2 German journalists were held and kidnapped by US-authorities (english)

<a href=www.indymedia.org>Jens Klinker and Peter Nowak 7:04am Wed Apr 9 '03 (Modified on 5:16pm Thu Apr 10 '03) jens.berlin@gmx.net article#310096

24 hours in the country of unlimited opportunities 2 German journalists were held and kidnapped by US-authorities.

You can also read this article in german by clicking the following link. Der Artikel ist auch in deutsch verfügbar: de.indymedia.org

To visit and to report about information meetings about the put down overthrow against the left-reformistic Chavez-government in Caracas/Venezuela one year ago, we (two journalists from Berlin/Germany) wanted to fly to Caracas on Monday, April 7th 2003. Because the flight Berlin-Milano was canceled, the airline provided another route Berlin-London-Miami-Caracas. Until the arrival in Miami there hadn´t been any problems. In Miami all passengers had to show their passports some meters after leaving the plane. When we were controlled, the policeman saw that there was an Iraq-Visa marked in one of our passports.

Because of this we were brought to the immigrant-office. We informed the police about our activities as journalists and about the fact that we didn´t want to travel to the USA but to transit via Miami to Caracas. Nevertheless the police took photos and stored fingerprints from us like from criminals. And we have been interrogated for 8 hours (about the Iraq; the Red Army Fraction, a "marxist-leninist" city-guerilla of the german past and about political things like the relationship to the USA or activities). Additional the police created extensive files. The police claimed that they have information about left activities about one of us. There is the question how the exchange between german and US-american offices had been.

The police refused to contact a lawyer and a translator and to get a law-help. To phone with the german consulate was first consciously allowed when the consulate was closed, so that no contact was possible. The interrogation was made without directly torture, but the police threated with further consequences like prison if there would be a lack of coorperation.

Because the immigration-area is on neutral territority, it is a law-free room (for immigrants), and the US-autorities took skillfully advantage of this. The last 16 hours we were prisoned together with refugees of Latinoamerica in a strong lighted, windowless prison without beds. The food was highcalory und unhealthy plastic food.

In a phone call with the german consulate, the consulate told us that the US-authorities do what they want and that they have "another law-understanding than we in germany". Afterwards we were deported back to London.

Not till London we got some of our documents back and one of us got a paper which said that he would be "prohibited from entering, attempting to enter or being in the United States for a period of 5 years..." We got handwritten entries into our passports without signatures or stamps. Some tickets to fly to Caracas and to fly back from Caracas to Berlin had been stolen by the US-police. Also one of us got not his interrogation-protocoll.

Fazit: This incident shows clearly that the US-ruling-system is the enemy of all free humen of the world inclusive the progressive humen in the USA. During US-soldiers attacked the Iraq with tanks and rockets, a legal Iraq-delegation-travel is treated in Miami like a crime. When we were arrested in the immigration prison, we watched in the tv that two independent journalists were killed in the Iraq by the US-army and numerous other were injured. The war outside against the Iraq and the repression inside like the attack against the freedom of press and information are two sides of the same medal. Opinions which are critical to the policy of the USA or other countries are not desinable.

No border, no nation - fight deportation!

You can contact us via email: jens.berlin@gmx.net and peter_nowak@web.de add your own comments

I have a question! (english) john lenon 1:23pm Wed Apr 9 '03 comment#310336

I have a question! Is this liberty and democraty? Are you kidding me? (english) Head_in_the_sand 5:32am Thu Apr 10 '03 (Modified on 7:58am Thu Apr 10 '03) comment#310645

What an amazing story. This is much more news worthy on April 9 than the overthrow of the Iraqi regime. The editors of this news site are truly dishonest intellectual creatures. The only reason this pathetic site did not report on the tremendous events in Baghdad yesterday is because it did not fit the picture all the deluded radicals were sure existed.

It is quite interesting when reality smacks you in the face. Interestingly, why don't we see pictures of "Thank you Bush" on your site. That's right, we want to serve our own agenda. We really aren't interested in the truth. We report "passionately" as the main page states when it suits our own ideological purposes. Then, when we watch the corporate news station we have the OBLIGATION to point out how they are just governmental puppets pushing their agenda. We, however, are so far more intelligent because we can never be "brainwashed" so easily. Instead, only we see the truth. Those 80% who don't fit in with our ideology are just idiots who can't think for themselves. Thank God they have us. Thank the Lord ... oops I may have offended some atheists ... thank Gaia that we are gifted with such superior insight into the way the world works. All those dolts in the military and government are clearly incapable of any rational thought. In fact, our whole government is a sham. Those founding fathers, authors of the "Federalist Papers" and Constitution, they were sell outs -- what did they know?

I have an idea. Why don't we all get on a plane, go to Baghdad, and protest the war. The Iraqi people will thank us. All the civilians will hoist us on their shoulders and thank us for being so pure of heart and mind. We will warn them of the evil our country is intending. Afterward, we should get rid of our military, our administration. After all, history tells us ... well, never mind history, we are too special, too smart. We are the "chosen" generation that knows much better than all the previous -- historical precendences doesn't really apply to us anyway.

Most importantly, we must ensure that we are NEVER open to accepting any idea which does not fit into our world view. The last thing we need is critical analysis. Reply to Head in the Sand (english) Inquisitive Citizen 7:53am Thu Apr 10 '03 comment#310677

Mr. Head-In-The-Sand,

I suggest you read The Pentagon Papers, by Daniel Ellsberg. Just do it. It sounds like you're an intelligent person who just hasn't done enough investigative research about the culture of lies and deception in our government. This book is a good starter. Hopefully it will lead you to other books, articles and tapes (and I have read many). Then go and read things like "Rebuilding America's Defenses" put out by the Project for a New American Century (www.newamericancentury.org. )I have no doubt that you'll see things in a different light, maybe radically so.

No one ever said that this news organization does not have a particular mission and mandate: to seek out and expose the dark side of our purported "free" democracy, so that we can keep comprehensively informed, and hopefully have the guts to take action to keep abuses of power in check. You are blind if you believe that our political system was constucted so perfectly, so pure that we, the citizenry, can just sit back and our system of checks and balances will prevent those in power from abusing it. It works well, but not well enough, as this article attests. Lest we forget that there are human beings at the helm of our government, and human beings are prone to greed, power and meglomania. Do you think that if Bush and Cheney rose to power in Iraq they would install democracy?

We are constantly bombarded with pretty much the same theme, with little variation, from the mainstream media: it ranges from condoning the war to outright, guns ablazin', flags a wavin', support for the war. News sites like this one are a breath of fresh air, a different perspective that, yes, have their own idealogical bent, but also just happen to uncover many of the anti-democratic, anti-humanitarian acts that, if I may be so bold to speak the truth, are too often committed by those in power (to which I principally refer to decision makers in our government and large corporations). You can EASILY find the latest watered-down newscast about our invasion of Iraq through any number of media outlets. What's so wrong about reporting about other newsworthy events like this one?

What's the use of feeling so proud that you are living in "the world's greatest nation" if you allow internal and external abuses to accrue incognito until our cherished democracy begins to lose legitimacy and fall to pieces?

I could go on about the specious reasoning publicly espoused by the Administration and the Pentagon for our "need" to invade Iraq (like fooling the American people into thinking there is a link between Al-Queda and Saddam or it is to "liberate" the Iraqi people while we continue to support and give aid to other just-as-horrendous regimes like Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and Nigeria), but I will not. Just read "Rebuilding America's Defenses" to know EXACTLY why we are doing this-- Pax Americana, modern day imperialism. Ashamed and outraged (english) Jordan 9:36am Thu Apr 10 '03 jazsmutt@hotmail.com comment#310709

that is, i am ashamed and outraged at the treatment Jens Klinker and Peter Nowak received at the hands of my government. my tax dollars, earned in the teaching profession, seem to be hard at work infringing on the rights of others. gentlemen, the U.S. is apparently not safe for those, such as yourselves, trying do important work. nor as, recent events in the U.S. Oakland show, is it safe for our own citizens engaged in peaceful demonstrations. i commend you and encourage your investigative reporting on Venezuela. please bear in mind that the people of the U.S. are far from united in its support of these clumsy, unethical, and illegal actions.

in response to "head in the sand:" the reason i check indymedia sites is specifically so that i can read news like the story i comment upon above. if i want to see made-for-tv footage in Iraq i can, and do, check corporate sites. any educated person in this country is well advised to come to one's own conclusions by getting as much information as possible. for an indy site to report what the corporate media is already bombarding me with would be REDUNDANT and a waste of precious independent resources.

your insinuation that all of us opposing the war share the same analysis and arrogant views is baseless. at demonstrations against this war one can encounter fellow citizens of all ages, creeds, and walks of life. many of them stand with their children at their sides. some are against the war for spiritual reasons (strong in their conviction that we can resolve conflicts without bombs), some base their actions on historical analysis of the destructive affects of U.S. policy, and others point out the folly of these conflicts for economic reasons (having realized that empires, sooner or later, spend more trying to creat situation wherein they can expatriate capital from other countries than these powers actually get out of it). all of these approaches to situation are valid, based on ethics and reason rather than arrogance, and are not reflected in your commentary.

yes many Iraqis are glad to be free of saddam. world-wide, there is little dissent over the repressive nature of his regime! when we watch images of Iraqis today we must bear in mind that anyone who has been starved by the western world for over a decade and then bombed into submission is likely to greet occupying soldiers promising food and water with open arms. one must also ask, if a free and SELF-DETERMINED Iraqi state were truly desired by the U.S. powere elites, why didn't we support the massive popular uprisings against him, called for by Bush Sr., that occured shortly after the first gulf war? why did we let them get slaughtered at that time? why didn't the U.S. want the people of Iraq to win their freedom themselves?

the best answer seems to be that, in such a situation, the U.S. and the U.K. would not be able to install western corporate personel into interim government positions that will guarantee a brokering of Iraqi oil interests that favor our corporations and, through them, our short-sighted and hysterically militaristic "strategic interests." though we are likely to depend of Venezuela for most of our oil here in the U.S, we wish to be in control of these reserves so that other nations like China will have to deal with us, not the people of Iraq, to tap into them. And of course, we wish to free Israel from the need to secure its oil from countries like Russia.

when we look the images such as those being paraded across the spectacle of the corporate media today, we must be aware that there is more to consider than meets the eye. surely we can agree, at least, on this? Point taken (english) Head_in_the_sand 10:06am Thu Apr 10 '03 comment#310721

To the poster of the previous message: you made some cogent points with which I agree. Do not take me for some simpleton who believes governments are morally sound playgrounds of the national polity. I will look into your references in order to understand your "radical" perspective (if it is indeed such).

In fact, I am the first to say that governments are INTRINSICALLY corrupt -- unless measures are taken within itself to prevent its degradation. That, by the way, is one reason this country IS so wonderful -- the founders expected and counted on the failure of human nature to properly execute the task of governing. Does that mean the government is never at fault because there are safeguards? Of course not. And when the administration or elements of the polity deceive us or abuse power, I agree it is the people's responsibility to voice their concerns and frustrations -- lest the abuse augments to dangerous levels. Vietnam, naturally, is the classic example.

Further, I am not one to get agitated with anti-war citizens (or non-citizens) so long as they are peaceful. I do not agree with them, but dissenting voices do not intimidate nor frighten me. What does frighten me is the lack of rationale used in these articles. I do not pretend to have the greatest sources of information. One of your points was correct in questioning what information the government gives us -- and I offer that questioning the information and articles that pass through this site is just as important. Additionally, almost all the articles are more interested in heresy and "opinion" based reporting than the major media outlets. Examples of this are the recent police brutality claims (where only testimonial information was given -- quite possibly correct, but I would like a more thorough investigation by government AND media agencies), civilian casualties during the war (news crews were shown what Iraqi regime personnel would allow -- further, not trusting our government and trusting theirs to get accurate reporting is simply to absurd to even comment), public sentiment claims concerning the war (always I am reading how the number is increasing yet all polls show support constant if not increasing support). Some of these articles are just plain lies -- as much as they purport to be correcting the big media's lies. There is a very specific phenomenon of which the big news media is guilty -- selective reporting. There are certainly instances where something is ommitted or ignored or not even further investigated. However, overall accuracy at what is reported is much higher than these radical sites. Here, both accuracy and information are at times sacrificed.

There should be a standard of journalism. If you want to just push an agenda, don't call it a media site. I would claim that the people so convinced that the major media sources are governmental propaganda agencies are as brainwashed as the populace they accuse.

It is equally naive to think that the radicals or liberals on this site have pure motives. Ultimately, it is about power. Right now, this country has become more conservative since 9/11 and as a result the loss of power to the left has caused a backlash.

I have known many radical thinkers (many brilliant people) and they all possess this unfortunate quality of self-pity. Many feel as if the government or people have dissapointed and harmed them depending on whether they are liberal or conservative, respectively. Instead of employing any pragmatism in their approach, they form opinions and views which become so rigid that it becomes impossible to penetrate their mind at all. I am certainly willing to listen to a claim -- but I want hard evidence to support it, not just one radical reporter making claims that support his/her's preconceived notions on the matter.

At the end of the day, I realize that radicals will always exist. They are essential to our society, and I do not wish them to be gone or shut up. I do strive for a critical society -- one which is skeptical yet flexible in thought. The religion of logic is the only one that should matter, and it would make for a well informed, reasonable, and rational public. Errata to my previous message (english) Head_in_the_sand 10:08am Thu Apr 10 '03 comment#310722

My last message is to Inquisitive_citizen, sorry for any confusion. Critical reporting and Indymedia (english) dubravko 11:59am Thu Apr 10 '03 dubravko@kakarigi.net comment#310775

I understand the frustration of the head_in_the_sand poster with apparent one-sided reporting on this (and other) Indymedia web site(s). Indymedia web sites are based on the principle and mechanism of open publishing and follow minimal editorial standards. Consequently, nothing prevents "the other side" to also post news which, due to very minimal editorial control, have a very good chance to remain published. I would therefore suggest to either start reporting yourself (I read your comments with great interest, although, I must admit, that negative, at times very sarcastic slant repulsed me) or recruit someone else to write. It is good and almost imperative to receive news from multiple sources in order to make an informed judgement of what the reality out there really is. It is only reponsible to do so.

INFORMATION + KNOWLEDGE = DECISION MAKING

tallyimc.org/ I HAVE AN IDEA. (english) BC 12:54pm Thu Apr 10 '03 comment#310802

I HAVE AN IDEA. IF YOU DONT LIKE INDYMEDIA.ORG OR THE STORIES THAT GET POSTED HERE, DONT VISIT THE WEBSITE. ITS THAT SIMPLE. I Have An Idea also (english) jjy_ucf 1:43pm Thu Apr 10 '03 jjy_ucf comment#310822

I have an idea also: If he doesn't like this site and should stay off, then the same rationale applies to you goofballs about the news channels; don't watch.

I HAVE AN IDEA TOO (english) johnway 1:50pm Thu Apr 10 '03 comment#310828

Hey, ive got an idea, if you dont like the US or what it does, boycott all its shit or leave the US if you live in it.

This is in response to the post that states if you dont like Indymedia dont come.

I think that it is good to have a little debate here and there. If everyone at Indymedia agreed than this site would be little more than a pulpit for its views. One thing that I love about this site is that anyone can say anything, and its usually respected if deserving. to US customs/immigration: STOP THE MADNESS!! (english) J Black 5:16pm Thu Apr 10 '03 pleasestaycalm@hotmail.com comment#310904

Wow, there are a whole lot of postings chastising the indymedia movement and site(s) for being biased and unbalanced lately... I see your point, but - indymedia is not meant to be all things to all people - indymedia serves very effectively as a counterpoint to the very obviously biased and unbalanced mainstream reporting. If you want to see pictures of 'liberated' Iraqis, then hit CNN. It's all there.

If you want to be well informed, you've got to refer to a variety of sources and consider a range of viewpoints. You're never going to get a 'real' picture - a view-point is all you can reasonably expect. Indymedia lets pretty much anyone publish their viewpoint (including flame-war-inciting little trolls), and allows anyone who wants to take the time a chance to comment on those viewpoints. As a whole, indymedia presents a collective point of view that is desperately needed in our current corporate mediatainment-dominated environment. Most of all, indymedia creates the POSSIBILITY for a real all-things-considered offering-up of the truth... it's not there yet, but unlike the corporate-whores and pentagon/DoD-briefing-regurgitators, it has at least the POTENTIAL to get there.

Some seem to think that indymedia is organized to represent some specific viewpoint or range of tactics, and that it is supposed to be representative of a certain group or groups and that it does, or should, censure and regulate itself as-such.... but indymedia doesn't 'represent' anyone, and there is NO editorial control to enforce the service of any exclusive agenda. It's a clearing-house for independently written journalism and viewpoint, period. It doesn't advocate anything in particular - it provides a FORUM for independent people to publish news and express their own viewpoints (which may range from 'nuke Iraq', to 'let's pie-plaster Dan Rather's rented-out face', to 'bring me G.W.'s head on a platter!').

In the case of most (indymedia) sites, the editorial control is basically deciding which articles get 'front-page' (main column) posting, and which get left to the side column. There aren't (or certainly shouldn't be) any mechanisms or contols in place to enforce a 'left-wing' or any other kind of bias. If you want to post some George-the-liberator/support-the-troops/I-love-cops stuff then that's your deal - just don't expect much praise for it.

Moreover, if you want to post some genuine critical analysis of indymedia, PLEASE DO!!! I think it would be very well received by the vast majority of those who rely on this site to help them maintain some shreds of hope, dignity, and sanity.