http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...-prosecution-comedian-erdogan-poem

Under pressure from Erdogan Merkel has decided to prosecute German comedian Jan Böhmermann for a poem that slandered the Turkish dictator.

Very surprising, even for a country as messed up as Germany. With this stuff going on Turkey is starting to look more and more like a proper EU candidate, lack of freedoms doesn't matter when we the EU's largest economy doesn't have them either.

You read that wrong. Merkel is just authorizing the judiciary to go ahead, doesn't mean he will lose. He will probably win and be vindicated. Something similar happened when Charlie Hebdo published the infamous caricatures in the 2000's, various associations attacked them, it went to court and they won.

It shows that there is a bit of a lack of independence of the judiciary branch, however, something that usually the EU frowns upon, but original members of the EU get away with it (same for France).

Quoting Aesma (Reply 1):

That's not really relevant IMO, the fact they are even charging somebody for slandering a foreign dictator (which shouldn't be a crime in the first place) really shows how badly Germany lacks in freedom of speech, and how much leverage Erdogan has over Merkel.

There is nothing "now" about it, the law has been on the books for years - Merkel just isn't illegal blocking prosecution under the law that exists.

The law is being repealed however, because of this case. But it won't be repealed in time for this case.

So that basically throws your entire argument out of the water.

Quoting moo (Reply 3):

I don't exactly get why such a law would possibly exist in any country that generally likes to represent itself as a liberal democracy.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 4): I don't exactly get why such a law would possibly exist

While the law's existence would be problematic if it sought to restrict legitimate criticism of a foreign head of state, it does not do so. What it does is restrict insults and slanderous insults. In this respect s.103 of the Criminal Code is no different to other sections that seek to protect German citizens from slander and defamation. Just as a German citizen can seek redress if somebody were to accuse him or her of watching pornography while slapping people around, so too a foreign head of state can seek similar redress. And remember, that is precisely what Böhmermann is alleged to have done. No doubt he will get off because he will be able to provide evidence that Erdoğan does exactly that.

In many countries satire is accepted by some as a valid form of political criticism, even to the point of it being acceptable to include outrageously false information designed to foster hatred of its target. That isn't universally accepted and Germany's law was originally drafted against the background of recovering from a war brought on by distrust and hatred.

I support repeal of the law but that doesn't mean open slather to say anything you like , true or false, simply to bring somebody into disrepute. Just stick to the facts. Why embellish it with lies on the pretension that one is an artist or entertainer? For example, I might have disliked Tony Abbott as prime minister and could find plenty of grounds to mock him but that would not justify my suggesting he got off on kiddie porn, his defence of the Catholic Church notwithstanding.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 4): I don't exactly get why such a law would possibly exist in any country that generally likes to represent itself as a liberal democracy.

Because there is no such thing as a utopia?

People here are always falling over themselves to predict the downfall of Europe.  

Quoting WearyDrover (Reply 5): No doubt he will get off because he will be able to provide evidence that Erdoğan does exactly that.

Will be difficult because (taking the "Poem" out of it's context in the TV show) Böhmerman deliberately used rather childish insults, e.g. of Ergogan having sex with goats and sheep. That he did it to show where the limits of German law are concerning satire and that his original song, in which he critizised Erdogan for his policies (which Erdogan demanded to be removed from German TV), like using the Turkish law on insulting the president to stiffle any criticism at home, was just a description of what Erdogan is actually doing.

Böhmermann explained in his show that the original song was intended as a criticism of Erdogan's politics, but then he read the "Poem" to show what he thinks a real insult would look like.

the German government and Erdogan are already at odds because he summoned the German ambassador (in diplomatic speak a very serious thing) because this ambassador dared to watch a trial currently going on against two editors of an opposition newspaper, who published a story about the Turkish government arming Islamist militias in Syria. Erdogan considers this publication treason.

Jan

[Edited 2016-04-15 06:22:54]

Quoting pvjin (Thread starter): Under pressure from Erdogan Merkel has decided to prosecute German comedian Jan Böhmermann for a poem that slandered the Turkish dictator.

Firs of al,Germany is ruled by the law, not by Mrs Merkel or anyone else, also and most certainly not by Mr. Erdogan.

Second, there is an antiquated paragraph in the law, §103 which is about "lége Majestè" or, in English, crime against he crown. Her Majesty Erdogan has cited that §§ in his request to the German Government to punish Mr. Boehmermann. Looks like the Dictator of Turkey has litle else to do than messing with other countries judicial systems.

What Mrs Merkel has done now is, that she authroized the DA to use that infamous § 103 in their Investigation of the case and,to ask the Parliament (the German) to abolish §103..

That in mind, the State attorney will investigate the case, having in mind that the § 103 will likely not exist after the summer. Even if the State Att. Comes to the unlikely finding to bring this in court, the judge still can dismiss,having in mind that §103 is o longer in the books.


Mr. E can, and he did that already, can as a private Person in acordance wit §185, which is the slander §§ for ordinary persons, something more likely to fit the Sultan

Many peple do not like Mr. Boehmermann, me included, but we have to stand up when a foreign Potentat tells our government what to do and what not, Messing into our internal affairs. This whole case can only end with a full exonneraton of Jan B.. Freedom of speech and of the art is the higher legally protected right. It's bad enough when freedom of speech does not exist in Turkey and many other countries, subjugating to a foreign dictator would be the end of our freedom..

Slandering a foreign head of state is punishable in most of the countries. It's a relic from the time when most countries were still ruled by monarchs.



David

Quoting pvjin (Reply 2): lacks in freedom of speech

Who would've thought?

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 7): People here are always falling over themselves to predict the downfall of Europe

Downfall? No, but a significant change to the worse with upcoming religious and social tension for sure! The ones that are driving this continent will be the first one to leave.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 1): Merkel is just authorizing the judiciary to go ahead, doesn't mean he will lose

Exactly. Silencing Erdogan with our understanding of justice will prove him once and for all that Turkey's law and views on freedom of speech are not applicable in Europe.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 9): What Mrs Merkel has done now is, that she authroized the DA to use that infamous § 103 in their Investigation of the case and,to ask the Parliament (the German) to abolish §103..

From what I understand, he didn't even go on some sort of rant against Erdogan, he simply used the poem as an 'example' of something that would be illegal to say, and made that abundantly clear before he said it, which complicates the case. Still, that's a bizzare law that has absolutely no place in a free society. It's always puzzled me that Europe can be so much more progressive than the US in many areas, but European law has much less tolerance for inflammatory speech.

Well, you would have to prove that allowing unfettered inflammatory speech (like happens with some of your politicians, radio commentators, neo nazis, religious crazies, etc.) is actually progressive and has merits.

Quoting N415XJ (Reply 12): rom what I understand, he didn't even go on some sort of rant against Erdogan, he simply used the poem as an 'example' of something that would be illegal to say

Yeah it was a poem. Protecting this idiot Erdogan who basically opened up Turkey to ISIS is insane. How many bombings were in Turkey in the past 5 years vs the 2006-11 period. A lot more.

Here in Denmark it has been reported that the infamous §103 in its latest revision dates back to Emperor Wilhelm II (1888 - 1918).

Such paragraphs were normal in all European countries when they were ruled by kings and emperors as dictators. And they disappeared when democracy gained momentum from 1848 and onwards.

With the very unique and special way, in which Germany stumbled into democracy a hundred years late, it is understandable and excusable that §103 was forgotten.

[Edited 2016-04-15 18:54:12]

Quoting N415XJ (Reply 12): It's always puzzled me that Europe can be so much more progressive than the US in many areas, but European law has much less tolerance for inflammatory speech.

Thd difference between Germany and the US is, that this Little "Poem" would be protected by freedom of speech in the US. But you could not air it on TV there, because every second word would be beeped out . Here it was on TV without a Problem. The Problems came afterwards.

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 15): Such paragraphs were normal in all European countries when they were ruled by kings and emperors as dictators. And they

The §§ "protected" only the Monarch himself. When this matter is through the Courts it will be retired. That leaves a good number of Options to the justice System. The state attorney can find that there is no case again JB and Closes the file, possibly with a Penalty in the amount of XXX. If the state attorney opens a file, the judge can decide that he will not accept the case and dismiss.

Even if a Trial takes place it is unlikely that JB gets more than the Minimum sentence, certainly on probation. However, any conviction would be a win for the dictator..

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 16): Here it was on TV without a Problem. The Problems came afterwards.

Technically speaking, even Russia or China or any other totalitarian regime has freedom of speech. What makes the free world different is freedom AFTER speech.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 16): Even if a Trial takes place it is unlikely that JB gets more than the Minimum sentence, certainly on probation. However, any conviction would be a win for the dictator..

If Merkel is so detached from reality, why no one from Merkel's inner circle realized the symbolic implication of such decision? Germany dancing to Erdogan's tune.

It's funny to think that if this poem was about Kim Jong-Un, the whole world would be laughing about him. But if you apply this to other dictators, then all of the sudden it's not justifed.

Just to be clear what we're talking about, here's a translation of the poem that Böhmermann read out on TV (and of which he said that it would be illegal):

Stupid, cowardly and inhibited
That's President Erdogan,
His crotch smells terribly of Doner Kebab
Even a pig's fart smells nicer
He's the man who beats up young girls
While wearing a rubber mask
Fucking goats is his favourite
As well as suppressing minorities.

Kicking Kurds, beating Christians,
Whilst watching child pornography
In the evening, instead of sleeping
He gets fellated by a hundred sheep
Yes, Erdogan is certainly
A President with a tiny cock.

You hear every Turk saying
"The stupid pig has shrivelled nuts".
From Ankara to Istanbul
Everyone knows this man is gay
Perverted, vernimous, zoophilic,
Recep Fritz Prikopil.
His head is as empty as his balls are
He's the star on every gangbang party
Until his cock burns when he pisses
That's Erdogan, the Turkish President.

Actually the incident has brought this old law to attention and it will most likely be removed from the penal code soon. There exists another article in the German penal code for slander, Erdogan could have used this, just like any other person, but no, he is somebody special.

Turkey has a similar law about insultig the president, which has been used many times during the last few years to silence critics, same as a law about insulting the Turkish state, which has been used to imprison people who wrote about the genocide comitted by the Ottoman empire (which Erdogan dreams of recreating) against the Armenian minority during WW1 (the founder of the modern Turkish Republic, Kemal Atatürk, was outspoken against this genocide when it happened, but got ignored and sidelined by the powers that be back then, e.g. Enver Pasha ).

Article 103 of the German penal code was used by the Shah of Persia against protestors against his regime back in the 1960s, but the then German government used diplomats to mak him retract the accusations.

Some years ago a high ranking Chinese politician was visiting Germany, and in one place there was a demonstration against Chinas actions in Tibet and because this politician was instrumental during the Tianamen Square massacres, hich could be seen and heard by the Chinese politician. The Chinese politician demanded from Merkel to have the demonstration disolved as an insult to China, but Merkel refused to do so, stating the right of free speech and holding rallies enshrined in our constitution.


Jan

Quoting moo (Reply 3): There is nothing "now" about it, the law has been on the books for years - Merkel just isn't illegal blocking prosecution under the law that exists.

It would be legal for her to do so, but she chose not to.

THAT isn´t her mistake. The mistake was to a) to wait that long instead of instantly letting justice do its job and b) to actually side with Erdogans hurt feelings.

A clear "yes, and, in diplo speak of course, i have bigger balls then him" would have been in order. She gets slandered in all sorts of media and doesn´t make a fuzz about it after all.

Quoting N415XJ (Reply 12): From what I understand, he didn't even go on some sort of rant against Erdogan, he simply used the poem as an 'example' of something that would be illegal to say, and made that abundantly clear before he said it, which complicates the case.

And you understand it right. There will be either no ruling, because the law is of the books before a ruling, or an acquittal.

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 17): What makes the free world different is freedom AFTER speech.

There is no unlimited free speech in any country, there are always ways to get punished for what you say. Getting in trouble *after* is the only way a free nation should have, other nations prosecute before you make something public.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 16): But you could not air it on TV there, because every second word would be beeped out . Here it was on TV without a Problem. The Problems came afterwards.

Well, maybe HBO could, but no normal major TV station in the US would show it. Just like they didn´t show the Jyllands-Posten Mohammed stuff. Or printed it. While we got to see them...

For those that don´t know what this is all about:

Quote: Ralf Kabelka is Jan Böhmermann's sidekick: Beginning: Böhmermann: Welcome to Germany's comedy show NR. 1. It's us. We don't have anything to do with satire. What our colleagues of extra3 did... we're not as thorough as them. Respect to them, big thing they made. That's a different league, like heute-show as-well. I really, really like the heute-show. They're sooo brilliant. When I heard rumors in the past, we were looking for their spot or anything Olli Welke hosts... Noooo, not at all Olli! Best wishes to you! [blows kiss to camera] I am suuuch a big fan of yours, I always watch your show for... for... errr... „inspiration“. Also, the Satire by extra3 almost started the third world war. Big applause for that! Super-song. And apparently in Turkey every, even the smallest satire or comedy show is being watched. So presumably, you also watch our show. Dear Turks, hello, when you watch this here. Maybe we need to explain something to you...? What our colleagues from extra3 did, was to make fun of your politics, Mr. Erdogan. That's legal in Germany and Europe through freedom of arts, freedom of media and freedom of speech. Kabelka: „By Article 5!“ Böhmermann: Article 5 of our constitution! That's legal. Criticism of politicians is legal! You can't come here and tell the government to withdraw satire or delete it from the internet. This is completely legal here. And I really enjoyed, how civil society stood up this week. Beatrix von Storch, who wanted me shot, if I remember correctly, two weeks ago, because of the BeDeutsch-video. And now all of a sudden, she's in first row, when it's about to defend freedom of arts and speech. Everyone agrees, satire needs to be allowed. Je suis extra3! Mr. Erdogan, but there are of course examples, that aren't legal. On one side, there's justified criticism, satire and fun, which is legal. And on the other side there's „abusive criticism“, which is illegal. „Abusive criticism“, that's a juridical term. Kabelka: „If you plainly insult people, defame people in personal regards, degrade people just to degrade them.“ Böhmermann: To degrade someone is „abusive criticism“? And that's illegal? Kabelka: „Yes.“ Böhmermann: Did you understand that, Mr. Erdogan? Kabelka: „It can be prosecuted.“ Böhmermann: It can even be prosecuted? And then video can be withdrawn from the internet? Kabelka: „Yes, but only afterwards.“ Böhmermann: It may be a bit complicated for you, Mr. Erdogan. Maybe we'll explain it by a practical example. I've got this 'poem' here, it's named „abusive criticism“. May we have a Turkish styled version of a song by Nena? And may we have a Turkish flag in the background? Fine! What comes next would be illegal? Kabelka: „Would be illegal.“ Böhmermann: This would be considered illegal. The 'poem' is named „abusive criticism“: „Sod-dumb, cowardly and hesitant/ Is Erdogan the President/ His boner smells like Döner/ Even a pig's fart smells finer/ He's the man who punches girls/ while wearing a bloody rubber mask/ Things he loves the most/ is shagging goats/ and oppressing minorities This kind of criticism would be illegal! Kicking Kurds, beating up Christians/ while watching child porn/ And in the evening instead of a nap/ Fellatio with a hundred sheep/ Erdogan is all things considered/ a President with a tiny wang/ I repeat this is an example of what would be illegal! Kabelka: „One would not be allowed to say that“ Böhmermann: Every Turk can be heard whispering:/ This dumb pig has got shrivel-balls/ From Ankara to Istanbul/ Everyone knows this man is gay/ perverted and zoophil/ Recep Fritzl Priklopil/ His head as empty as his balls/ the star guest on every gang-bang party/ until his tiny wang starts to burn while having a piss/ That's Reccep Erdogan“ This is what would NOT be legal by freedom of arts! Hey, don't applaud! What would happen next? Kabelka: „It would be withdrawn from the mediathek, f.i..“ Böhmermann: So, Erdogan would need to take a lawyer!? I'll say Dr. is a great lawyer. Kabelka: „Yes, he's the lawyer of the mayor of Berlin and others.“ Böhmermann: Mr. Erdogan, visit this lawyer, tell him you've watched something you don't like: „abusive criticism“. Then you'd visit a court. Get a restraining order there. Then we'd have a legal case. Does that become clear to you? I really enjoyed, as a citizen of Germany, now after months of disputes and arguments, we finally had a consensus again. When its' about despots, when it comes to politicians, who go against freedom, like only despots do: Erdogan, Victor Orban, Beata Shit-lo, Beata Shit-lo from the Piss-Party, the Prime Minister of great neighboring country Poland, Marine LePen from the [acts like vomiting] Front National, Pim Fortuyn in the Netherlands [most likely confused him with Geert Wilders], HC Strache from the FPÖ. They're all authoritarian, nationalistic wannabe despots. Also Frauke Petry, here, of course. All these are people, who more people should go against. Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump. I really appreciate we resist these guys self-confidently. Who cuts the rights of other people, needs to get his own rights cut. END

from: http://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comme...hmermann_said_english_translation/

best regards
Thomas

It's not a fine work of poetic art, indeed. I would just have used the dutch word, Geiten Neuker. But when you consider that Theo van Gogh has lost his life about that, I would noit want to estimate what the Sultan can do with his secret Service as wilfully tool.
Boehmermann announced today that he will take some time off, possibly with van Gogh in mind. He has Police protection, like the Mohammed caricaturists. The ZDF TV is backing him through the process, not only morally.

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 17): If Merkel is so detached from reality, why no one from Merkel's inner circle realized the symbolic implication of such decision? Germany dancing to Erdogan's tune.

My first reaction yesterday was to quit my over 30 year Membership with the CDU. However, one should always think things over and I am too old for kneejerk reactions. Mrs. Merkel can now meet the Sultan on her visit next week and tell him that this with the judiciary. That's a Chance to teach him a lesson in Democracy with her cryptic smile on her face.
Erdogan will not understand that, but who cares? OTH, you are right, he is dancing on our noses. But he does not realize at the same time that he is making a stiupid idiot of himself. The whole world is laughing about Erdogan every time his Name appears in the media and he can kiss EU Membership of Turkey good bye for a Long time to come. Turkey has that Chance again only with anew government completely reversing Erdogan's politics.

Now it is up to the Independent judiciary, hopefully showing Erdogan the middle finger by dismissing the case. That would be another lesson in Democracy.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 22): The whole world is laughing about Erdogan

As long as he gets attention from leaders and representitives, I don't think he really cares. It must be flattering for him that Merkel is even making an effort. He's simply an attention w****.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 22): That's a Chance to teach him a lesson in Democracy with her cryptic smile on her face.

I have the impression she's more willing to satisfy others and herself than actually those who have elected her. IMHO, she has lost all her credibility in the last two years. One faux-pas after another.

Quoting LSZH34 (Reply 23): As long as he gets attention from leaders and representitives, I don't think he really cares. It must be flattering for him that Merkel is even making an effort. He's simply an attention w****.

Well, he made almost certain that the poem, seen by very few people even in Germany, will be widely circulated in Turkey in turkish translation. Let the Streisand effect commence...

I am sure before this month is over, close to a billion people will have at least seen parts of the Poem in a language they understand. Facebook is pretty good at that.

best regards
Thomas

Whichever way we look at it, Merkel has made a couple of mistaked not only in showing some empathy with the Sultan. But she was slandered multiple times, especially by Greek media but others like Polish and Hungarian media as well. Too tempting to Show her in a Nazi costume.
But that always fires back to those repsonsible and she does not even comment, least sue them. That's the right way to handle that.

May be that Erdogan does not care about the fact that he is constantly make a fool of himself, but of he carries on like he does he will moe and more Opposition. Merkel may have lost some credit over the past 2 years, but she is correcting her mistakes and unfortunately she Needs Erdogan for that. But she would have needed him with or without the "yes we can". Simple fact of geography.

Erdogan will lose more than the credibility he never had on an international .scale. He will lose the fight against his own Population.

One thing people here mostly don't seem to get is that the Turkish diaspora in Germany is allowed to vote in Turkish eletions as well, and that Erdogan tries to use them to put pressure or the German government.
According to an ld agreement, most Tukish mosques here have their imams provided by the Turkish ministry for religious affairs.
I'm working for a German-Turkish joint venture no, about 50% of my colleagues ae Turkish. I noticed that espcially the men put a big emphasis on social status and what the consider their honour, formal respect, titles and how they are being greeted is very important, who can give orders to whom and the whole hierarchy.
Unlike dealing with Aerican, British, Irish and German airlines I dealt with before, where it was important to get to the point fast and where hierarchies were much shallower. Even the style of dress is impotant, most of my male Turkish colleagues wear sharp suits and neckties (while us Germans wear, at our level, pressed khaki chinos and pressed shirts or polo shirts, without necktie). Age is also important, the older you are, the more respect you get. And these are very well educated people mostly with university degrees.
A business phoe call, even if it involves an AOG, usually involves somepolite smalltalk first, until we come to the matter. O the other hand Turkish colleagues, when they think that they are higher up in the hierarchy than us, can be almost insultingly direct, if they want something from us.

In their culture, a man who does not act on a perceived insult loses his honour and is not to be respected or followed. This is especially true with Erdogan's traditional followers, the Turkish poor, who are a lot more family and clan oriented, often lesser educated, more religious and traditional than the Kemalist urban elites (though their men can also be touchy about what they see as their honour). In Erdogan's culture, criticism is a sign of disrespect and this has to be stopped right away, else other men will see him as somebod without balls, a coward.

I'm familiar with this concept also from other patriarchic cultures, Southern Italy used to be similar as wel as Spain, it seems to come from the old Roman empire, where every family had a "Pater Familias" as the absolute ruler of the family with power over life and death of their faily members.
Same with the strong emphasi on social hierarchies and standing, I know this concept from East Asia.

Interestingly I get on with the female Turkish colleagues very well. All of them are very friendly and cooperative.

Jan

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 7): People here are always falling over themselves to predict the downfall of Europe.

That's a little extreme, but yeah, this time there are no real or metaphorical gates of Vienna to stop the invaders--because they've been welcomed in with open arms. Now it's simply a matter of time and demographics for this bomb to blow. Europe is already dead.

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 10): Slandering a foreign head of state is punishable in most of the countries. It's a relic from the time when most countries were still ruled by monarchs.

How contemporary of Europe.

And yet we have Europeans on this very board who point across the pond at us colonists and insist WE'RE the backwards thinkers! My gosh.

Quoting Rara (Reply 19): His crotch smells terribly of Doner Kebab Even a pig's fart smells nicer

Very Monty Python-esque, I think.  

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 25): Erdogan will lose more than the credibility he never had on an international .scale. He will lose the fight against his own Population.

It is going to be quite hilarious...



For those that don´t speak German:

"Mr. Böhmermann, would you please read out your satirical vituperative poem for proof recording?"
"With pleasure!"

Speaking of.... offensive language is only punishable if it is untrue. His lawyers could request to present evidence that he does have shrivel-balls. Technically Erdogan has to proof that the poem isn´t stating the truth...

best regards
Thomas

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 22): It's not a fine work of poetic art, indeed.

It is not, but bad taste should not be a criminal offence. Paging Pussy Riot or the Plastic People of The Universe.

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 21): Getting in trouble *after* is the only way a free nation should have, other nations prosecute before you make something public.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Even the communists persecuted people for expressing their views AFTER they have done do.
If Erdogan is so butthurt, let him file a civil lawsuit (which he did)... without the German state getting actively involved in a criminal case.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 26): One thing people here mostly don't seem to get is that the Turkish diaspora in Germany is allowed to vote in Turkish eletions as well, and that Erdogan tries to use them to put pressure or the German government.

Thanks for the explanation but what is your point? Does that mean the whole Germany should adopt their social norms and standards? Why Germany feels under pressure because of who they vote for at home? It cannot not get much worse than Erdogan.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 26): In Erdogan's culture, criticism is a sign of disrespect and this has to be stopped right away, else other men will see him as somebod without balls, a coward.

Then let Erdogan's culture stay where it belongs. In Turkey.

[Edited 2016-04-16 07:55:30]

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 9): Firs of al,Germany is ruled by the law, not by Mrs Merkel or anyone else

Yet Mrs Merkel gets to decide who gets prosecuted. The article says:

Quote: The foreign minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, said Social Democrat ministers, including himself and the justice minister Heiko Maas, had been overruled by Merkel in allowing the prosecution to proceed.

Seems to be a regretful lack of a judicial independence.

Quoting Rara (Reply 19): A President with a tiny c*ck

Well, now we know why Erdogan's so upset. It's fine to call him a sheep f*cker but never insult the size of a man's equipment!

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 21): And you understand it right. There will be either no ruling, because the law is of the books before a ruling, or an acquittal.

Which seems to be what the comedian wanted to see happen. Living under police protection, not so much...

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 24): Well, he made almost certain that the poem, seen by very few people even in Germany, will be widely circulated in Turkey in turkish translation. Let the Streisand effect commence...

It surely made me laugh!  

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 29): Even the communists persecuted people for expressing their views AFTER they have done do.

Oh really..... they also did it before it was public whenever they could. In fact they much preferred that.

Your own nations bill of rights clearly states that there are limits to freedom of speech, in case of the Czech republic freedom of speech can even be limited if what you are saying is immoral..... which is a much strikter limitation of freedom of speech than "you can no claim someone if fucking sheep in public unless you can proof it".

The big difference to most, if not all, other countries, is that in Germany EVERYONE that feels offended can press charges, not just heads of state. Offending people is a crime here. Dignity of men comes before freedom of speech (or religion for that matter).

best regards
Thomas

Quoting Revelation (Reply 30): Well, now we know why Erdogan's so upset.

Oh, i am so looking forward to the next edition of the German Magazin Titanic.

http://www.titanic-magazin.de/

They just announced that, to be fair and to make sure that Erdogan doesn´t feel so alone, they will offend all the worlds heads of state in their next edition.



"My first Banana" (if you don´t recognize her in young, that is our head of State.



"How Asians see the (soccer) World Cup"



"We all need a little Fun" (Cancelor, Defense and Forign minister at that time)



"Does Jesus still play a role?"



"Federal President Bianco: Why not try a nigger for once" with the bubble saying "Does it always have to be a man or women?"

So much for Germany lacking freedom of speech. That is going to be one mother of offensive edition.

best regards
Thomas

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 7): People here are always falling over themselves to predict the downfall of Europe.

LOL, they've been predicting the same of the US here for years.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 16): Thd difference between Germany and the US is, that this Little "Poem" would be protected by freedom of speech in the US. But you could not air it on TV there, because every second word would be beeped out . Here it was on TV without a Problem. The Problems came afterwards.

Actually it would be aired on pay tv (cable) without censoring and would easily make late-night (where it belongs) over-the-air free tv with 3 bleeps (or slight changes). The general content would probably preclude it from times children would be watching.

Quoting mham001 (Reply 33): LOL, they've been predicting the same of the US here for years.

Considering how good "Make America great again" works it is fair to assume that a fair deal of Americans do believe that as well.

Quoting mham001 (Reply 33): (where it belongs)

If belongs at whatever time they want to air it on whatever channel they want to show it. But then again, so does full frontal nudity. And three beeps are three too many. Pre-censorship is the worst kind of censorship.

best regards
Thomas

Quoting Revelation (Reply 30): Yet Mrs Merkel gets to decide who gets prosecuted.

No, that's a misconception. Like in many jurisdictions, slander in Germany is a punishable offense, but only if the offended party makes a request to prosecute it. It's the same with Erdogan. If he feels offended by a comedian (or anyone else), he can report it to the authorities, who will open an investigation. It's not Merkel who decides about that, but a State Attorney.

What Merkel DOES decide about is an additional law which will soon be abolished, which puts a particular emphasis on slandering foreign heads of state, but requires the government to authorize the process.

In my view, by the way, she's absolutely correct in authorizing the prosecution in this case. Erdogan may be an idiot, and it may well be embarrassing for him that he even bothers with this, but the law is the law. It would be ridiculous for her to claim that the poem isn't offensive.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 26): men put a big emphasis on social status and what the consider their honour, formal respect, titles

Don't Germans also like their titles ? Everyone with a PhD is called Doktor, even if it's an honorary doctorate !

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 29): It is not, but bad taste should not be a criminal offence. .

fully agreed. one must not like something or a Person but it is essential in a Democracy to defend the right of free speech, of the arts etc.
Personally I like the Cartoons by Greser & Lenz better. Wednesday in FAZ and in the current Focus Magazine.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 30): Yet Mrs Merkel gets to decide who gets prosecuted. The article says:

Exactly not. Mrs. Merkel has given the decision into the Hands of the judiciary System, which Erdogan already called himself through his German lawyer. The judiciary is Independent, same here as in the US

Quoting Aesma (Reply 36): Everyone with a PhD is called Doktor

If you have a doctorate degree, doctor becomes part of your name.

Best regards
Thomas

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 29): Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 26): One thing people here mostly don't seem to get is that the Turkish diaspora in Germany is allowed to vote in Turkish eletions as well, and that Erdogan tries to use them to put pressure or the German government. Thanks for the explanation but what is your point? Does that mean the whole Germany should adopt their social norms and standards? Why Germany feels under pressure because of who they vote for at home? It cannot not get much worse than Erdogan. Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 26): In Erdogan's culture, criticism is a sign of disrespect and this has to be stopped right away, else other men will see him as somebod without balls, a coward. Then let Erdogan's culture stay where it belongs. In Turkey.

Erdogan plays the same card Hitler, Stalin, Putin, the North Korean Kims and Mao played and play:
He sells himself to the Turkish diaspora as incarnation of the Turkish people and the Turkish state.
If you insult him, you insult the whole Turkish people. Erdogan is not just the president of Turkey, but he IS Turkey.
This is very much aimed especially at the working class Turks here, whohave the stupid idea of wating a strong man as a paternal, but authoritarian leader. In Turkey many see him as the Turkish equivalent of Margaret Thatcher, who reformed the country's economy by breaking up old state monopolies and kicking ut the corupt, urban, high nosed, secular and republican elites. What they don't see is that he just replaced these with another crowd of religious, provincial and equally corrupt cronies. The average Turkish working class Ahmet ses Erdogan as one of his group, due to Erdogan's roots (Father worked on a Bosporus ferry as a sailor, family was very religious, but also quite poor. Erdogan, as a young man he sold fruits on the market to finance his studies at university. The disrict of Istanbul, where he grew up, is very rough, so he regularly had to fight to be respected. He actually could be Putin's twin).

The almost 2 Million Turks living in Germany are an important pool of voters for him. The impact on the Germans is just a side show for him. He wants to show the Turks that he is THE strong leader and that he can make the EU jump.

Additionally I have mentioned that you'll find this machismo all around the Mediterranean, not just in Muslim countries. Even in Russia they have it.

Jan

Quoting Revelation (Reply 30): Quoting PanHAM (Reply 9): Firs of al,Germany is ruled by the law, not by Mrs Merkel or anyone else Yet Mrs Merkel gets to decide who gets prosecuted. The article says: Quote: The foreign minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, said Social Democrat ministers, including himself and the justice minister Heiko Maas, had been overruled by Merkel in allowing the prosecution to proceed. Seems to be a regretful lack of a judicial independence.

In cases which might interfere with foreign relations (and a case involving a foreign head of state this clearly is the case) most governments have a veto right concerning prosecutions, as it might endanger the security of the state.

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 32): Oh, i am so looking forward to the next edition of the German Magazin Titanic. http://www.titanic-magazin.de/ They just announced that, to be fair and to make sure that Erdogan doesn´t feel so alone, they will offend all the worlds heads of state in their next edition.

I recently found the original from 1989 in my library!

Jan

Quoting Aesma (Reply 36): Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 26): men put a big emphasis on social status and what the consider their honour, formal respect, titles Don't Germans also like their titles ? Everyone with a PhD is called Doktor, even if it's an honorary doctorate !

If you ever have seen Azeri office workers jumping to attention (like in the army), just because their director enters the office, then you'll change your opinion. And I know several academics with, usually top grade, PhDs, who don't publish the fact that they have one. Of my stepfather, who was a communications technology engineer, I only found it out during his funeral, when one of his colleagues was holding a speech.

My father had one and used the title, but this might have been because he was the first one ever (and so far the only one) in our family who earned one.
But to his colleagues he was just "Schorsch", a pun on his first name.

Jan

Quoting Rara (Reply 35): What Merkel DOES decide about is an additional law which will soon be abolished, which puts a particular emphasis on slandering foreign heads of state, but requires the government to authorize the process.

Thank you for the important clarification.

However it remains that she is overruling her Justice Minister. That here would be viewed except in the most extreme circumstances as undermining the Judiciary, and would draw much commentary.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 37): Quoting Revelation (Reply 30): Yet Mrs Merkel gets to decide who gets prosecuted. The article says: Exactly not. Mrs. Merkel has given the decision into the Hands of the judiciary System, which Erdogan already called himself through his German lawyer.

Yes, I understand she will not make the judgement, but she has made the decision to prosecute and in the process overruled the Justice Minister.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 40): In cases which might interfere with foreign relations (and a case involving a foreign head of state this clearly is the case) most governments have a veto right concerning prosecutions, as it might endanger the security of the state.

Yes, that is quite reasonable. I'm no legal expert but I doubt the powers of the US Attorney General are absolute, but any interference from the Executive will draw a lot of criticism. In the past when the Attorney General does not do what the President wants the President will ask for a resignation and in the extreme case will fire them since they are a member of Cabinet that serves at the pleasure of the President, but all of that would be a major political crisis. The Attorney General largely gets to do what they want to do because the President has very little direct control over them. The opposite side is that since the President selects them, they will select someone who is very like minded and very unlikely to do anything that the President would not agree with.

Perhaps you or others can explain more about the German Justice Minister and in particular the relationship between Mrs. Merkel and Justice Minister Heiko Maas?

Quoting Revelation (Reply 42): However it remains that she is overruling her Justice Minister.

"overrule" is a a bad choice of words. The law doesn´t say "the justice minister" decides, it says "the federal government decides". The Chancellor decides what the federal government does. The elected representatives of the people, the parliament, decides when Chancellors need replacing.

He was only "overruled" in the sense that he advised differently, and her own decision was just opposed to what he argued and she went with that. He had no legal say whatsoever, he just had a different opinion.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 42): but she has made the decision to prosecute

Nope, she just decided to not stop the process. The state prosecutor can still look at the case and dismiss it for lack of merit.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 42): but any interference from the Executive will draw a lot of criticism.

There is no interference. Everything happend exactly the way the law intended it to happen.

§ 104a of the German penal code reads:

Quote: Offences under this chapter shall only be prosecuted if the Federal Republic of Germany maintains diplomatic relations with the other state, reciprocity is guaranteed and was also guaranteed at the time of the offence, a request to prosecute by the foreign government exists, and the Federal Government authorises the prosecution.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 42): Perhaps you or others can explain more about the German Justice Minister and in particular the relationship between Mrs. Merkel and Justice Minister Heiko Maas?

With pleasure 
I think even in englisch the German constitution makes for an easily digestible read: http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/

best regards
Thomas

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 43): I think even in englisch the German constitution makes for an easily digestible read:

Thanks, but I'm more interested in the real world dynamics. Why would he make his objection known? Why would she move forward knowing he does not support her decision? Why wouldn't any disagreement be worked out in private?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal...of_Justice_and_Consumer_Protection suggests the MoJ is a more bureaucratic role than the Attorney General is in the US -- is that a fair summation?

Quoting Revelation (Reply 42): Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 40): In cases which might interfere with foreign relations (and a case involving a foreign head of state this clearly is the case) most governments have a veto right concerning prosecutions, as it might endanger the security of the state. Yes, that is quite reasonable. I'm no legal expert but I doubt the powers of the US Attorney General are absolute, but any interference from the Executive will draw a lot of criticism. In the past when the Attorney General does not do what the President wants the President will ask for a resignation and in the extreme case will fire them since they are a member of Cabinet that serves at the pleasure of the President, but all of that would be a major political crisis. The Attorney General largely gets to do what they want to do because the President has very little direct control over them. The opposite side is that since the President selects them, they will select someone who is very like minded and very unlikely to do anything that the President would not agree with. Perhaps you or others can explain more about the German Justice Minister and in particular the relationship between Mrs. Merkel and Justice Minister Heiko Maas?

I'm quite sure that for the last two weeks Merkel and her staff had been working to get a less confrontational solution, but Erdogan ddoesn't like compromises, he is spoiling for a fight, so that he can big himself up. I mentioned that in his youth he as a street fighter. In his world you are either a winner (who takes all) or a loser, who gets kicked around. At the moment, due to the refugee crisis, he thinks that he has the EU by the short and curleis. He recently tried to pick a fight with Putin, but got told by NATO that while they will defend Turkey if they get attacked without a fault of their own, he will be on his own if he provokes a war with Russia.
Erdogan is just one of the several populist authoritarian wannabe Caudillos, Duces, Great Leaders etc., who recently appeared from the woodwork and want to lead their countries back to ancient greatness.

Jan

Quoting Revelation (Reply 44): Thanks, but I'm more interested in the real world dynamics. Why would he make his objection known? Why would she move forward knowing he does not support her decision? Why wouldn't any disagreement be worked out in private?

Party politics, mostly. It's important to point out that the MoJ in Germany isn't head of the judiciary, as the Attorney General in the United States is, but just a minister (i.e. member of the cabinet). The chancellor is head of government and can overrule the ministers if she so chooses.

In our current coalition government, the chancellor and the MoJ are from different parties. The Social Democrats (party of Mr Maass) seek to differentiate themselves from the Conservatives (party of Mrs Merkel) and often choose to take opposing positions on certain political issues.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 44): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal...of_Justice_and_Consumer_Protection suggests the MoJ is a more bureaucratic role than the Attorney General is in the US -- is that a fair summation?

Yes, more bureaucratic and also more "political" (in the sense of party interests being served).

Quoting Revelation (Reply 44): Why would he make his objection known? Why would she move forward knowing he does not support her decision? Why wouldn't any disagreement be worked out in private?

Why not? When cabinet secretary disagree with policies they usually say so publicly. Bear in mind that we, more often then not, have more than one party form the government. The Social democratic party, to which the justice minister belongs, is opposed to Merkels decision. Of course they say that out loud, otherwise the smaller of the parties forming the government would just be an appendage of the cecum for the bigger partner.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 44): uggests the MoJ is a more bureaucratic role than the Attorney General is in the US -- is that a fair summation?

Not much summation there, and i guess from your perspective the most important information is missing: there is no federal justice system in the sense you have it. No federal prisons and stuff. The justice department has less than 800 employees and just about half a billion in budged compared to over 100.000 and over 20 billion in the US.
It is mostly a coordinating organisation, they don´t "do" much.

best regards
Thomas

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 43): "overrule" is a a bad choice of words. The law doesn´t say "the justice minister" decides, it says "the federal government decides". The Chancellor decides what the federal government does. The elected representatives of the people, the parliament, decides when Chancellors need replacing. He was only "overruled" in the sense that he advised differently, and her own decision was just opposed to what he argued and she went with that. He had no legal say whatsoever, he just had a different opinion.

Ok, on re-reading, it seems the Chancellor has a lot more independence and power than does a US President. In the US if a Cabinet member had a true disagreement on direction with the President chances are good that they'd resign. If they had a mild disagreement they'd try to work it out within the Cabinet and would not go public with the disagreement. If a reasonably strong disagreement became public the Cabinet member would probably be on their way out the door one way or the other, either via a request for a resignation, or an outright firing, or a steady decline in influence followed by a replacement at the next convenient opportunity. It's important to US politics that our Cabinet be viewed as a team that's working together. We'd find it pretty upsetting if it became public that the Attorney General disagreed with the President on an important decision, especially if it impacted foreign policy.

It's interesting how so many outside the US think the President is so powerful. The reality is that the Cabinet officers have a lot of independence, and of course the Congress has a huge say in what parts of the President's agenda actually get implemented.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 45): I'm quite sure that for the last two weeks Merkel and her staff had been working to get a less confrontational solution,

Yes, surely, but as I am asking above, I wonder if is she working as hard to make sure her own government is in agreement? Isn't the public disagreement a big problem or is it normal and expected? I don't think I'm going to find that answer reading the German Constitution.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 45): I mentioned that in his youth he as a street fighter. In his world you are either a winner (who takes all) or a loser, who gets kicked around.

Yes, thanks for those insights.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 45): Erdogan is just one of the several populist authoritarian wannabe Caudillos, Duces, Great Leaders etc., who recently appeared from the woodwork and want to lead their countries back to ancient greatness.

I'm definitely not trying to make this about the USA, I'm just trying to understand the differences, but I'll point out that many US Presidents get their offices by trying to project power. JFK claimed Ike (of all people) was weak and let a 'bomber gap' emerge. Meanwhile Ike had all the pictures from the U2 and knew there was no such gap but could not explain that publicly. Ronald Reagan of course made the projection of power the main element of his campaigns, as did GWB.

I was sick recently and binge watched all 24 episodes of the BBC's "Cold War" documentary series. It's a great view of so many of the dynamics of the mid 40s to the early 90s and for me it's nice because it's in englisch and yet not done from a totally US point of view. It's amazing how so many elements of politics are based on power projection. Like little children so afraid of each other that they can't find a way to talk to each other.

Quoting Rara (Reply 46): In our current coalition government, the chancellor and the MoJ are from different parties. The Social Democrats (party of Mr Maass) seek to differentiate themselves from the Conservatives (party of Mrs Merkel) and often choose to take opposing positions on certain political issues.

Ok, that explains a lot to me. In the US our Ministers form the Cabinet and are all appointed by the President with approval of Congress. Almost all are members of the President's party and since their appointment happens right after the President's election it's rare for Congress to not approve. It is customary for the President to take one or two Cabinet members from the other party for some of the less important Cabinet positions, but these officials need to toe the Administration line or find themselves in danger of being kicked out. Since their own party enjoys the visibility that they get via the position they also will not support an official who objects publicly to Administration policy. Our Executive branch is largely a one party operation. Of course Congress and the Judiciary keep the Executive in check.

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 47): Why not? When cabinet secretary disagree with policies they usually say so publicly. Bear in mind that we, more often then not, have more than one party form the government. The Social democratic party, to which the justice minister belongs, is opposed to Merkels decision. Of course they say that out loud, otherwise the smaller of the parties forming the government would just be an appendage of the cecum for the bigger partner.

Thanks, that explains a lot.

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 47): Not much summation there, and i guess from your perspective the most important information is missing: there is no federal justice system in the sense you have it. No federal prisons and stuff. The justice department has less than 800 employees and just about half a billion in budged compared to over 100.000 and over 20 billion in the US. It is mostly a coordinating organisation, they don´t "do" much.

Thanks again. In the US many crimes are 'federalized' so the US DoJ is a very large and powerful organization. I didn't realize that the German MoJ has a much different role.