There was indeed a rich tradition of shared social reform. Examining the political parties, Doering-Manteuffel attributes particular importance to the Grand Coalition from l to l These years of political cooperation would not have been possible unless the large parties had moved away from their early confrontational stance.
University of New South Wales Law Journal
By the late ls the SPD was ready to adopt its Godesberg Program, bidding farewell to long enshrined notions of collectivization. This farewell to confrontation in both parties, Doering-Manteuffel suggests, culminated during the period of the Grand Coalition, which necessarily forced enough agreement on basic principles to confirm consensus liberalism. Where did the new pragmatism originate? The author points to the growing interaction among key German and American elites, which strikes me as plausible, although I am uncertain whether the intellectuals of the CCF played so crucial a role.
It is hard to believe that such sophisticated thinkers as Daniel Bell or Edward Shils and others, important though their ideas were, would have had so catalytic an effect on democratization. In any case, to cite these intellectuals' roles demonstrates how difficult it becomes to distinguish between the networks of civil society and the impact of high politics.
The search for pluralism, the effort to back away from ideological thinking, reflected the Soviet-American confrontation as well as many of their earlier brushes with radicalism in the s. And the public diffusion of their concepts through magazines such as Der Monat and the many conferences that took place depended on financing through the Ford Foundation, whose leadership had virtually enlisted as a government auxiliary in the Cold War, and on secret sources from the CIA.
I would suggest that from World War II through the ls American ideological production represented a symbiotic effort on the part of public and private sources. American hegemony, in effect, conscripted the intellectuals, many of whom dropped their traditional critical stance toward the state, such that it remains difficult to distinguish between official and civic mobilization. Shepard Stone is a good example of the tireless intellectual organizer who deployed private and public resources alike to strengthen German democracy and its containment of both Left and Right.
The totalitarian threat first of Nazism and then of Soviet Communism encouraged a fusion of private and public ideology in the West as well. The story thus requires us to think about the interaction of foreign policy and domestic policy, and of state and society, a bit more fluidly than Doering-Manteuffel allows. Doering-Manteuffel's focus on parties also gives too short a shrift, I believe, to other key developments: some political or judicial, although not in the realm of party politics, and many societal. Let me cite some of the political and judicial events that I believe played a key role precisely in the decade that the author identifies as crucial.
One was the Spiegel Affair, which signaled that editors and the public would not tolerate high-handed moves against the press, even in the name of national security. Others included the protracted Auschwitz and Maidanek trials, which meant that Germans themselves were seriously investigating and prosecuting war criminals. The inner democratization that Doering-Manteuffel seeks to describe required a serious confrontation with the past on the part of Germans themselves, and although much resistance to such scrutiny continued, the trials of the s represented a major step forward.
More generally, I would have preferred greater emphasis on the contemporary social transformations within the Federal Republic. The author acknowledges that political change went apace with "structural" factors, among which he cites "economic prosperity and effective social security as well as an unmistakable trend to a service- and leisure-oriented society. Despite the Wirtschaftswunder, these were really developments of the s, which certainly fits Doering-Manteuffel's chronology.
Democratic society is mass society, and for perhaps the first time in its history Germany was becoming a mass society in the modern sense, not just a society where masses were created by political mobilization. However, as the author recognizes, taking note of these developments requires the historian to place the Federal Republic within a broader framework. Germany had a particular democratic "deficit" to overcome, but it did so by participation in trends that gripped most Western societies. Some were political: The role of parties changed throughout the Western world.
- Violin Duets, Op. 71 - Violin 1.
- Little White Magic:Book #3 (The Girlfriends Series)!
- Labor Migration;
- WEDDLEs Guide to Association Web Sites 2009/10: For Recruiters and Job Seekers (Weddles Guide to Association Web Sites: For Recruiters & Job Seeker)!
- Early Nutrition: Impact on Short- and Long-Term Health (Nestlé Nutrition Institute Workshop Series)!
The end of ideology was not just a German phenomenon. Otto Kirchheimer discussed the decline of principled opposition on the part of the SPD within the context of the growth of catch-all parties in most advanced industrial societies. Italy, too, was undergoing a similar efflorescence, and the phrases it generated, "La dolce vita" and the "apertura a sinistra" or "opening to the Left," indicate different aspects of the transformation.
Throughout the Western world, in effect, political aspirations tended to change. It was as if the ls had required a vast investment in collective discipline: The men and women of that decade needed to reconstruct societies physically and thus work to accumulate national capital; they needed to draw sharp political and military lines against the new threat of Soviet Russia; and they tended to reinforce traditional morality and family structure after the war had blurred gender roles as women entered the work force and headed families in difficult circumstances.
Nonetheless, after a decade of such intense sociopsychical and political effort, there was a reaction to such collective effort: less discipline, a partial shift from heroic accumulation to private consumption or social spending, and less Cold War Abgrenzung and more inclusiveness. In foreign policy the shift from Hallstein Doctrine to Ostpolitik was a salient political example of such changed priorities. These changes helped to democratize Germany, but not just Germany.
In the United States they helped to advance democracy in the major area of civic life where democracy had been excluded, that is, race relations. In Italy they undermined the close connection between the Catholic Church and the Christian Democratic Party and legitimated working-class participation in government. In England they slowly began the process of weakening class hierarchies maintained by Oxbridge education and family lineage.
In France they helped ensure that the new constitutional regime of the Fifth Republic did not become simply reactionary but rather a broader expression of social aspirations. Germany began its democratic transition from a different starting point, to be sure, but responded to many of the same forces that gripped all Western societies. The world transformed itself in the latter s; it spun, so to speak, from a tight sociopolitical orbit into a larger one. With the subsequent impact of globalization, it is still slipping.
The merit of this essay is to show us that the transitions of the s may be less postwar history than a prelude to postmodern history. In conclusion, I would like to raise a difficult question that arises from the issues that this essay so usefully discusses, namely, how do we test the democratization that Doering-Manteuffel seeks to explain, that is, "inner" democratization or the democratization of "hearts and minds"?
As its essential quality, the author seems to posit a concept of reconciliation, that is, the willingness to reach across the party divide and seek common ground. This is the meaning of "consensus liberalism;" it was the change that took place, as he describes it, in both major parties during the late ls and ls; it was the sine qua non of the Grand Coalition.
And, so he states, it remains today the prerequisite for incorporating the former East Germany into the enlarged Federal Republic. I agree with him: If democracy involves reconciliation, then anathematizing the PDS is probably counterproductive. Of course reconciliation has its limits: I cannot imagine that the author would have wanted to tolerate a revived Nazi Party after l Nevertheless, reconciliation is important.
However, I would propose that mobilization also is important. Modern democracies are tested at times in the streets or by other major acts of participation, such as marches or fundamental electoral campaigns. Democracy does not require, and indeed cannot sustain, continuous mass demonstrations, but it does sometimes build on the willingness to confront power directly. The American civil rights movement, the German Lichterketten against neo-Nazi violence several years ago, and the East Germans' earlier demonstrations in Leipzig are testimonies of democratization.
But just as reconciliation can in theory go too far, so open political contention also can become problematic: Were the student demonstrations of the late ls always a testimony to democratization? It is true, I believe, that more democratic societies can result from uncomfortable public conflict, but so too can more intolerant ones.
Indeed, mobilization and reconciliation, and contention and tolerance, can work at cross purposes in a modern democracy. Nonetheless, mature democracies probably have to experience both.
- Play Money (Pathfinders).
- Sweetpeas Weekend Adventures At Grandmas House.
- Situation Room (Foto).
- 9/ Das Märchen von der unentdeckten Hamburger Terrorzelle | Machtelite.
- Young Men in Prison: Surviving and Coping with Life Inside!
- Works of Henry Harland.
- The Knights Templar Absolution: The Chinon Parchment and the History of the Poor Knights of Christ!
- Interview with NSA Experts on US Spying in Germany?
- Grandes Eaux Noires le Premier Livre de Litterature Nigerienne en Français (French Edition).
- The Smell of Mud;
- Situation Room (Foto) – Wikipedia!
- None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.!
At the end, Doering-Manteuffel's essay challenges us to think about what exactly constitutes democratization. This is not primarily a historical question, but we can answer it only with reference to history. This essay prods that inquiry. Barclay Kalamazoo College , T. The chief foci of discussion were the nature and legacy of the two Napoleonic empires. The conference consisted of six panels, the last of which was a roundtable. Each of the first five sessions was capped by a commentary and by questions and contributions from the floor. Woloch was particularly concerned with documenting the attempts to legitimize the empire by linking it to the "basic gains" of the Revolution.
Cheryl Welch was the commentator for this session. She drew attention to the ambivalent nineteenth-century responses to Napoleon from Enlightenment and Romantic thinkers, and from those who considered him to be the archetype of revolution and antirevolution.
She concluded that the Napoleonic "cautionary tale" no longer had much purchase in the late twentieth century.
Chaired by Jean Cohen, it began with a contribution from Jack Hayward contrasting the Gaullist and Bonapartist regimes. Although insisting that Gaullism cannot be reduced to Bonapartism, Hayward argued that both the Napoleons and de Gaulle can be understood as classic examples of "heroic" leadership, a term he prefers to "charismatic" or "crisis" leadership.
Whereas Hayward focused on two regime types within French politics, T. Blanning analyzed the interstate relationship between France and Prussia. From being allies or at least nonbelligerents for much of the eighteenth century, they were transformed into enemies largely by Napoleon's refusal to grant Prussia a legitimate zone of interest in North Germany and by the despoliation meted out by French armies on Prussian soil. Napoleon III, through a combination of ideology and personality, provided an unwitting stimulus to Prussia's military reform and, hence, to the events that led to Sedan.
The commentator for this session, Charles Tilly, sought to build on the previous two papers by developing a typology of relations among sovereign, leaders, nation, and state. He also suggested that the papers raised important issues regarding the relationships between military organization and political authority, and between political authority and citizenship. Jerzy Linderski chaired panel three on "The Politics of Historiography. Conceptualizing a Regime Type: Bonapartism or Caesarism? Using examples as diverse as Julius Caesar, Warren Hastings, and Douglas MacArthur, Eckstein argued that the experience of governing a large province independently creates an "imperial counterculture" that is ill disposed to the conventions and the mentality of the "law-ruled state.
Other kinds of opposition to the law-ruled state were described by Wolfgang Wippermann in his discussion of Bonapart-ism and fascism. Reviewing a number of theories that emphasize the distinctiveness of Bonapartist and fascist regimes, Wippermann argued for their continuity though not identity.
More specifically, he defended the claim that "a theory of Bonapartism. David E. Barclay then considered the response of Prussian conservatives to Bonapartist governance. Concentrating on the s, Barclay demonstrated the complexity of such responses that ranged from "high conservative" antipathy to crypto-Bonapartism.
A commentary by Jerrold Seigel developed the theme of multiple conservatisms, and, referring to Tocqueville, remarked on the "proto-Foucauldian quality" of his descriptions of the "quiet, pervasive control over people's lives and minds that democratic forms of domination may assume.
Fontana showed that Gramsci deployed the notion of Caesarism as part of his efforts to understand the victory of fascism and the failure not only of the revolutionary left but also of liberalism and liberal institutions generally. The attack on liberalism was a prominent theme, too, in the talk that followed by John McCormick on Carl Schmitt.
McCormick scrutinized Schmitt's distinction between "commissarial" and "sovereign" dictatorships; highlighted the manner in which Schmitt's doctrine of dictatorship eventually collapsed into Caesarism; and argued that liberal constitutionalism is much more robust in dealing with political crisis than Schmitt envisaged.
The commentator, David Kettler, objected to an overhistoricised view of Caesarism and offered some pertinent observations on Gramsci's critique of liberalism and Schmitt's juristic understanding of dictatorship. A roundtable discussion concluded the conference. Blanning, J. Pocock and Zwi Yavetz. A pervasive theme of the discussion was the extent of the continuities or ruptures between Bonapartist modes of rule and those of their absolutist precursors and fascist successors. Convener: Cordula A. Grewe GHI. Commentators: David E. In the debates about the nature and construction of national identities, the "imagined" or "invented" dimensions of collective identities has become a focal point of debate.
Placed in this context, the theme of "Historicizing the Nation" aimed to reassess this argument in an interdisciplinary context, examining the ways in which "medieval" imagery, iconography, and subject matter were appropriated and transformed by national ist movements. Based on the assumption that medievalism was an integral component of "Romantic" nationalism, the papers centered on the ways in which certain specific pictorial or visual themes associated with the Middle Ages were transformed in the context of nationalist myth-making.
The synchronic reading of the different national movements illustrated the similarity of concepts and strategies among different social and ethnic groups for building their "imagined" communities. This includes the formation of smaller regionalist Snipes-Hoyt or political Morowitz collectives. As much as the employed strategies differed in detail, they resembled each other in the Janus-like character of their approach to history. Looking back to look forward, the past - itself already a construction - was used as a re source to develop or justify contemporary concepts of social, political, or military renewal.
Not surprisingly, the efforts to claim, create, and establish national identity through historical writing or through literary and visual production peaked in times of social, economic, or military crisis. The construction of national identity coincided with the definition of and distinction from the other, which was all too often defined as the enemy. In these processes, visual and literary productions played a key role in the distribution of national istic concepts to a wide audience. Literature and imagery provided the symbols that could be inscribed on the community or the collective.
Through them the abstraction "nation" became, so to speak, flesh. In contexts such as Ireland or Germany, where national cultural unity and its political expression in the nation-state had not yet taken shape, national identity remained a program of action, a term based on expectation rather than experience. Identity, such as Irishness, had yet to be constructed. Beside demonstrating Ireland's industrial potential, the exhibition claimed the importance of Ireland as a cultural center by including a Hall of Fine Arts, which showed not only Irish artists but also European Old Masters.
This claim was, of course, directed against the cultural hegemony of England, attacking its political dominance on a cultural level. Yet even more important was the Hall of Irish Antiquities, where a collection of Celtic objects not only asserted the existence of a distinct Celtic history but also laid the foundation for the development of a specifically Irish iconography. In later years this iconography became a powerful, widely accepted symbolic language for Irish nationalists and liberation movements.
Another crucial aspect of the ideal of the Irish Industrial Exhibition of was the intertwining of national aspirations and Christian faith. As in Ireland, a revival of religious belief and the process of re-Christianization of society accompanied and supported national ideas. In Germany, too, religion and nationalism were often viewed in a mutually reinforcing light. The core of the German Nazarenes' enterprise, for example, constituted their belief that only the rise of a new religiosity could lead to an artistic as well as a political renewal of the German people after a century of decadence and moral decline Grewe.
Turning toward Christianity, the majority of Nazarenes rejected antiquity as a symbol of heathenism and denounced French neoclassicism as an expression of secularization and revolution, both of which they despised. Turning away from the Greek nude as the prevalent model, they developed instead an androgynous body ideal that sought to express purity, self-restraint, and sexual abstinence, that is, the renunciation of eighteenth-century decadence.
Although the Nazarene reform program corresponded with the religious overtones of anti-French resistance and war rhetoric, the ideal of the androgynous body contrasted peculiarly with the rhetoric of the modern masculine stereotype that otherwise dominated German nationalistic body imagery. The paper on "Xaverio or the Ideal of the Androgynous Body: Artistic Crisis and National Desires" Grewe showed how difficult it proved to construct a "national body" outside of the Winkelmannian neoclassical model. Even in a country such as France, where the nation-state had been achieved, the questions of what constituted the nation, what it was composed of, and how it could be defined remained hotly debated.
Although the notion of France as a nation remained essentially unchallenged throughout both the nineteenth and the twentieth centuries, medievalism responded also in France to internal crisis. First, medievalism played an important part in the conflicts between different parties that aimed to enforce their political positions through their particular construction of the past. Whereas the former analyzed the ways in which architectural criticism served to develop a specifically Catholic national identity supported by conservative circles, the latter demonstrated how leftist writers, artists, and art historians stylized the culture of Brittany as the source for democratic traditions.
With its thriving peasant culture, its isolation from the bureaucratic entanglements of Paris, and its allegedly long tradition of Celtic liberty, Brittany served as the "ur-France" of a variety of populist nationalist ideologues. In the decades before this very construction of the Middle Ages driven by contemporary goals came under attack in the wake of a national crisis after the Franco-Prussian War in The crisis of French national identity fostered a mingling of medievalism with biological and racial theories.
One widely held theory about French origins claimed that the French aristocracy descended from the energetic, pure-blooded Germanic invaders of the fifth century, whereas the common people were products of the weak, mixed-race Gallo-Romans. France was depicted as injured, as a sick body, a metaphor appropriate for the popular organic conception of state and nation. Yet, opposing racial theories, biological metaphors, and the rhetoric of sickness, writers such as Coulanges instead located the source for France's national crisis in precisely these constructions of the past that supported widespread insecurities about the character of the French people.
Understanding the sociological function of historical interpretations, Coulanges denounced the misconceptions of France's history as the major cause of its sickness and called for a more scholarly, less biased approach to medieval history. He argued that the influence of the German invaders on French culture was in fact slight, and he insisted instead on the unbroken links between the Roman Empire and the subsequent development of France.
This analysis of the past allowed him to describe France as a historically independent, strong, and stable country throughout its history. As Emery emphasized, Coulanges's revisionist approach to medieval history not only helped to heal France's moral wounds. However, the tie between Coulanges's allegedly more objective scholarship and contemporary political debates also alerts us to the political implications of all historical writing.
Writing about the past almost inevitably includes a "making" of the past. Beyond shedding new light on the processes that lead to the construction of national identity, myths, and iconography, the discussion of "historicizing the nation" also helped us to understand the complex relation between the present and the past. Roundtable at the GHI, June 22, Participants: Francis M. Bator, Martin J. Hillenbrand, Thomas L. Hughes, Robert G. Livingston, Ernest R.
May, and James S. The history of German-American relations in the s and early s is now being investigated by a growing number of historians. These researchers are taking advantage of newly opened archival records and recently published collections of documents. The aim of this workshop was to add a third perspective, namely, that of the recollections of officials active during this period. Bator, a professor emeritus of political economy at Harvard University's John F.
Kennedy School of Government, served for three years as deputy national security adviser to President Lyndon B. Johnson, with responsibility for foreign economic policy and for U. Hillenbrand, a professor emeritus of international relations at the University of Georgia, served as deputy chief of mission at the American Embassy in Bonn from to and was assistant secretary of state for European Affairs from to before returning to Bonn as U.
Hughes, who served as deputy director of the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research from to , went on to become president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace from to ; Robert G. Livingston, a U. Sutterlin, a distinguished fellow at Yale University, served as counselor for political affairs at the American Embassy in Bonn in and as director of the State Department's Office of Central European Affairs from to before he went on to the United Nations, where he headed the Executive Office of the Secretary General from to The roundtable was moderated by Ernest R.
May, a professor of history at Harvard University and an authority on the history of international relations. The workshop started off with a brief presentation by Wilfried Mausbach on German-American relations during the chancellorship of Ludwig Erhard Mausbach identified three issues that dominated the bilateral relationship in these years: 1 the West German government's efforts to counter what it perceived to be the growing neglect of the German Question among its closest allies; 2 Washington's proposal to create the Multilateral Force MLF , which was to give the West Germans a sense of participation in their own nuclear defense without giving them actual control of these weapons; and 3 the agreements, beginning in , to have Bonn offset foreign-exchange expenditures of American soldiers stationed in Germany through purchases of U.
Francis M. Bator picked up on the offset issue, explaining that Washington assumed that Erhard would honor the current offset agreement. Regarding future offset agreements, however, Johnson signaled his readiness to compromise and proposed trilateral U. Bator emphasized that in conveying this position to the German government, the United States made it clear in numerous messages via numerous channels that officials in Bonn should get back to them on this issue.
However, according to Bator, nothing happened: "We absolutely blanked out. We got no acceptance of the idea of a trilateral negotiation with respect to the future offset and nothing on the current offset. In his view, the criticism overlooked the fact that the president's major objective was to enable him to maintain a very large American conventional force in western Europe in the face of enormous pressures from the U. Congress and serious balance-of-payments difficulties. From the perspective of keeping alive the political viability of ground-force deployments, the ensuing trilateral negotiations were a success.
As to American negotiating tactics during Erhard's visit to Washington in September , Bator confessed that it took him years to figure out why the president would not yield ground. Characteristically, Johnson would not explain himself to his staff: "Exposition was not his game. A majority leader did not cut a deal with someone who appeared unable to deliver. Bator explained that in late August the president was convinced that the days of the Erhard government were numbered.
Martin J. Hillenbrand emphasized that Johnson's assessment of the situation was not based specifically on any prediction coming from the American Embassy in Bonn but rather might very well have been due to the impact of reports from Bonn over the previous two years. These reports left little doubt that Erhard's standing within his party, the Christian Democratic Union CDU , was rapidly eroding and that the chancellor lacked the political skills to govern the country in the same manner as Konrad Adenauer had.
Nevertheless, Hillenbrand felt that American emphasis on offset was both diplomatically and technically done in such a way as to exacerbate the situation. Of course, this came in the wake of a concerted American effort to convince the Germans of its merits. In Hillenbrand's view, this episode is an example of a tendency to "dream up a scheme to meet what we think is a psychological necessity on the part of our European allies" that is then transformed into a genuine American cause.
Thomas L. Hughes took issue with Bator's portrayal of Johnson as the "central player" in these matters who often overrode his own advisers. Hughes pointed out that this portrayal to some extent contradicts the picture of the president behaving like a majority leader, always trying to be sensitive to a variety of viewpoints.
Hughes explained why he did not see Johnson acting this way, and he felt that this was "especially ironic because German-American relations in the s were marked by an effervescence of politics all over the place. You couldn't find two more politically active capitals in the world than Washington and Bonn. In fact, Hughes never sensed that Johnson was very much engaged or interested in Germany.
He pointed out that the German-American relationship and the German "success story" of the s were traditionally identified with Republicans, such as Eleanor, Allen, and John Foster Dulles or John J. Thus, the Democratic Party was not much interested in Germany. By the end of his administration, and his triumphant visit to Berlin in June , John F. Kennedy had overcome his party's reluctance to make German-American relations its own. But, according to Hughes, it might have been precisely Kennedy's tremendous success that kept Johnson from visiting Germany until Adenauer's funeral in James S.
Sutterlin emphasized the extraordinary, long-lasting, and direct effect that internally motivated U. Moreover, he drew attention to the personality of the American ambassador at the time, George McGhee. Although the ambassador was a friend of the president, Sutterlin believed that this also carried some disadvantages. Because McGhee felt he had a direct line to the president, he constantly wrote telegrams on the assumption that they would have an immediate effect on Johnson, especially on the issues of offset and the MLF. Sutterlin, however, thought they probably did not and that this illusion on the part of the ambassador might have actually reduced rather than increased the effectiveness of the embassy as a source of advice.
The role of the embassy was further complicated by a constant stream of people from the Treasury Department coming to Bonn, which indicated that issues like offset were not centered in the State Department and were in fact handled outside traditional diplomatic channels. This may have contributed to misunderstandings on both sides of the Atlantic.
Philipp Gassert introduced the second half of the workshop. He showed the audience the verbatim text of a conversation recorded by Bator on March 2, The occasion, Gassert explained, was the return to Washington of McCloy, the American envoy to the offset negotiations, during a break in the trilateral negotiations. The winter and spring of witnessed what has since been described as the coming of age of the Federal Republic. With the end of the postwar era, Americans could expect more support, especially financially, from Germany, but Bonn was at the same time more inclined to resist American demands.
Thus, the government of Erhard's successor, Kurt Georg Kiesinger, let it be known that it would not agree to a full future offset. With negotiations deadlocked, McCloy was back to receive new guidelines. Gassert used the record of McCloy's discussion with the president and his advisers to illustrate how we can look at the German-American relationship from several angles: personalities, questions of communication and perception, political constraints, and the geopolitical and strategic level.
The conversation between Johnson and McCloy made clear that the president wanted to know what the Germans had to offer; yet, the Germans were intent on sounding out the Americans first. However, Gassert pointed out that there was another mirror image: Johnson and Kiesinger each argued that the future of the alliance was at stake, that each was doing everything he could to hold it together, and that the other side was the one jeopardizing relations.
Bator thought that the memorandum once again showed Johnson acting as a majority leader-like president. According to Bator, although he leaned toward McCloy's position, the president did not want to reveal his hand and tried very hard "to stiffen" McCloy. Bator warned, however, that this had to be read as a negotiating position and not as a description of where the president's mind actually was. Bator went on to call attention to the sensitivity of negative press reports, such as those triggered by a February interview with Kiesinger, alluded to in the conversation between Johnson and McCloy.
Bator explained that such reports made it more difficult for the president to ward off domestic opposition, while there was a total incomprehension of the president's problem in playing out his political hand on the part of the Germans. Other participants elaborated on this issue: Hillenbrand pointed out that not only the press sometimes generated an atmosphere of crisis: "Many of these crises of confidence between the Federal Republic and the United States that I have lived through were in many cases, it seems to me, exaggerated by both sides.
There is an excellent tendency on the part of staff members and particularly those who are immediately concerned in the bureaucracies, who were writing briefing papers - in order to interest the principals who are going to meetings - to emphasize or overemphasize the critical nature of this particular meeting.
Robert G. Olivia Condac.
Frank Louwen Dr. Susanne Feidicker Dr. Isabel Voigt Prof. Nina Bock Dr. Wiebke Schaarschmidt Lena Raddatz Dr. Mina Dianakshoori Dr. Christine Eichbaum Susanne Faller Dr. Kyra Fischer Thea Hug Dr. Annemarie Neuhoff Dr. Bettina Paul Dr. Lisa Holetzke Prof. Juping Yuan Dr. Silvia Oddo-Sommerfeld M. Miriam Bieber M. Sarah Sommerlad Hebammenteam. Monat 2. Monat 3. Monat 4. Monat 5. Monat 6. Monat 7. Monat 8. Monat 9. Monat Lehre Vorlesung Praktikum Tipps Famulatur.
KollegInnen Veranstaltungen. Mitarbeiter Dr. Septembers So viele Indizien auch gegen Motassadeq sprechen, so wenig wirkliche Beweise gibt es gegen ihn. Bei allen juristischen Feinheiten bleibt dies ein Makel, den kein Urteil aufheben kann. Es werden wohl immer Zweifel bleiben. SPON 8. Foto- und Filmaufnahmen sind beim Prozess in Guantanamo verboten. September gilt, stand ebenfalls im Visier der Geheimdienste. Dies ist nicht Sache des FBI. Sie sagen dem FBI nichts. Wir werden es sagen, falls und wenn wir uns entscheiden, dass das FBI es wissen soll. Rossini und sein Kollege Miller wurden nach dem For years, rather than reveal the true nature of the blunder, the agency has instead propagated the fable that it missed that San Diego call in for technical reasons.
Yet the public only became aware thanks to the information leaked by Edward Snowden. Today, other NSA whistleblowers are claiming that the program was based on a lie. I had to stop every couple pages and just sort of absorb and try to rearrange my understanding of history for the past 13 years and the years leading up to that. It challenges you to rethink everything, and so I think the whole country needs to go through that. But that is no reason to keep the truth from the American people.
Bush am Zusammengefasst lautete seine Botschaft an die Welt wie folgt: Am Every civilized nation here today is resolved to keep the most basic commitment of civilization: We will defend ourselves and our future against terror and lawless violence. Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September 11th — malicious lies that attempt to shift blame away from the terrorists themselves, away from the guilty.
We face enemies that hate, not our policies,-but our existence — the tolerance and openness and creative culture that define us. Warum allerdings politisch Verantwortliche aller Parteien gefolgt von diversen Lohnschreibern der sog. Vierten Gewalt einem kollektiven Blackout anheim fielen, ist logisch nicht nachvollziehbar. September umgehend identifiziert werden. Zum ersten Mal in seiner Geschichte rief der Nato-Rat am Teil 1.
Teil 2. Teil 3. Der Berliner Morgenpost am 8. In dem Brief, datiert am CBS vom Otto Schily am 9. September vorausgesehen. Auch das Pentagon war Teil eines solchen Szenarios. CNN vom 1. He had a valid U. Investigators have confirmed that Jarrah had spent at least three weeks in January at an al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan. He was released because U. Die FAZ vom Deutsche Presse-Agentur vom However, they had hung up the phone when the year-old man said he was being detained.
Just hours before the kamikaze airplane attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington he had asked in vain to be allowed to send a fax to U. President George W. The man had for the past month insisted that he had important information for the United States and must urgently pass it on by telephone. The German authorities had eventually allowed him to make the call, the paper wrote.
"Uneingeschränkte Solidarität" | Politik
Daily Mail am 7. The CIA issued a confidential warning that Muslim fundamentalists were preparing a spectacular attack imminently, but it was unable to specify the target. The warning to aviation regulators coincided with a series of flights planned by the author, Salman Rushdie, as part of a North American tour to promote his new novel, Fury. It led to the belief that Rushdie was the likely target. Deutsche Welle vom The year-old, who is alleged to have flown the first plane into the World Trade Center in an attack that killed thousands, is portrayed by Hopsicker in the book as a swinging party animal, partial to alcohol, cocaine and night clubs and far removed from the devout Muslim student in Hamburg that the press largely focused on.
Das Abendblatt vom 5. NDR-Doku am Chicago Tribune vom But the disclosure that the CIA was seeking to turn Darkazanli into a spy during the time the initial hijacking plans were being laid represents the earliest and deepest set of U. Consulate, appeared at the headquarters of the Hamburg state domestic intelligence agency, the LFV, that is responsible for tracking terrorists and domestic extremists. New York Times vom Daily Times vom Secret service chiefs are said to have taken seriously the tip from one of its veteran informants and immediately passed on the details to Washington.
Cox News Service vom 2. And while we have been unable to corroborate the nature of those conversations, Greenberg confirmed that some of that information was passed along to the Senate Intelligence Committee. And this was before September 11th.
Glass to the Intelligence Committee, and my question is: why did no one from the Committee follow up with Mr. Glass to pursue this? We are an oversight and legislative agency. The attack will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties against US facilities or interests. Attack preparations have been made.
Attack will occur with little or no warning. Planes were never in place to intercept it. By the time the Northeast Air Defense Sector had been informed of the hijacking, United 93 had already crashed. Farmer scrutinizes F. Sunday Herold vom 2. As the World Trade Centre burned and crumpled, the five men celebrated and filmed the worst atrocity ever committed on American soil as it played out before their eyes.
Who do you think they were? Iraqis, even? Al-Qaeda, surely? Wrong on all counts.