Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Wednesday January 04 2017, @09:44PM   Printer-friendly
from the dilemma dept.

Germany finds itself in a dilemma. After WW2, laws were put in place to ensure that the Federal Government could never again subvert the security apparatus to create something similar to that which enabled the Nazis to seize power. A quite laudable aim, at least at the time. As a result the German States, of which there are currently 16, are each responsible for their own security and intelligence organizations. The Federal Security organization has only limited responsibility for the security at such places as borders and railway station etc.

In a speech reported here the Federal Minister of the Interior Thomas de Maiziere has suggested that this split of responsibilities needs to be rethought to enable acts of terrorism which are targeting at the country rather than the individual states to be effectively combated:

De Maiziere examines national as well as European security structures in the article, and concludes: reforms are "required." The core of his analysis calls for expanded federal responsibilities, which will demand that states relinquish some of theirs. Formulations such as "centrally operative crisis management" or "control competence over all security agencies" appear throughout the article.

However, the recent terror attack, the most serious in Germany in over 35 years, did not prompt de Maiziere's considerations, it simply gave him a reason to group them together into a kind of list of demands. The interior minister writes that he himself had proposed most of the changes "prior to the attack." The demands affect all authorities and areas of government concerned with defense against the threat of terror: Namely, the police and the Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), Germany's domestic intelligence agency - but also, as the minister sees it, the army. The international scope of the problem, he says, touches on the need to secure Europe's external borders, as well as the global dimensions of the right to asylum.

This suggestion has not gone down well, particularly with those who were living in fear of a state controlled secret intelligence organisation (Ministerium für Staatssicherheit, MfS), commonly known as the Stasi) until relatively recently.

[Continues...]

For example, this report contains the following:

Anis Amri, believed to have carried out the [recent Berlin] attack, was allowed to remain in the country because he did not have a valid travel document and his home country, Tunisia, initially refused to produce one.

To handle such cases, Mr. de Maizière suggested setting up federally controlled "departure centers," which could be placed "close to German airports" to aid the process.

He argued that such measures were already possible within existing German law and suggested extending the period for which a person can be detained pending deportation beyond the current maximum of four days.

Opposition lawmakers sharply rejected that suggestion, insisting that the government had a responsibility to respect the human rights of each individual, even those who are to be deported.

"In a country governed by the rule of law, the end does not justify every means," said Ulla Jelpke, an interior affairs expert with the left-wing Left Party.

She further criticized the plans as a "frontal assault" on the decentralization of powers that were set up to prevent another takeover like that of the Nazis.

What initially appeared as a problem with a relatively simple solution has become a lot more complex.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by VLM on Wednesday January 04 2017, @10:37PM

    by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday January 04 2017, @10:37PM (#449571)

    Bacon eating contest ... you eat bacon you can stay because a rather flexible interpretation of dietary laws implies you're not a complete fanatic.

    If you are a fanatic, well, see ya, better off without.

    Its a very old problem in human history, what do you do when all the problems come from a small group and 99% of the members of that small group are no problem? Well the olden days solutions were not so nice, but now we have cheap microwavable instant bacon at customs offices and jet aircraft flying back home. Its much more civilized than ethnic cleansing or genocide like the old days.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=4, Overrated=1, Total=5
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 04 2017, @11:08PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 04 2017, @11:08PM (#449580)

    Maybe we should deport anyone of any of the Abrahamic faiths. They all hold to "sacred" scriptures that advocate slavery, murder, and genocide to appease their deity.

    • (Score: 2) by BK on Thursday January 05 2017, @12:24AM

      by BK (4868) on Thursday January 05 2017, @12:24AM (#449595)

      It's less about the scripture and more about practice. When the "moderates [youtube.com]" are as scary as the fundamentalists...

      Or maybe I misunderstand?

      --
      ...but you HAVE heard of me.
      • (Score: 4, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday January 05 2017, @03:57AM

        by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Thursday January 05 2017, @03:57AM (#449643) Journal

        Soooort of, yeah. Thing is, in the US we have our own Taliban; they just haven't finished undermining the Constitution yet. Look up who Rushdoony was and what Theonomy is, and prepare to soil yourself.

        These people have, thanks to the US being dumb enough to elect a Dire Oompa Loompa from Hell, suddenly gotten their mephitic claws on all three branches of the government, and we may be about to see them ascendant. But as of this moment, they're mostly held back by the rule of law. Time will tell where this goes...

        --
        I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
        • (Score: 2) by BK on Thursday January 05 2017, @04:22AM

          by BK (4868) on Thursday January 05 2017, @04:22AM (#449651)

          Yep, those would be fundamentalists. In the USA the moderates would be the 'Cafeteria Catholics'. Your turn to research. When the Cafeteria Catholics start to sound like fundamentalists, I'll worry.

          --
          ...but you HAVE heard of me.
          • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday January 05 2017, @07:55AM

            by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Thursday January 05 2017, @07:55AM (#449691) Journal

            I grew up as one of those "cafeteria Catholics," thanks. Looking back on it, it was an insane mix of selfish compartmentalization and unthinking ignorance. Thing is, "moderates" legitimize the loony fringe. It's the same kind of false thinking, I believe the Fallacy of the Golden Mean, that has allowed the US's politics to ratchet rightwards for the last 40 years.

            --
            I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 05 2017, @08:44AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 05 2017, @08:44AM (#449700)

          These people have, thanks to the US being dumb enough to elect a Dire Oompa Loompa from Hell, suddenly gotten their mephitic claws on all three branches of the government, and we may be about to see them ascendant. But as of this moment, they're mostly held back by the rule of law. Time will tell where this goes...

          That's a great excuse if Trump turns out to be actually decent president, which is not that hard considering how awful his predecessors were.

          Funny how that law of yours never stopped Bush or Obama.

          • (Score: 1, Flamebait) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday January 05 2017, @05:58PM

            by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Thursday January 05 2017, @05:58PM (#449834) Journal

            And your fallacy is....*Family Feud scrolling sound* *DING!* False equivalence! I award you no points, and may God have mercy on what passes for your soul.

            --
            I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 06 2017, @01:09PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 06 2017, @01:09PM (#450198)

      Maybe we should deport anyone of any of the Abrahamic faiths. They all hold to "sacred" scriptures that advocate slavery, murder, and genocide to appease their deity.

      Amen to that! Oh wait...

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday January 05 2017, @03:47AM

    by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Thursday January 05 2017, @03:47AM (#449640) Journal

    VLM...seriously? Seriously? First of all, if you're going to be unreasonably xenophobic, do your research; these people could reasonably perform taqiyya if it's a life or death situation, you know. Your kind usually just loves to howl about the T-word. Step up your game!

    --
    I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
  • (Score: 2) by Rivenaleem on Thursday January 05 2017, @09:42AM

    by Rivenaleem (3400) on Thursday January 05 2017, @09:42AM (#449713)

    I worry I may get a "woosh" for this ... however, the most abolute hardline terrorist will gladly suffer eating bacon if it means you drop your guard and let him/her stay.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 05 2017, @06:08PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 05 2017, @06:08PM (#449841)

    > Bacon eating contest ... you eat bacon you can stay because a rather flexible interpretation of dietary laws implies you're not a complete fanatic.

    VLM - keeping the world safe from vegetarians!