So Should Germany Be Dictating Terms?

by Englishman 75 Replies latest jw friends

  • Yerusalyim
    Yerusalyim

    What do you want from a country that made a Faustianesque pact with terrorists as far back as 1972 when it set up the "hijacking" of a German plane that allowed the release of the three surviving members of "Black September" (you know, the guys that killed 11 athletes at the Munich Olympics). German governement officials have now admitted that this was allowed so as to keep Palestinian terrorists from targeting Germany.

  • Elsewhere
    Elsewhere

    I thought I would throw in the BBC's take on the matter. Sometimes I like to compare their reporting to America's CNN......

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2229231.stm

    Sunday, 1 September, 2002, 19:21 GMT 20:21 UK Germany withholds evidence on terror suspect Zacarias Moussaoui before US District Judge Leonie Brinkema Moussaoui has insisted on representing himself Germany has told the United States it will withhold evidence against 11 September suspect Zacarias Moussaoui unless it receives assurances the information will not be used to secure a death penalty against him.

    In an interview with the Der Spiegel news magazine, Justice Minister Herta Daeubler-Gmelin said: "Our documents cannot be used for the death penalty or for an execution."

    US officials say Mr Moussaoui, who was detained on immigration charges before 11 September, was meant to be the 20th hijacker in the attacks in New York and Washington.

    Rescue workers at Ground Zero Moussaoui faces charges of conspiracy to commit terrorism
    Four of the six conspiracy charges he faces carry a possible death sentence, a punishment banned in European Union states, including Germany.

    Ms Daeubler-Gmelin insisted the issue would not put more pressure on relations between Germany and the US - relations which are already strained by Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder's criticism of US threats to attack Iraq.

    On Thursday, German prosecutors announced they had charged another suspect, Mounir El Motassadeq, with belonging to a terrorist group and being an accessory to murder.

    Different laws

    Germany has played a central role in the investigation into the 11 September attacks, which killed more than 3,000 people.

    Three of the hijackers, including suspected ringleader Mohammed Atta, lived in the northern German port city of Hamburg.

    German investigators reportedly have evidence linking Mr Moussaoui to Atta, who piloted the first plane into the World Trade Center.

    Mohammed Atta Mr Moussaoui is said to have had links with Mohammed Atta
    But the government insists it can not bend laws forbidding the supply of evidence that could incriminate someone facing execution.

    A letter explaining the long-standing German position had been sent to US authorities in reply to a request for information about Moussaoui, Herta Daeubler-Gmelin said.

    "At the moment, the US is examining our answer and will then get back to us," she said.

    A spokesman for the US Justice Department said he had no immediate comment.

    Cooperation between justice authorities in the two countries is "good and trustful," Ms Daeubler-Gmelin said. "After 11 September, one shouldn't try to soften that."

    20th hijacker?

    Zacarias Moussaoui, 34, was arrested last summer after arousing suspicion at a flight school in Minnesota.

    He became the first person to be charged directly in connection with the attacks.

    He is being held in custody in pending the opening of his trial in January.

    US law enforcement officials have said Mr Moussaoui received two money transfers from a man who shared a flat with Atta in Hamburg.

    Mr Moussaoui, a French citizen of Moroccan descent, has denied involvement in the attacks but has admitted to being a member of al Qaeda.

  • Realist
    Realist

    @Yerusalyim:

    it is the US that has intervened in the middle east for a long time. they are not welcome there and their agenda is not to help the people of the arab countries but to secure the oil and the state of israel.

    they have at many occations caused great suffering among arabs. that they would get targeted by terrorism eventually can not be a surprise to anyone. also if a country is constantly wageing war all around the world it is a natural consequence that it gets hit back at some point.

    neither osama nor any other arab nutcase has a reason to terrorize european states.

  • YERU2
    YERU2

    When has the US intervened in the Middle East without first being invited by an Arab country? The Saudis invited us to develop their oil fields, Kuwait and Saudi asked our help with Sadam, Israel has been our constant ally. Nay, it was the Europeans, and specifically the Brits who intervened in the Middle East as a result of conquest of war against other European powers. I suppose that yes, if Germany has in the past been complicit in aiding the terrorists there is no reason for them to hit Germany.

    HOW EXACTLY has the US caused great suffering among Arabs? We've raised their standard of living, I guess that's harm?

    You Said,

    also if a country is constantly wageing war all around the world it is a natural consequence that it gets hit back at some point.

    I take it then that you support Terrorism as a valid form of warfare?

    What have we done to Bin Ladin or the Saudis SPECIFICALLY, that gave them the right to kill 3000 INNOCENT CIVILIANS?

  • Realist
    Realist

    i do not support terrorism as i do not support aggressive foreign politics. fact is that the US has caused war and destruction in many countries. not to help the people there but solely to protect the interests of the US industry. one cannot do this over and over again and not expect to become the target at one point. also i have to say that the bombing of zivil targets by the US airforce is in no way better than bolwing up the world trade center. i would regard both as equally evil acts.

    i agree that the inability of EU to solve the conflict in yugoslavia made an intervention of the us necessary. i agree that this action was taken to protecting human rights. this however has been the only selfless intervention so far.

    the US has supported all corrupt governments in the middle east including sadam hussein before he got on their bad side. that the US came to protect the criminal kuwaiti government (and with them the OIL!!!) is no reason for the average arab to love the US. also supporting israel despite their constant violation of human rights makes the US the target of arab hate. and maybe you are not aware of it but since 1991 hundreds of thousands of iraquies died because of the unecessary and inadequat embargo against iraq. there have also been other incidences such as the bombing of tripolis that certainly didn't help to change the view of the arab population.

    for a comprehensive and i think very neutral summary of the US interventions in the middle east i would recommend this site: http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-159.html

  • Englishman
    Englishman

    Just my take on this:

    Germany, by witholding the info pending an assurance that the the death penalty won't be invoked, gains by:

    1. The action will appeal to anti-CP people.

    2. Germany appears to take the moral highground.

    3. Germanys action may assuage hostility from Moslem factions in future.

    4. Germany appears to be taking a stand against the US, could gain hidden benefits in return for U-turn.

    5. Germany steals limelight from Tony Blairs "Feed the world" campaign and becomes seen to be acting in a humanitarian manner.

    Englishman.

  • Realist
    Realist

    feed the world??? never hear of that!

    is tony blair reinventing foreign aid or has that some new features?

  • Englishman
    Englishman

    Yeah, he made a big speech about it. I suspect that he's just giving himself some ammo as a caring loving fellow.

    Like all of us Brits

    Englishman.

  • Yerusalyim
    Yerusalyim

    Realist,

    How do you equate US bombings of military targets, with occasional mistakes to the intentional destruction of a completely non-military target? Our intervention against Iraq wouldn't have happened had Hussein not invaded Kuwait and then began killing raping and pillaging the country. So, where else have we intervened without an invite?

  • Realist
    Realist

    Hello yerusalim,

    let me first clarify something....i am not at all against americans! i lived there 3 years and i think most of them are great people. however, i absolutely desgise the foreign politics made by the US government.

    the us has intervened only in conflicts where they think they can gain something. if they would do it to protect human rights then why don't they declare war on israel?

    it is oo obvious what they are doing, yet they try to put it under the cover of protecting human rights. that is was truly sickens me. for christ sake why don't they finally admit it that their actions are taken to protect the us industry???

    concerning the bombings: i hope you acknowledge that the US has killed many thousands of people by their bombing campains. if you include WWII, korean and vietnam war it has been millions. the US airforce did not just target military facilities but deliberately civil targets in their large scale bombardments. this is not different from terrorism in any way.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit