get off for lack of evidence is another issue. The laws at the time were also pretty lax. Again, will the German justice acquit every time an accused person can point to someone in prison elsewhere in the world who cannot be reached by German justice?

Nothing you wrote explains why the guy is running around free instead of being in "U-Haft". I think Jens' explanation is plausible.

@Karl B.
Nothing you wrote explains why the guy is running around free instead of being in "U-Haft". I think Jens' explanation is plausible.

I am no legal buff, but this one is rather easy to explain.

The prosecution no longer has solid evidence to convict him for 9/11 directly, but only has solid evidence for membership in El Qaida. And §129b StGB (membership in foreign terror-organizations) carries a penalty from money-fine to a maximum of five years (Sueddeutsche wrote yesterday ten years - which confuses me now, btw??). And Motassadeq already served two years now.

So the outcome now is not that strange - terrorists serve longterm sentences usually on individual crimes, not on "mere" membership. What is a farce is the apparent lack of evidence on the 9/11-act and the strange infamous fax during the trial of Mzoudi, highlighting the oddness of relations behind the scenes.

It is interesting to read the following. It seems lately that France and Spain are acting a bit differently about the threat of terrorism. They are taking pre-emptive action to take down militant Islamic cells whose members may not have committed crimes but who have the skills or the resolve to do so.


“The French had kept a group of Moroccan-born militants under surveillance for some time, but had no specific cause to arrest them when the police struck in dawn raids on Monday, seizing 13 men with suspected links to the Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group.”

A senior French official admitted as much on Tuesday, saying, "There was no evidence they were preparing an imminent attack in France." The crucial factor was that they had traveled to Afghanistan, where they learned to use weapons and make explosives.

"When they come back, they have certain ideas and certainly a technical capacity for action," the French official said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/07/international/europe/07TERR.html?ei=5007&en=ded5cc89e5e62cb5&ex=1396670400&partner=USERLAND&pagewanted=all


It appears this new strategy has not reached Berlin. (Time for another EU Summit on Terror?)

Motassadeq acknowledged being trained by al Qaeda in Afghanistan. He now joins Abdelghani Mzoudi as another terrorist freed by the German courts. The comments made by the presiding judge in the Mzoudi case now apply to Motassadeq. . “Not because the court is convinced of your innocence, but because the evidence was not enough to convict you." . . .

Of course the reason given in both of these cases were the same. . . “the Bush administration's reluctance to make captured terrorists available for testimony and to allow prosecutors to make use of intelligence information on the terrorist network."

The German government has asserted that terrorist suspects can be tried in criminal courts rather than in military tribunals, which the United States favor as a venue for many of the suspects the US now has in custody.

Germany has chosen to treat terrorists as criminals and acts of terror as crimes and not as enemies against civilization. By giving these people the same due-process protections criminal defendants enjoy – the presumption of innocence, protection from self-in crimination, the right to a lawyer, and so on it makes it harder to gather intelligence and to prevent future attacks.

I think Berlin should bask in the glory for protecting the civil liberties of these two individuals and the real independent justice system. It will be interesting to see just what France and Spain does with all these people who have been arrested. Will they follow the “German way” or some other course.

Of course, one might consider this to be an example of Berlin’s doctrine of “soft power” at work. By sending a message that terrorists can use Germany for the purposes of planning and supporting terror attacks on other nations without fear of punishment is a way to protect their citizens from such attacks.


@Joe
It seems lately that France and Spain are acting a bit differently about the threat of terrorism. They are taking pre-emptive action to take down militant Islamic cells whose members may not have committed crimes but who have the skills or the resolve to do so.

France is not taking pre-emptive action, but they arrested members of groups who already had committed active violence in Morocco and Spain. Same thing here: German law section §129b StGB covers this issue.

Motassadeq acknowledged being trained by al Qaeda in Afghanistan.

Yes, and he still faces a conviction under this same §129b. He was not "freed by the court", but only allowed to stay home under strong limitations until trial, because he now already served 2 years now.

Some how we must define terms. Preemptive

I define it as ...marked by the seizing of the initiative: initiated by oneself

So if these people have committed no crimes but are arrested then this is not a preemptive action by the security forces but more of a violation of their civil liberties (those who have been arrested.)

So what you are saying is the report by the New York Times is wrong. Well at some point I did comment the NYT had a credibility problem. Just another example of the NYT trying to fool Americans into believing there really is more common ground between the US and Europe than it appears.

BTW this is the Kerry doctrine on how to fight terrorism. Not the preemptive part but treating this as a form of crime and allowing the police and courts to handle it. Most reactive in its application.

@Joe
So if these people have committed no crimes but are arrested then this is not a preemptive action by the security forces but more of a violation of their civil liberties (those who have been arrested.

No...Okay, once again: These people were arrested for being members/associates of a group, whose main purpose is to commit terrorist-attacks and of a group who already committed terror-acts.

So while those arrested hadn't committed individual terror-attacks themselves yet, being member in a violence-focused group is also a crime by itself. German criminal law §129b - "If you are member of a group which is mainly focused to commit criminal acts...". (A bit more complex, but I summarize)

@ Klink

Just to share with you and acknowledge that America from time to time does things that are a bit difficult to comprehend. I would like to share this bit of silliness with you which I am sure was not reported in the European media.

"The last of the Minuteman III missiles will receive their new motors by 2008. It costs about $5.2 million to replace the rockets on each missile. The new rocket motors, which have to comply with EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) rules, will have a shorter range than the original motors."

The question which begs to be asked then is . . . If nuclear missiles have to comply with EPA regulations, what about the warheads?

See the worldwide Greens movement is making progress.

Joe
Just to share with you and acknowledge that America from time to time does things that are a bit difficult to comprehend. I would like to share this bit of silliness with you which I am sure was not reported in the European media.

"The last of the Minuteman III missiles will receive their new motors by 2008. It costs about $5.2 million to replace the rockets on each missile. The new rocket motors, which have to comply with EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) rules, will have a shorter range than the original motors."

LOL. Very cute!

While Germany used to have its fair share of silly bureaucracy as well, our main source for entertainment coming from "unintentional humour" these days is certainly the EU and the sheer endless amount of sillyness coming down on us from Brussels.

@klink-
Your child-like defense of your countries duplicity and bugling and deceit is amazing simplistic and ignorant at the same time. I am glad you post on this site know as I would like to debate each point you have made since you have arrived, and when I am done your head will be even further up your welfare-soaked ass.
You say france position current is not "pre-emptive" but a reaction to crimes already committed.
Ok, so when were these crimes committed? Why the arrests now? Why not directly after the crimes were committed? Why 2.5 years after war declared on the west are these somewhat tiny measures finally being taken?
You shape reality to wrap around your delusion, you display a systemic condition that has wilted the brains of your country.
You mention polls take from an 800 person survey, though the US has 300 million people which is 5 times the size of your country and whose GDP is 10 times yours, and whose un-employment rate is less than 50% of germany's.
Is this what forms the insanely fragile arguments you put forth? Your country initially convicts this grinning jihad monkey 15 yrs sentence for the death of 3000 office workers. That is roughly 200 days for each of the deaths. That sentence alone is a disgrace to any forward thinking and modern nation. You show no shame.
You fools should have detained each of the jihad cowards among you once they returned from their Afghani "religious training". You knew damn well what these fools were up to, you simply thought their war was against the US and for that you continued to fund these fools with your welfare marks.
You should save each of the posts you put forth. You can look back on them in a years time and then seek the psychological help you are in desperate need of. You use a screen name from a TV series that more than anything was a running testimony to german bungling and mis-steps. This guy Col Klink had a 350lb side kick named Sergeant Schultz who was a strudel eating asswipe who would accept a slice of strudel to look the other way as the POWs made daily excursions to town. You ought to change you post name.
In the meantime your country still debates on which company should obtain the lucrative contract to provide anti-graffiti paint to a holocaust monument and a foot bath is installed in german courts for your muslim patrons.
I don't give a flying f**k what bottom feeding fools such as yourself have to think of my country. I simply enjoying dissecting your nonsense. One can save France's butt in two world wars and they turn around and stab us in the back. Save Moslems in Bosnia, Kosovo and Afghanistan and they turn around and blow up 3000 souls in our largest city. Save Berlin in 1948, countered 5 Soviet tank armies in the GDR for 45 years, give the green light to Gorbachov to allow Germany to reunite and their cowardly chancellor stabs us in the back with his novo Von Ribbontrop foreign minister at the UN.
You don't question the need for this anti-graffiti paint, and WHY it is STILL necessary and you don't question the reason behind the multitude of muslims who bath in your courts.
Your hypocrisy, creative and selective concept of history, and your delusion are insane.

How can a European be ignorant and simplistic. I do not see how that is possible. Good thing you did not also call him agrrogant, then he would be an American

And you can liberate Irak and they turn around and stab you in the back....thats life

See I knew the people of Iraq were smart. They really do want to be European too. Hell maybe they are. Germans with sunburns

@ Plato

There is one thing that you learn in life if you are to venture out into the world in any capacity other than being a tourist. That is no matter what policy the US takes on any topic someone within Europe will object to it and will be supported by majorities in the rest of the world. These objections do not require being logical, rational,factual or anything else. For the most part they represent a deep resentment of the US. So it is in general just a great waste of time and emotions on your part to get upset. In fact, it gives them great pleasure to see your outbursts, as it is something they can feel superior about.

Given this attitude, they get pissed because the US pays them little attention. Wonder why the US treats then this way. It is because are consumed by the ultimate form of psychopathology.

@Joe
That is no matter what policy the US takes on any topic someone within Europe will object to it and will be supported by majorities in the rest of the world.

*yawn* Again: Bush, the poor victim. (At least this time without an instrumentalization of the Holocaust attached to it)

Lemme turn that sucker right around: No matter which political position Europe and the UN General Assembly should take on any topic, someone amongst the Bush-supporters will object to it.

Hey there y'all, grumpy here. It seems to me that Klink, mathesar are livin proof of the success of the media in Old Germany! Keep up the great posts boys.

That is so cute Klink.

I have no problem at all with any positon Europe takes. I have even less of a problem with postions that UNSC takes. I dare you to say that Europe does not have a problem with the positions the US takes.

I do not consider the US to be victim nor do I consider the Bush Administration to be victims either. One becomes a victim when they refuse to take responsiblity for their own actions and their own futures. Or maybe you want to define "victim" in another way.

@Joe
I have no problem at all with any positon Europe takes.

Then you are apparently not that respresentative of the conservative US then. Even the Bush-administration had problems with Europe's doubts on WMD-evidence - best seen in Condi's snappy remarks "Germany shall be ignored and France be punished".

And I meant "playing victim" with your brushing off possible criticism with a hilarious argument:

...no matter what policy the US takes on any topic someone within Europe will object to it and will be supported by majorities in the rest of the world. These objections do not require being logical, rational,factual or anything else.

I have seen Bush-supporters saying similar remarks about US-Democrats in their forums as well. If one doesn't want to take responsibility and criticism for past actions, this is certainly the comfy way out - just smear those that critizise. :-)

The comments to this entry are closed.

Mission

The Debate

Blog powered by Typepad

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28