Jump to content

Former concentration camp guard on trial


JudyJudyJudy

Recommended Posts

JudyJudyJudy

He’s 100 years old . 👀 is it really worth it to take him to court ? 
 

Was he just “following orders “ ? 
 

Did he have any real alternative? 
 

Is Germany still feeling an “irrational” guilt about world war 2 therefore having trials like this ? 


Has Germany  been forgiven ? 
 

My view is it’s a show  trial . He was following Orders . He was coercised. If he didn’t he would have been killed himself . Germany needs to forgive itself and move on now . It’s the past and whilst we shouldn’t forget and try and learn from it we need to move on . Holding on to hate and revenge is never good for the human psyche ( as those who support this prosecuting do ) His conviction may give temporary closure to some but it won’t bring back the victims or alter the past . 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/07/trial-begins-of-100-year-old-former-nazi-concentration-camp-guard?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR1NPWhSH7cA4YtnBYYyK7UALqqxoZHPqBVZANlEg97ommMzGFfnBgB_Ldk#Echobox=1633628326

 


 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 194
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • JudyJudyJudy

    33

  • jack D and coke

    21

  • sadj

    17

  • Jambo-Jimbo

    14

John Findlay

It's a tough one, then if I was related to anyone murdered there, then I guess it wouldn't bother me what age anyone was when on trial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There’s nothing irrational about the guilt. It still shapes the consciousness of most Germans, their outlook on the world and their caution in foreign affairs. Germans have money, they can and do travel all over the world, but they are painfully aware of themselves as Germans. The past is still ever-present even for those growing up now. (I am, of course, referring to a majority here. There is no shortage of neo-Nazis in parts of Germany today.)

 

You cannot relativise the Holocaust, treat it as just another tragic event in human history that needs to be moved on from, although goodness knows there are many people in today’s world who would be more than delighted to do so for various reasons. The number of children murdered in Auschwitz alone would fill Hampden four times. When Hans Frank said “1000 years will pass and the guilt of Germany will not be erased”, he was right. For this reason it is right that people associated with the slaughter should still be brought to trial. For me, and I think most Germans, we’re still living in the aftermath of the Holocaust and will be for a long time yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's somewhat strange that some people are both in support of prosecuting centenarians for war crimes committed 80 years ago but are also in support of giving UK troopers immunity from prosecution for relatively recent war crimes committed in Afghanistan, Iraq and Northern Ireland.

 

You either prosecute all war crimes, or you don't.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cade said:

It's somewhat strange that some people are both in support of prosecuting centenarians for war crimes committed 80 years ago but are also in support of giving UK troopers immunity from prosecution for relatively recent war crimes committed in Afghanistan, Iraq and Northern Ireland.

 

You either prosecute all war crimes, or you don't.

 

It's semantics... but the Holocaust was not a war crime.

 

It was either a crime against humanity or genocide, as specifically defined under the terms of the Nuremburg trial. There was some debate over which to charge against (one or the other, or both) but I cannot remember the outcome. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JudyJudyJudy
5 minutes ago, Cade said:

It's somewhat strange that some people are both in support of prosecuting centenarians for war crimes committed 80 years ago but are also in support of giving UK troopers immunity from prosecution for relatively recent war crimes committed in Afghanistan, Iraq and Northern Ireland.

 

You either prosecute all war crimes, or you don't.

 

Well said . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JudyJudyJudy
1 minute ago, CF11JamTart said:

It's semantics... but the Holocaust was not a war crime.

 

It was either a crime against humanity or genocide, as specifically defined under the terms of the Nuremburg trial. There was some debate over which to charge against (one or the other, or both) but I cannot remember the outcome. 

No but the guard is being charged with war crimes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Cade said:

It's somewhat strange that some people are both in support of prosecuting centenarians for war crimes committed 80 years ago but are also in support of giving UK troopers immunity from prosecution for relatively recent war crimes committed in Afghanistan, Iraq and Northern Ireland.

 

You either prosecute all war crimes, or you don't.

 

 

It's definitely the latter of the two. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SectionDJambo

The younger generation of Germans today still feel wary about how they will be received by the people of some other nations, the UK being one of them. I know this from having had a German mother and still having sizeable German family connections.

For me, the never ending shame that these people cast on future generations of Germans, and the horrible crimes they were part of, justifies them being prosecuted no matter what age they are. 
As far as I’m aware, there is usually evidence that they weren’t just in these camps to make the coffee, but actively involved in what went on.

Of course, there have been atrocities carried out by other nations since 1945, which don’t seem to attract the same desire for justice. Maybe because only the defeated tend to face prosecution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The SS were fanatical Nazi's, thugs and killers, unlike your ordinary Wehrmacht soldiers who were largely just following orders, the SS on the other hand were a whole different kettle of fish entirely, rarely if ever they were coerced or just following orders, especially when Jews were concerned, no they were front and centre when it came to killing Jews, Gypsies, Roma, Gay's, Russians/Slav's and anybody else the Nazi state wanted rid off, the job was usually given to the SS. 

 

It was the SS who were put in charge of the concentration/death camps, not the Wehrmacht or the Luftwaffe but the SS, and of course there was a reason for that. 

 

An SS concentration camp guard, especially one who was a guard for 3 years is most certainly going to have witnessed/been involved in the killings that took place in the camp over that 3 year period, therefore imo it is right that they are brought in front of the courts to answer for potential crimes, even 80 years after the event.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

The SS were fanatical Nazi's, thugs and killers, unlike your ordinary Wehrmacht soldiers who were largely just following orders, the SS on the other hand were a whole different kettle of fish entirely, rarely if ever they were coerced or just following orders, especially when Jews were concerned, no they were front and centre when it came to killing Jews, Gypsies, Roma, Gay's, Russians/Slav's and anybody else the Nazi state wanted rid off, the job was usually given to the SS. 

 

It was the SS who were put in charge of the concentration/death camps, not the Wehrmacht or the Luftwaffe but the SS, and of course there was a reason for that. 

 

An SS concentration camp guard, especially one who was a guard for 3 years is most certainly going to have witnessed/been involved in the killings that took place in the camp over that 3 year period, therefore imo it is right that they are brought in front of the courts to answer for potential crimes, even 80 years after the event.

All correct of course, but there still has to be a level of common sense applied. I read a couple of weeks ago about a woman in her 90's who is being brought to court as she was a secretary in a camp so therefore was guilty of knowing what was going on. Fair play to her as she did a runner from the police when they went round to arrest her. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

The SS were fanatical Nazi's, thugs and killers, unlike your ordinary Wehrmacht soldiers who were largely just following orders, the SS on the other hand were a whole different kettle of fish entirely, rarely if ever they were coerced or just following orders, especially when Jews were concerned, no they were front and centre when it came to killing Jews, Gypsies, Roma, Gay's, Russians/Slav's and anybody else the Nazi state wanted rid off, the job was usually given to the SS. 

 

It was the SS who were put in charge of the concentration/death camps, not the Wehrmacht or the Luftwaffe but the SS, and of course there was a reason for that. 

 

An SS concentration camp guard, especially one who was a guard for 3 years is most certainly going to have witnessed/been involved in the killings that took place in the camp over that 3 year period, therefore imo it is right that they are brought in front of the courts to answer for potential crimes, even 80 years after the event.

Always found it interesting that the governments at the time sort of turned a blind eye to them (The US had intel that Hitler may be and high ranking SS Officers were definately there (US documents show this)) all shuffling off to Argentina and Peron’s position/help whilst having the wife he did. I think its 💯 correct to put this person to trial. To say he was coerced is mindboggling to me when the SS were essentially as you say fanatics and not a typical soldier on the ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JudyJudyJudy
13 minutes ago, Tazio said:

All correct of course, but there still has to be a level of common sense applied. I read a couple of weeks ago about a woman in her 90's who is being brought to court as she was a secretary in a camp so therefore was guilty of knowing what was going on. Fair play to her as she did a runner from the police when they went round to arrest her. 

Yes she certainly did a runner for all of one hour . She was 18 when she was a secretary in one of the camps . 
 

I prefer the “ truth and reconciliation “ process regarding atrocities or abuses. It’s a more healing alternative to retribution and vengeance . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Yes she certainly did a runner for all of one hour . She was 18 when she was a secretary in one of the camps . 
 

I prefer the “ truth and reconciliation “ process regarding atrocities or abuses. It’s a more healing alternative to retribution and vengeance . 

So you would rather they went yeah we did bad shit and ill tell you all about it for freedom from prosecution than faced trial for their crimes in all cases or just when it suits your viewpoint due to age or sex a n other reason? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, John Findlay said:

It's a tough one, then if I was related to anyone murdered there, then I guess it wouldn't bother me what age anyone was when on trial.

Indeed , I don’t think age should ever be a limiter to crimes such as this. Its not like “aye he nicked a packet of crisps and a six pack of beer but hes 100 so we felt bad calling the police” 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is if you start making decisions about legal proceedings because of age, particularly in cases such as the Camps of WW2 you are almost granting forgiveness because of age.  If you worked in one of those camps whether directly or indirectly you were responsible for the heinous crimes that were committed. It is certainly well marked still after all these years the first newsreels in my mind of the piles of bodies, of the shaking wrecks that were survivors, and the extreme cruelty and sometimes revealed the joy taken in carrying out these horrors, yes have a trial, at least a conviction will stand long after death and the accused will always be known as one who participated in slaughter. The Japanese were certainly held to account for their actions against POW's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JudyJudyJudy
7 minutes ago, sadj said:

So you would rather they went yeah we did bad shit and ill tell you all about it for freedom from prosecution than faced trial for their crimes in all cases or just when it suits your viewpoint due to age or sex a n other reason? 

He’s 100 years old . It’s ludicrous and the 96 yo woman too . Truth and reconciliation isn’t just a slap on the wrist you know . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched something about how Hitler basically brainwashed the Germans into his way of thinking, it was very smart how he turned the Germans against the Jews and ordinary people became fanatics caught up in his storm. Its not worth the time and money prosecuting a guy thats had to live with what he's done for 80years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JamesM48 said:

He’s 100 years old . It’s ludicrous and the 96 yo woman too . Truth and reconciliation isn’t just a slap on the wrist you know . 

People such as him who refuse to say anything , what will it achieve? Give him amnesty he might tell you about the fun he had doing something he believed in and hes free from prosecution for it. If your 100year old neighbour had been found to have been raping preteens 40 years ago is that ok to say naaa you are old its fine? As I said these are not i nicked a six pack of beer crimes. 
 

What “healing” is there to be achieved now by him going over these heinous acts he committed? T&R may have worked in 1955 but even then it would have meant a lot of these people getting away with what they did to men , women and children because of their religious beliefs , hair colour , ethnic background , city they lived in or just because they felt like it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Herbert said:

I watched something about how Hitler basically brainwashed the Germans into his way of thinking, it was very smart how he turned the Germans against the Jews and ordinary people became fanatics caught up in his storm. Its not worth the time and money prosecuting a guy thats had to live with what he's done for 80years.


So again , if he was 100 and had been found to be a serial rapist 40 years ago thats ok because hes had to live with something he chose to do? Can you say he didnt want to do it and had too , these are not just random soldiers on the front line they are the SS operatives who ran these camps and committed atrocities beyond what we in 2021 can comprehend. To say oh he was brainwashed by hitler - do you have the same attitude toward religious extremists who plant bombs or attack people with knives , the lorry driver who ploughed through a group of French people? 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JudyJudyJudy
11 minutes ago, Herbert said:

I watched something about how Hitler basically brainwashed the Germans into his way of thinking, it was very smart how he turned the Germans against the Jews and ordinary people became fanatics caught up in his storm. Its not worth the time and money prosecuting a guy thats had to live with what he's done for 80years.

Only have to look at today’s world to see how people can be coerced and controlled by Govts to do what they want . It’s nothing new . These people were brain washed and also frightened too . They had no choice . If they made the moral choice of not participating in being guards , secretaries etc they would have been killed . Simple as that . And it would still happen today 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JudyJudyJudy
6 minutes ago, sadj said:


So again , if he was 100 and had been found to be a serial rapist 40 years ago thats ok because hes had to live with something he chose to do? Can you say he didnt want to do it and had too , these are not just random soldiers on the front line they are the SS operatives who ran these camps and committed atrocities beyond what we in 2021 can comprehend. To say oh he was brainwashed by hitler - do you have the same attitude toward religious extremists who plant bombs or attack people with knives , the lorry driver who ploughed through a group of French people? 
 

 

Your example is a false equivalence . You are takin about one person who committed a specific crime . What crime of level of responsibility did the guard do . Who is actually responsible for the crimes ? The guards who directed people into the gas Chambers ? The person who released the gases ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Your example is a false equivalence . You are takin about one person who committed a specific crime . What crime of level of responsibility did the guard do . Who is actually responsible for the crimes ? The guards who directed people into the gas Chambers ? The person who released the gases ? 

All of them James , if they were part of the SS they are all culpable. The secretary is a grey area and im not sure prosecuting her is appropriate (would depend on why she worked there , was it a position given to SS members or general public for instance) but the people who worked as guards at these camps are every bit as complicit as each other. Its not a false equivalence either based on the above or because of age/time passed. Some of the argument is oh hes old. Aye nae bother when Im old ill admit to murdering 3people but its cool because Im old 🤷🏻‍♂️. He chose to be in that position if he was SS thats a very important distinction to make imo.
 

You said T&R would be the way to go so why? What healing would it achieve now? 

Edited by sadj
Link to comment
Share on other sites

JudyJudyJudy
2 minutes ago, sadj said:

All of them James , if they were part of the SS they are all culpable. The secretary is a grey area and im not sure prosecuting her is appropriate (would depend on why she worked there , was it a position given to SS members or general public for instance) but the people who worked as guards at these camps are every bit as complicit as each other. Its not a false equivalence either based on the above or because of age/time passed. Some of the argument is oh hes old. Aye nae bother when Im old ill admit to murdering 3people but its cool because Im old 🤷🏻‍♂️. He chose to be in that position if he was SS thats a very important distinction to make imo.
 

You said T&R would be the way to go so why? What healing would it achieve now? 

Well what would sending him to jail accomplish ? Revenge ? Satisfaction ? It’s important to move forward and not be consumed with ideas of revenge . It doesn’t help people really.  Sorry some may equate justice with revenge . Why isn’t the secretary just as culpable ? She helped keep the camp functioning ? Some would argue . People state that joining the SS was voluntary ? Im

not So sure that people maybe felt they had a choice 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Findlay
1 hour ago, JamesM48 said:

Only have to look at today’s world to see how people can be coerced and controlled by Govts to do what they want . It’s nothing new . These people were brain washed and also frightened too . They had no choice . If they made the moral choice of not participating in being guards , secretaries etc they would have been killed . Simple as that . And it would still happen today 

Unless we have this trial we won't find out how much he was coerced to how much he was a willing participant.

Do you advocate people', Cities, and countries apologising for how slaves were treated a hundred and fifty plus years ago? That is far further back in time than WWII. 

I knew a WWII veteran who had been a POW of the Japenese, and he hated and despised the Japanese until the day he died. Many said to him and of him that he shouldn't have been so bitter.

His reply was always the same. You never witnessed what I did, and you never suffered the torture and humilation/degradation that I suffered.

To me no-one could argue with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

Unless we have this trial we won't find out how much he was coerced to how much he was a willing participant.

Do you advocate people', Cities, and countries apologising for how slaves were treated a hundred and fifty plus years ago? That is far further back in time than WWII. 

I knew a WWII veteran who had been a POW of the Japenese, and he hated and despised the Japanese until the day he died. Many said to him and of him that he shouldn't have been so bitter.

His reply was always the same. You never witnessed what I did, and you never suffered the torture and humilation/degradation that I suffered.

To me no-one could argue with that.

 

Only if you're working on the basis that all Japanese were and are the same. To me, someone could quite easily argue that they're not. Totally get his being bitter though, I'd agree on that front and don't imagine anyone giving up on that easily

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Cade said:

It's somewhat strange that some people are both in support of prosecuting centenarians for war crimes committed 80 years ago but are also in support of giving UK troopers immunity from prosecution for relatively recent war crimes committed in Afghanistan, Iraq and Northern Ireland.

 

You either prosecute all war crimes, or you don't.

 

 

Interesting perspective. Is there not a marked difference by a young squaddie making a mistake when in fear for his own life facing an angry mob say in January 1972 or ignoring and facilitating the daily processing and slaughter of passive civilians over a number of years?

 

Edited by Japan Jambo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imo he should face justice for his part in war crimes regardless of his age and the time that has passed, as should anyone who has committed such acts in other conflicts within living memory.

 

They need to be held accountable for what they did. Justice should be served for the purpose of the victims and their names will be there in the pages of history as perpetrators of those crimes just as the names of victims are written. 

 

Everyone has a conscience choice, there were many Nazi's who chose to help people or showed compassion despite their orders. Others chose to carry out brutality and cruelty beyond their remit simply because they could and they thought they'd get away with it. Witnesses who survived never forgot their names or their faces and will have given fresh testimony after the war to their actions otherwise they would never have been of interest to the prosecuters who have spent decades hunting them down. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JudyJudyJudy
27 minutes ago, Cruyff said:

Imo he should face justice for his part in war crimes regardless of his age and the time that has passed, as should anyone who has committed such acts in other conflicts within living memory.

 

They need to be held accountable for what they did. Justice should be served for the purpose of the victims and their names will be there in the pages of history as perpetrators of those crimes just as the names of victims are written. 

 

Everyone has a conscience choice, there were many Nazi's who chose to help people or showed compassion despite their orders. Others chose to carry out brutality and cruelty beyond their remit simply because they could and they thought they'd get away with it. Witnesses who survived never forgot their names or their faces and will have given fresh testimony after the war to their actions otherwise they would never have been of interest to the prosecuters who have spent decades hunting them down. 

The choice was join or be shot 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

The choice was join or be shot 

Actually, no.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-55661782.amp

 

“That was an excuse former guards often gave. But it was not true. Records show that some new recruits did leave Ravensbrück as soon as they realised what the job involved. They were allowed to go and did not suffer negative consequences.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JamesM48 said:

The choice was join or be shot 

There was actually a paper written on this by David H. Kittermann which includes a number of testimonials from German officers and soldiers who cited German Military Code which allowed soldiers to refuse any order recognised as illegal. Many did and were not executed for doing so. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JudyJudyJudy

Two sides of the argument 

 

 

 

“ conscious participation”  - 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

The choice was join or be shot 

What are you basing this on as its not consistent with the admittedly little I know about this subject

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

The choice was join or be shot 


Do you mean join or join in? If the former, I would suggest you read up about SS application criteria and procedure. The latter is covered by FWJ’s post. Doubtless there were situations where SS guards found they regretted what they had got themselves into, but then again they knew when they were applying that they were going to be involved in whatever dirty work was going.

 

I guess it’s possible to view the 100-year-old as unlucky. Finally tracked down after nearly a lifetime in which he could have come clean. But in the scheme of things, he’s a million times luckier than the Soviet PoW starved, tortured and then dragged to the execution pit at Sachsenhausen. He doesn’t need anyone’s sympathy.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JudyJudyJudy
4 minutes ago, leginten said:


Do you mean join or join in? If the former, I would suggest you read up about SS application criteria and procedure. The latter is covered by FWJ’s post. Doubtless there were situations where SS guards found they regretted what they had got themselves into, but then again they knew when they were applying that they were going to be involved in whatever dirty work was going.

 

I guess it’s possible to view the 100-year-old as unlucky. Finally tracked down after nearly a lifetime in which he could have come clean. But in the scheme of things, he’s a million times luckier than the Soviet PoW starved, tortured and then dragged to the execution pit at Sachsenhausen. He doesn’t need anyone’s sympathy.

 

 

Who’s says I was sympathetic to him ? I’m just questioning why he is being taken to Court now at that age 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SectionDJambo
2 hours ago, Herbert said:

I watched something about how Hitler basically brainwashed the Germans into his way of thinking, it was very smart how he turned the Germans against the Jews and ordinary people became fanatics caught up in his storm. Its not worth the time and money prosecuting a guy thats had to live with what he's done for 80years.

It is very uncomfortable to think how the majority of the people of a nation can be brainwashed by the likes of Hitler and Goebbels. The more you repeat lies and implicate a race or group of people of wrongdoing, the more the people being fed those untruths believe them. We cannot underestimate the power of the propaganda machine of the Nazi party in Germany during the 1930s. It must have been relentless with a fear of being punished or discriminated against if you didn’t toe the line. Once they grabbed power, there was no stopping them.

That an Austrian, by birth, could take such control of a country like Germany, I still find hard to believe. But then none of us can possibly know what it must have been like to be living in Germany at the time. 
It may sound ridiculous to some but I can see similarities with Trump in the way that he has managed to brainwash far too many Americans into believing that the election was rigged and that America was about to be overrun with Mexicans, the majority of whom were going to be rapists and murderers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JudyJudyJudy
9 minutes ago, leginten said:


Do you mean join or join in? If the former, I would suggest you read up about SS application criteria and procedure. The latter is covered by FWJ’s post. Doubtless there were situations where SS guards found they regretted what they had got themselves into, but then again they knew when they were applying that they were going to be involved in whatever dirty work was going.

 

I guess it’s possible to view the 100-year-old as unlucky. Finally tracked down after nearly a lifetime in which he could have come clean. But in the scheme of things, he’s a million times luckier than the Soviet PoW starved, tortured and then dragged to the execution pit at Sachsenhausen. He doesn’t need anyone’s sympathy.

 

 

As the video I posted 

makes reference to , who wasn’t responsible for the atrocities . Why didn’t every day Germans fight back . They knew what was happening so can’t they can be viewed as culpable as those who worked in camps? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, leginten said:


Do you mean join or join in? If the former, I would suggest you read up about SS application criteria and procedure. The latter is covered by FWJ’s post. Doubtless there were situations where SS guards found they regretted what they had got themselves into, but then again they knew when they were applying that they were going to be involved in whatever dirty work was going.

 

I guess it’s possible to view the 100-year-old as unlucky. Finally tracked down after nearly a lifetime in which he could have come clean. But in the scheme of things, he’s a million times luckier than the Soviet PoW starved, tortured and then dragged to the execution pit at Sachsenhausen. He doesn’t need anyone’s sympathy.

 

 

 

Yip, every applicant of the SS knew exactly what they were getting into, therefore once they put on that uniform they were complicit in the actions of the SS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Who’s says I was sympathetic to him ? I’m just questioning why he is being taken to Court now at that age 


He’s being prosecuted for the simple reason that (West) Germany in 1979 rightly decided that there would be no statute of limitations on Nazi war crimes. It is not about “hate” or “revenge”. It is about the very difficult business of trying to achieve some degree of justice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SectionDJambo
22 minutes ago, Cruyff said:

There was actually a paper written on this by David H. Kittermann which includes a number of testimonials from German officers and soldiers who cited German Military Code which allowed soldiers to refuse any order recognised as illegal. Many did and were not executed for doing so. 

My mother told me a wee story about a time that her and her sister were to go to a meeting with a Nazi official as to what jobs they could do to help the nation and community. They were both in their mid teens. 
Both wanted to work in a hospital, which my mother was allowed to do. Her sister was told she would be doing something else, to which she rather cheekily questioned the authority of the official to tell her what to do. She was told, with some menace, that all he had to do was press a button on his desk and she would be taken away, so she had better shut up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JudyJudyJudy
1 minute ago, SectionDJambo said:

My mother told me a wee story about a time that her and her sister were to go to a meeting with a Nazi official as to what jobs they could do to help the nation and community. They were both in their mid teens. 
Both wanted to work in a hospital, which my mother was allowed to do. Her sister was told she would be doing something else, to which she rather cheekily questioned the authority of the official to tell her what to do. She was told, with some menace, that all he had to do was press a button on his desk and she would be taken away, so she had better shut up.

That’s exactly how I think it was for most if not all of the population. Hobson’s choice 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

As the video I posted 

makes reference to , who wasn’t responsible for the atrocities . Why didn’t every day Germans fight back . They knew what was happening so can’t they can be viewed as culpable as those who worked in camps? 

 

Undoubtedly many did, and many were shot by the gestapo.

The Nazi regime had infiltrated every facet of society, friends & neighbours turned fellow friends & neighbours over to the police, nobody was safe, therefore it took a very brave person to even question the regime in public, let alone try and resist it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

As the video I posted 

makes reference to , who wasn’t responsible for the atrocities . Why didn’t every day Germans fight back . They knew what was happening so can’t they can be viewed as culpable as those who worked in camps? 


That’s a very interesting question, and incredibly difficult to answer. There’s an excellent book on this subject called “Hitler’s Willing Executioners” by Daniel Goldhagen. As the title suggests, his thesis is that most ordinary Germans were aware of what was going on and went along with it willingly.

 

As ever when it comes to standing up to the terrors of totalitarianism, the question for the individual is: “What would you have done? And when?”

 

I’m not convinced I would have had the courage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

joondalupjambo
6 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

As the video I posted 

makes reference to , who wasn’t responsible for the atrocities . Why didn’t every day Germans fight back . They knew what was happening so can’t they can be viewed as culpable as those who worked in camps? 

The British and US government's knew what was happening so did the old Russian regime.  How far up the tree do we go?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, leginten said:


That’s a very interesting question, and incredibly difficult to answer. There’s an excellent book on this subject called “Hitler’s Willing Executioners” by Daniel Goldhagen. As the title suggests, his thesis is that most ordinary Germans were aware of what was going on and went along with it willingly.

 

As ever when it comes to standing up to the terrors of totalitarianism, the question for the individual is: “What would you have done? And when?”

 

I’m not convinced I would have had the courage.

 

Nor am I convinced that I would have had the courage.  But if I went along with being an accessory to (at least) 3,518 counts of murder, and someone caught me years later at 96 or 100 years of age, they would be well within their rights to try me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, leginten said:


That’s a very interesting question, and incredibly difficult to answer. There’s an excellent book on this subject called “Hitler’s Willing Executioners” by Daniel Goldhagen. As the title suggests, his thesis is that most ordinary Germans were aware of what was going on and went along with it willingly.

 

As ever when it comes to standing up to the terrors of totalitarianism, the question for the individual is: “What would you have done? And when?”

 

I’m not convinced I would have had the courage.

And he's been pretty much denounced by most people for the book and the anti German tone of it that some have described as racist. He's an extremist in terms of his writings on the holocaust and throwing blame around. I seem to remember he wrote another piece accusing the catholic church of being part of it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

The choice was join or be shot 

 

I am not sure from my recollections of the war, and my ensuing studies of it as I have grown up. My view is that the German people of the time were open to a ranting lunatic promising them greatness again. Do not forget  Hitler got into power in a reasonably short time after Germany had lost a World War. His preachings and rantings gave the citizens hope that their Country would again be a world power. Many put their sons into the Hitler Youth, a basic army cadet force, many of these well brainwashed youngsters became members of the S.S. who had responsibility for concentration camps. As a member of one of Britains elite Regiments, my training was total belief in the Regiment and the orders of my superiors, its not hard for me to see how young men could be brainwashed into absolute belief in their orders and the purpose of such. Hitler was seen by his enemies a a buffoon, but he did have the ability to stir a crowd, especially one with the desire to hear and accept what he had to say. Germany also had some very capable military leaders, Rommel probably one of the best known, his problem he was becoming more of a celebrity and hero than his Master so he was disposed of. Hitler to me was a gifted public speaker, but intellectually challenged. He wanted to get rid of a race, the Jews ,because they were successful, a semi intelligent man would not have annihilated them but would have controlled them but availed himself of their talents.

The camps were exactly what they were seen to be a place of nuisance disposal, everyone who worked in them knew exactly what they were doing and why, despite advanced age any participant must be Tried, and if the evidence supports conviction, so should it be, no need to jail an excessively elderly man, but to show proof that he was part of a homicidal gang should be enough to ensure that at no time in the future should he be classed as a man who was just doing his duty, he was an accomplice to murder, and the total elimination of a class, race and religion, of other human bings.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Kalamazoo Jambo changed the title to Former concentration camp guard on trial

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...