Retired WI Farmer Hitler Memorial


PDA






zeke1312
June 15, 2006, 11:05 PM
Ted Junker knows how to wack a hornets nest! He likes Hitler but "free speech" gets trumped by those who espouse free speech until it stares them in the face.:)http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,199703,00.html

If you enjoyed reading about "Retired WI Farmer Hitler Memorial" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Don Gwinn
June 15, 2006, 11:13 PM
It would be helpful if you could find a link or, failing that, just describe what's going on for those of us who haven't heard about it.

Arkie
June 15, 2006, 11:22 PM
Link... (http://www.gazetteextra.com/hitlermemorial061406.asp)

RNB65
June 15, 2006, 11:24 PM
The guy's a former Waffen SS officer living in the U.S. who decided to build a shrine to his hero Adolf Hitler.

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=435393

Brian Williams
June 15, 2006, 11:35 PM
I will defend his right to say what he desires, I only ask that he speaks the truth, not what he believe is the truth, while we are living in the age of disproof, in other words there are living people who have seen and can attest to the fact that the Holocost went on, I know he is lying.

I will defend his right to say what he feels but I will also speak up and show or point to truth.

Sindawe
June 15, 2006, 11:44 PM
I will defend his right to say what he feels but I will also speak up and show or point to truth.Which is as it should be.

If the guy wants to put a memorial to a drug addicted, insane tyrant, have at it. Just don't expect the rest of us to flock in worship of said tyrant.

ArmedBear
June 16, 2006, 12:36 AM
He needs a concierge and some pigeons.:D

http://www.ladyofthecake.com/mel/prod/images/franz1.jpghttp://www.ladyofthecake.com/mel/prod/images/spngtim4.jpghttp://www.ladyofthecake.com/mel/prod/images/hitlr2.jpg

Azrael256
June 16, 2006, 12:51 AM
I will defend his right to say what he feels This is the one time I disagree. Not because I find his message particularly repugnant, although I do. Not because I think nazi propaganda is especially evil, although I do. Not even because it's the insane ramblings of a crazy old man, which it is.

The reason is which IDIOT let a Waffen SS goon into my country?!? If we were talking about an ordinary Wermacht man who served his country honorably, I might be inclined to cut him some slack. This guy and all his little goose stepping moron buddies were convicted of war crimes 60 years ago. How *exactly* he is worthy of living, much less on American soil is beyond my comprehension.

ArmedBear
June 16, 2006, 01:02 AM
Azrael-- The Waffen SS, a branch of the military, had 950,000 members. It wasn't the Totenkopf SS, who guarded concentration camps, or any of the other small SS groups, which were much more intimately involved in war crimes.

Jeff
June 16, 2006, 01:07 AM
Oh yeah, I know that farmer. He is the guy that every year brings in a potato that has "the likeness of Hitler or Nixon."

RNB65
June 16, 2006, 01:07 AM
The reason is which IDIOT let a Waffen SS goon into my country?!?

Probably the same goons that sentenced many SS soldiers to 25 years to life in prison then commuted their sentences and released them within a decade.

beerslurpy
June 16, 2006, 01:09 AM
I dont agree that he got in because of a mistake or incompetence. It was over 10 years after the war. There were several atomic bombs, the start of the cold war and (I think) Korea between "omg germans = evil" and that guy immigrating.

Worries about him being some sort of nazi were probably pretty low on everyone's list of things to inquire about. They were probably more worried about him being a communist in 1955. And as a Nazi die-hard who fought in Russia, he was probably as anti-communist as they came back then.

The israelis will probably break his kneecaps now. Assuming that this entire nazi officer thing isnt an episode of senile demntia.

Azrael256
June 16, 2006, 01:19 AM
Azrael-- The Waffen SS, a branch of the military, had 950,000 members. It wasn't the Totenkopf SS, who guarded concentration camps, or any of the other small SS groups, which were much more intimately involved in war crimes. The tribunal saw it differently, and so do I. If we were talking about some hapless Pole who was pressed into service, I would cut him some slack. What we're actually talking about, however, is a volunteer officer of an organization that was convicted of war crimes.

beerslurpy
June 16, 2006, 01:22 AM
And how do you propose they should have ferreted out the devoted junior officers from the ones who just went along for the ride? All of them probably said "oh ja, ve vere just following ordahs." So many people (Schwarzenegger's father, Pope Benedict!) joined the Nazi party back then that it would be impossible to interrogate them all to find out who the dedicated ones are.

And it is not like he has been actively sabotaging the country or invading Poland. No one even knew who he was for the past 60 years, while he was presumably a productive member of society.

Here is an interesting mental exercise for THR: Whom do you suppose is a bigger threat to our freedom- an old nazi from Wisconsin, or the old men in congress and the supreme court? As creepy and weird as I think this guy is, I am not really worried about him banning my guns or trying to eminent domain my house.

RNB65
June 16, 2006, 01:31 AM
I agree with Azrael256. Former SS members should have been barred from any type of long-term entry into the U.S. unless they had some major league scientific or cultural skills to contribute. A Wisconsin potato farmer doesn't cut it. I'd a stamped a big "REJECTED" on his visa application and filed it in the circular file.

ArmedBear
June 16, 2006, 01:41 AM
And how do you propose they should have ferreted out the devoted junior officers from the ones who just went along for the ride?

beerslurpy, despite your handle, you actually know **** from shinola, which is more than I can say for a few people here.

Convicting all 950,000 men of war crimes was silly on its face back in the 1940s, and it's still silly. It would have made more sense to convict the entire country of Germany, except those involved in the Resistance.

That said, obviously this guy loves Hitler. He's a wacko. But someone having once been part of a huge military organization when there were few good options doesn't mean much one way or another.

And yes, there are people in my family who resisted. And my family was almost hauled to the camps, too. I'm Austrian by descent, with 1/8 Jewish blood. My father's family concealed their heritage to save their lives (they'd never been practicing Jews, or Catholics either for that matter).

Sooner or later, though, you have to watch The Producers and Hogan's Heroes, laugh, and move on. Hitler's dead. He's been dead for 60 years.

Azrael256
June 16, 2006, 01:44 AM
And how do you propose they should have ferreted out the devoted junior officers from the ones who just went along for the ride? I could not possibly care less. "Going along for the ride" doesn't fly, but even if it did, the man volunteered. And we're not talking about Ah-nold's dad flying a party flag, we're talking about a man who joined the SS.

Why is it that we have no problem understanding guilt by association when it comes to mobsters hijacking semi trailers full of cigarettes, but when it comes to invading Poland, the waters somehow get murky.

ArmedBear
June 16, 2006, 01:51 AM
Why is it that we have no problem understanding guilt by association when it comes to mobsters hijacking semi trailers full of cigarettes, but when it comes to invading Poland, the waters somehow get murky.

That made about as much sense as the rantings of the kook in Wisconsin.:rolleyes:

Byron Quick
June 16, 2006, 02:01 AM
Azrael526,

You are mistaken in your belief that all SS members were convicted of war crimes. There are entire SS divisions that nol only were never convicted of war crimes but were never even accused of war crimes.

That's not to say that this man is not guilty. I have no idea what his status is.

But trying to state that all SS were convicted war criminals or even accused war criminals is simply false to fact.

Don't get me wrong, I have no sympathy for Nazis or their pathetic ideology. I do have sympathy for accurate history.

Why is it that we have no problem understanding guilt by association when it comes to mobsters hijacking semi trailers full of cigarettes, but when it comes to invading Poland, the waters somehow get murky.

There is no law or regulation that would prevent any person from becoming a US citizen based on guilt by association. If you thought there was...you were mistaken. __________________

bouis
June 16, 2006, 02:10 AM
The reason is which IDIOT let a Waffen SS goon into my country?!?

I'll give the guy one thing -- Americans are woefully ignorant of what really happened during the second World War.

Can you imagine serving your country through what might be the most terrible war ever, only to go through sixty years of people thinking you were a butcher because of the color of the uniform you wore?

Beetle Bailey
June 16, 2006, 02:14 AM
I'd like to take this opportunity to suggest to everyone: If you have an opportunity to talk to anyone who was alive at the time, especially vets, please do so. But it doesn't have to be a vet. . . I had a classmate whose grandmother was a Ukrainian gypsy whom the Germans had captured.

She would have been sent to a death camp but during the medical exam they measured the size and proportions of her skull and deemed her worthy of being used as slave labor in Germany. Yep, life or death based on the physical shape of your head. . . :scrutiny:

There's also the Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles, where they have artifacts from the concentration camps. On display are some of the instruments of torture, some of which I couldn't even fathom to guess how they operate.

You don't fight Herr Junker by cutting off his free speech, you ask for his sources and get as many other accounts as you can.

Hmmm. . . which shall I choose, overwhelming historical evidence, or what some guy pulled out of his. . .

Azrael256
June 16, 2006, 02:20 AM
But trying to state that all SS were convicted war criminals or even accused war criminals is simply false to fact. No, it isn't. The tribunal judges decided that the SS, as a whole, was a criminal organization. They allowed a good deal of leeway for lower ranking men, particularly foreign conscripts, but this man doesn't exactly qualify for an exemption.

Byron Quick
June 16, 2006, 03:36 AM
At Nuremberg? At which trial?

Ok,

I've found where the tribunal held the SS and SD to be criminal organizations. What exactly did this mean for individual SS members not accused of specific crimes?

LAK
June 16, 2006, 08:10 AM
ArmedBearThe Waffen SS, a branch of the military, had 950,000 members. It wasn't the Totenkopf SS, who guarded concentration camps, or any of the other small SS groups, which were much more intimately involved in war crimes.
Uh oh ... someone who knows some history - as opposed to indoctrination and popular notions.

There are doubtless hundreds, maybe thousands of people in this country who have Adolf Hilter figurines, busts, paintings and flags of the Dritte Reich all over the insides of their homes.

We have a far greater threat than any single Hitler admirer within this country. That is the people in this country who are selling us out and destroying our country right before our very eyes - and millions who actively support the idea - and their criminal organization known as the "United Nations". Since they started building their global plantation, the crimes that occurred as a result of the Nazis are but a fraction of the sum total.

-------------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

Don't Tread On Me
June 16, 2006, 08:16 AM
Well, that's the price we pay for being Americans and establishing a free society. You get people who believe in some not-so-good things.


We protect religious beliefs and free speech. Well, not really protect, we simply limit the government from infringing on these rights. Remember, the government is often the tool of the majority and is misused to impose one's will over another. We certainly don't want to set a precedent by jumping all over an ex-nazi. If he's doing it on private property, well goody for him. His waste of money and property.


Bottom line, this guy or anyone else can say whatever they want - in the face of total concrete evidence that says otherwise, he will never convince everyone else (if that even is his intent) who is sane or not a racist/nazi. So let them be, paying attention to these types only promotes their madness.

WeedWhacker
June 16, 2006, 09:05 AM
I will defend his right to say what he desires, I only ask that he speaks the truth, not what he believe is the truth
Who are you to judge what he believes to be true? He has the right to say something which happens to be false, as long as he believes it is true. To even imply otherwise is to be an enemy of the First Amendment, no sugar-coating!

I don't agree with him, but free speech is free speech, even if you or I don't like it.

shooter429
June 16, 2006, 11:17 AM
I too think it would be interesting to talk to one of the few oldtimers left from WW2, regardless of what side they were on. As an American, I was taught that Nazis were scum of the earth and guilty of some of the most horrific crimes against humanity of modern times.

But what I have read and heard since that time is that not all Nazis were cruel, sadistic monsters. Not every Nazi conducted medical experiments on babies, only certain Doctors. And many did not even know about the camps until after-the-fact. In short, not all were war criminals or participants in the holocaust horrors of Hitler's third reich.

Also, keep in mind that he was indoctrinated to believe all that he is now espousing at a young age. He very well might not even want to entertain the possibility that he was a bad-guy. Try to look at it from another's perspective.

Anyway, the message or view that he is expressing should be a moot point (unless it fell outside the bounds of free speech). However, it is clear to me that as a nation we allow people to speak their minds- as long as they are politically correct. If he was putting up a gay-pride sign or a pro -abortion hall or a memorial dedicated to MLKJr. this would not be an issue.

Why does this double standard continue to exist?

Shooter429

Medusa
June 16, 2006, 01:47 PM
Let him be, does he advocate nazi policy, or is trying to make an ethnic cleansing, making threats? The hystery that evoked here is just :barf: . Azrael, the "tribunal judges" were idiots, whole deal was a circus, just an act of revenge. IF it is his property and he's no threat, then let it be. Or is it that some people are more equal than others, and some less equal?

You know, similar is going on here, only on the other side, if someone puts up a memorial to the victims of communist crimes, same gibberish comes up, similar to azrael reasonings - they (commies in here) were the liberators, adversaries (local resistance etc) were evil and "nazi".

I've heard that allies put 2 million german troops into camps, where over a million died of starvation and diseases. Somehow this genocide is silenced down, for example.

Truth isn't what the "winning side" says it is. Real truth has no sides, but all sides try to show the truth positively to them. If one has no critizism to get the difference between the real truth and propaganda (just like antis - they believe the propaganda, how the guns are so dangerous to everybody), then I can feel only sorry for them.

Most "nazis" were soldiers, just like american soldiers, fighting for the "right thing", for their families and homeland. Every country had their view on "right". Germany fought for the so-called cleaner future and against communists (and if someone cares to check the history that one might even see, why the Hitler was able to come to power in the first place), as the Stalin was ready to invade Germany also, so the german iniciative kept the western part of Europe free of commie occupation eventually, and what most americans don't get, most of your technological advances today came from german research or researchers then (von Braun, anyone?) - jet technology, rocket techology, light assault rifles, german U-boots, especially type XXI were to american navy as Abrams tank to beduin novadays, german ship design was one of the best (only a little lacking in craftmanship, sabotages and shortage in amount) - Spähkreuzer was a nice design, they had a corvette with shipboard helo Colibri for ASW duty, beforementioned Type XXI as first real submarine in the world (grandfather to most afterwar designs) etc etc etc.

Hutch
June 16, 2006, 03:29 PM
I've heard that allies put 2 million german troops into camps, where over a million died of starvation and diseases. I've heard that the moon landings were faked, but that studio wrestling is real.

Come to think of it, if you include the Soviets, that might actually have a chance of being true...

You got any source for that rumor?

Art Eatman
June 16, 2006, 03:38 PM
As to "Allies" and 2 million dead by starvation, well, yeah, Russia. They even incarcerated their own people who had been imprisoned by the Nazis for fear they had become "politically unreliable".

The Russians hauled trainload after trainload of whatever sort of heavy equipment, trucks, machine tools, and even people back to Russia from whatever territories they occupied at the end of the war. that was a large part of the Iron Curtain countries' problem in rebuilding: A swarm of roaches had cleaned out the rebuilding cupboard.

Art

AJAX22
June 16, 2006, 03:39 PM
I just wanted to chime in and suggest that a man acting in a non violent way to express his beliefs is a good thing, regardless of how wrong those beliefs may be.

Dangerous people are the ones that keep their beliefs to themselves and act in seceret.

Granted it is an offensive gesture, and it may bring elements into his town that the township may prefer to do without. But that is an issue between him and his neighbors to work out like civilized adults.

As far as banning the man from coming into the united states, maby it wasn't a wise choice back fifty some years ago to let him in, whether he was regular ss, or tokenoffer. But at the time the records were not computerized, it would have been very hard to tell a reffugee from a criminal fleeing justice. If he legally entered the country, and has been able to be a law abiding citizen acting in a productive manner, how he spends his money, offensive as it may be, is up to his discression. And the nature of his emigration is no longer a factor, he is a citizen, and as such enjoys the same rights as those of us born here.

I personally find his memorial offensive, I lost a large number of relatives in the holocost, but I would find it more offensive, and signifigantly more detrimental to the well being of our country to restrict in any way shape or form the free speach of an individual.

Just my oppinion

ArmedBear
June 16, 2006, 03:49 PM
I personally find his memorial offensive, I lost a large number of relatives in the holocost, but I would find it more offensive, and signifigantly more detrimental to the well being of our country to restrict in any way shape or form the free speach of an individual.

Agreed.

Furthermore, to make a big deal about it is to "give it power." If you laugh at it (again, watch the original Mel Brooks movie The Producers, which had a character in it who was much like this guy), then it is a joke. If you take it too seriously, it becomes something OTHER than a joke. This accomplishes the opposite from your intention.

Unlike, say, the Brady Campaign, this guy is just expressing his opinion about Hitler, not actively trying to destroy freedom. Most people find his opinion to be ludicrous. There's no real danger that a critical mass of people will become neo-Nazis, especially if no one makes a big deal about it and turns neo-Nazism into a great way for teenagers to piss off their parents. Leave it at that.

Jim K
June 16, 2006, 04:19 PM
There is no evidence that Pope Benedict XVI (Ratzinger) ever was a member of the Nazi party and he certainly was not a member of the SS, as some anti-Catholic groups have alleged. His father was anti-Nazi, and the family was forced to move several times for that reason, but there is no evidence that the his father or any family member ever joined any anti-Nazi organization or that he or anyone in his family worked for or with the OSS, as others have alleged.

He did join the Hitler Jugend as did every other German teen-age male (girls joined the Bund Deutsche Madel) for the simple reason that it was compulsory; membership in the HJ or the BDM did not confer Nazi party membership. He was allowed to leave in order to study for the priesthood. He was later drafted into the German Army but was in a non-combat capacity.

I am not going to get into this too much, but some of the above posts show an almost total ignorance of both the Nazis and of Germany in that period. I can only suggest reading some real history (start with Shirer's Rise and Fall of the Third Reich). Americans should learn more about the real Hitler and the real Nazis in order to oppose them and their ideas here or elsewhere. But it does no good to hang the "Nazi" or "Hitler" label on anyone we disagree with, as the liberal left has done.

Jim

Cosmoline
June 16, 2006, 04:22 PM
I want to know how the devil an SS man ever became a US citizen. He sure as hell better have had a few rocket designs for us. Otherwise we ought to have left him with the Ruskies.

ArmedBear
June 16, 2006, 04:54 PM
Cosmoline, look up Waffen SS in Wikipedia.

There were 950,000 men in the Waffen SS. It was a military unit, like the Marines or the Air Force. The other, smaller "SS" groups like the Totenkopf SS (Death's Head SS) were primarily the ones who committed atrocities, ran concentration camps, etc.

Surely, some Waffen SS did commit war crimes, as did some American soldiers and everyone else in the war. But not all 950,000 of them. Some people signed up because they didn't want to be drafted into other kinds of service, just like here in the '60s.

General Patton understood this in 1945; he was nearly crucified for it by what we now call the mainstream media. But no one in his right mind would suggest that George S. Patton, whose proudest life work was killing German soldiers in large numbers, was a Nazi sympathizer.

Deanimator
June 16, 2006, 05:01 PM
Azrael-- The Waffen SS, a branch of the military, had 950,000 members. It wasn't the Totenkopf SS, who guarded concentration camps, or any of the other small SS groups, which were much more intimately involved in war crimes
1. See this link to Theodor Eicke and the SS Totenkopf Division: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodor_Eicke SS Totenkopf Division drew DIRECTLY from the camp guard pool.

2. The Waffen SS was so well known for atrocities against POWs and civilians, that a FAILURE to commit such acts was remarkable. They started out in Poland, progressed to the murder of Senegalese POWs among others in France in 1940, then hit the big time in the USSR. Perhaps you've never heard of Malmedy or Ouradour sur Glaine.

That wretch should never have been allowed into the United States, and should now be deported... assuming he's not just some nutcase lying to attract attention to himself.

ArmedBear
June 16, 2006, 05:09 PM
Deanimator, perhaps you have never heard of Dresden or Tokyo? You know, burning 100,000 civilians alive and all that?

And yet, I've met several bomber pilots and crew from WW II, and none of them seemed like they should be deported.

I'm hardly defending atrocities; I'm just questioning people's perspectives. My parents grew up in Vienna during the war. They dodged bombs, even machine gun bullets, literally, on a regular basis. They were civilians, and they were not near a base or a munitions factory. Their fathers were conscripted -- in their 40s -- into the Nazi military (their families' lives would have been forfeit if they didn't go), despite the fact that both my grandfathers were anti-Nazi and my father's family was being "investigated" for having Jewish blood. We do, but thank God the Nazis could never prove it.

My parents have very close friends who were US Army Air Corps, US Marines, etc. at that time. Sometimes, after so many years, it's more important to build peace than keep hate alive.

Hate Nazism. That's fine, and a good thing. But don't hate every individual involved in the war, and don't believe all the propaganda. The War was ugly all around.

cbsbyte
June 16, 2006, 05:25 PM
First I believe the Pope was in the Luftwaffenhelfer, or FLAK gun helper. They carried ammo, and cared for the FLAK guns. In 45 he was drafted into the Army, but deserted. He was living at home, when he was caught by the US Army who put him into a POW camp. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_life_of_Pope_Benedict_XVI

The Waffen SS had many different branches of service, just like the army. So being in the SS did not automaticly make someone a war criminal. One could be in the Signal core, maintance, supply etc. Though the Waffen SS where know to have commited many war crimes during the war especially on the eastern front. The army probably commited more war crimes % wise. The SS was orginaly only a political military arm of the NAZI regime, under Himmler they created the Waffen SS. At first they where not well supplied nor, trained. Basicly they where devout cannon fodder. Later in the war they where better trained, armed, and supplied though they where a small fighting force in the overall Wehrmacht. The Army never considered them to be elite forces, and mostly depised the SS. Only Himmler, and the Nazi progangda machine made them out to be an elite fighting force. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffen_SS

I forgot to add that this guy has every right to apouse anything he likes on his own property. Though the neighbours can equaly do something back to him.

Art Eatman
June 16, 2006, 05:34 PM
This is degenerating into an argument about the SS itself, not any discussion of the man himself.

Do the Wikipedia and Snopes stuff and all that yourownselves.

Doesn't matter if it's the Nazis of Skokie, the KKK somewhere or this guy. The deal is that absent any advocacy of violence or crime, he can say and think whatever foolish notion strikes his fancy.

Just as we do here, every day.

Art

Cosmoline
June 16, 2006, 05:54 PM
There were 950,000 men in the Waffen SS. It was a military unit, like the Marines or the Air Force. The other, smaller "SS" groups like the Totenkopf SS (Death's Head SS) were primarily the ones who committed atrocities, ran concentration camps, etc.

I think the fact that this particular SS man wants to make a memorial to HITLER is a pretty good sign he was indeed one of the evil SS. He should never have been allowed to become a citizen or migrate here, and his record should be looked into to see if he lied on the forms at the time (which he most likely did). If so, send him out to the mid-Atlantic and drop him off in his new homeland.

Deanimator
June 16, 2006, 07:51 PM
Deanimator, perhaps you have never heard of Dresden or Tokyo? You know, burning 100,000 civilians alive and all that?

I've heard of Guernica, Rotterdam, Nanking and Manila too.

Maybe starting WWII and murdering millions of people wasn't such a good idea?

The purpose of the USAAF was to defend the United States from people like him.

The purpose of the SS in ALL its various slimy incarnations was to murder people like Anne Frank, the GIs at Malmedy and the civilians at Babi Yar and Ouradour sur Glaine, directly or indirectly.

I suggest you read Heinz Hoehne's "Order of the Death's Head" and Sydnor's "Soldiers of Destruction".

About the ONLY nice thing you can say about the SS was that they were sharp dressers.

He shouldn't have been allowed into this country.

He should have been HANGED.

Serendipity
June 16, 2006, 08:26 PM
Shouldn't we really be more worried about Hitlery than Hitler?

Deanimator
June 16, 2006, 09:04 PM
Shouldn't we really be more worried about Hitlery than Hitler?
The major difference between the Warsaw Ghetto and Waco was scale. The perpetrators largely resembled each other.

bouis
June 16, 2006, 09:38 PM
"They said he was a racist. It's a lie," Junker said. "He advocated for, he was in favor of these people. He respected other races."

He doesn't seem to be advocating hate or anything else, just revisionist history. If he really believed Hitler was so tolerant, why do you think that he, as a soldier during the war, would have committed atrocities or war crimes?

He's an old man who sees his side through rose-colored glasses. Big deal - we do the same thing, though maybe not to this degree. Leave the guy alone and let him die.

Deanimator
June 17, 2006, 12:23 AM
Leave the guy alone and let him die.
That's an interesting attitude, but I wonder if you'd stick with it were your interests at stake.

One experiment would be for someone to torture your family to death and disappear for twenty years. Then he could stop you in the street and ask you if there were still any hard feelings...

bouis
June 17, 2006, 12:40 AM
You don't see me hunting down Russian communists, do you?

And not all of them are 90-year-old men, either.

Edit: And don't forget the countless yuppies with Che t-shirts.

Medusa
June 17, 2006, 04:52 AM
Deanimator&Cosmoline, stick your head in a bucket of cold water and cool down. IF I would enforce same policy you here advocate, then every american soldier of that period should be hanged - they're raison d'etre was to kill every single german and japanese alive, exactly what you're saying.

Why can't you understand at last that people fought for their ideals, for their country and freedom, whatever the country, whatever the side. In war things happen, but most soldiers were just soldiers, following orders, fighting for the "right thing". A few were actual criminals, there was one dr. Mengele, not hordes of clones of him. Instead of blind and ignorant hate of all germans as such condemn certain real people for the acts they made. If you can prove the guy's a criminal, then so be it, he's worthy of condeming and judging. If you can't then shut up and respect the same values US preaches - freedom, right of existence and free speech, innocent until proven quilty etc. Just that he's saying Hitler was a nice guy doesn't make him the devil's advocate who's only purpose is the ethnic cleansing (what happened to the native americans by the way?). Maybe he has some loose nuts so he puts up all kinds of gibberish, or instead of flapping around you might actually listen what he's saying and focus on his arguments (as we're mostly doing in Highroad) instead of bashing the person simply because we don't like what he's saying.
Everybody remember one thing, world is a wide place with lots of different views on history (you all know my views of communist crimes issue), people see and understand things differently, based on their cultural and historical background. For example, in the US soil there was only 1 war for existence, we have had these for centuries and many times.

Justin
June 17, 2006, 07:07 AM
Why can't you understand at last that people fought for their ideals, for their country and freedom, whatever the country, whatever the side.

Yeah, but last time I checked, American ideals in WWII didn't involve stuffing Jews into ovens.

Yay for moral relativism!

JohnBT
June 17, 2006, 09:34 AM
"The major difference between the Warsaw Ghetto and Waco was scale. The perpetrators largely resembled each other."

Not so. In fact, it's not even close. Nice try on a sound bite with spin though, but you won't convince anyone who knows even the bare facts of the real history.
The Branch Davidians weren't herded together, starved for 2.5 years and shipped to death camps. The basic dates begin with 9/40(see orders below) and run until the beginning of the Warsaw Ghetto uprising in 4/43.

John

P.S. - Just to point out one of the regs, under #2, listed below. The Poles had to move out to make room for the Jews, but "Poles are not permitted to move into the German quarter."
____________________

"1. On the basis of the Regulation for Restrictions on Residence in the Government-General of September 13, 1940 (V.Bl.G.G.I., p. 288), a Jewish quarter is to be formed in the city of Warsaw, in which the Jews living in the city of Warsaw, or still to move there, must take up residence. The [Jewish] quarter will be set off from the rest of the city by the following streets: [here follows a list of streets and sections of streets]....

2. Poles residing in the Jewish quarter must move their domicile into the other part of the city by October 31, 1940. Apartments will be provided by the Housing Office of the Polish City Hall.

Poles who have not given up their apartments in the Jewish quarter by the above date will be forcibly moved. In the event of a forcible removal they will be permitted to take only refugee [style] luggage (Fluechtlingsgepaeck), bed-linen, and articles of sentimental value.

Poles are not permitted to move into the German quarter.

3. Jews living outside the Jewish quarter must move into the Jewish area of residence by October 31, 1940. They may take only refugee luggage and bed-linen. Apartments will be allocated by the Jewish Elder (Judenaeltester).

4. The Appointed Mayor of the Polish City Hall and the Jewish Elder are responsible for the orderly move of the Jews to the Jewish quarter, and the punctual move of the Poles away from the Jewish quarter, in accordance with a plan yet to be worked out, which will provide for the evacuation by stages of the individual Police districts.

5. The Representative of the District Governor of the city of Warsaw will give the necessary detailed instructions to the Jewish Elder for the establishing and permanent closure of the Jewish quarter.

6. The Representative of the District Governor of the city of Warsaw will issue regulations for the execution of this Decree.

7. Any person contravening this Decree, or the Regulations for its execution, will be punished in accordance with the existing laws on punishment.

Head of the Warsaw District

Dr. Fischer

Governor"

Eksterminacja, pp. 95-97.

Deanimator
June 17, 2006, 11:00 AM
Deanimator&Cosmoline, stick your head in a bucket of cold water and cool down. IF I would enforce same policy you here advocate, then every american soldier of that period should be hanged - they're raison d'etre was to kill every single german and japanese alive, exactly what you're saying.

Why can't you understand at last that people fought for their ideals, for their country and freedom, whatever the country, whatever the side.
Strange that the US military was so UTTERLY ineffective in trying to "kill every single german and japanese alive". They seemed to achieve most everything ELSE they put their minds to. Maybe it's because what you claim isn't true?

As for people's "ideals", NAMBLA has ideals too. Their right to do so aside, do you ENCOURAGE them to advocate those ideals?

That old man is the moral equivalent of Father Shanley (although admittedly NAMBLA just wants to rape prepubescent boys, not gas them), exercising his right to advocate hideously abhorrent ideas up until the point at which they create a "clear and present danger". Despicable people have rights. I respect their RIGHTS because they're the same rights I have. I don't have to respect the monster who holds those rights, be he this guy or Jeffrey Dahmer.

As for him being a former SS man, that should have excluded him from COMING here, much less becoming a citizen. We have plenty of homegrown evil people. I see no need to import them. He probably took a minimum wage job away from some Klansman...

Deanimator
June 17, 2006, 11:05 AM
"The major difference between the Warsaw Ghetto and Waco was scale. The perpetrators largely resembled each other."

Not so. In fact, it's not even close. Nice try on a sound bite with spin though, but you won't convince anyone who knows even the bare facts of the real history.
Actually, both conceptually and practically, they're eerily similar.

1. They're two groups of racists in black uniforms and coal scuttle helmets, armed with German submachineguns.

2. Their victims were chosen on the basis of race, ethnicity, etc. Do a Google search on "Good Old Boy's Roundup" to see what the BATF(E) is all about. Find yourself a group picture of the Branch Davidians. Then ask yourself why they were chosen.

3. They both wet themselves and initially ran screaming like schoolgirls when their intended victims unexpectedly fought back.

Medusa
June 17, 2006, 11:42 AM
Deanimator, my thought was that if the guy is a criminal and it is proven so, then you have every right to be angry and demand the court of law and possibly expel the guy. But as long as he can't be proven a criminal and advocate of violence, then you cannot judge the guy for just what he says, and especially if you don't like his words, there isn't a thing like thought-crime or future-crime. It is similar to that - you don't like what gibberish the antis put up to, so you would surely like to see most of them (the leaders especially, like Brady's) deported to far-east. I certainly would like to see the "traitors of homeland" (our polichickens, who try to gag people, lessen their possibilities to defend themselves, feed their families etc) to be sent there, but I can only think that, I cannot make it an official policy.

Point is, let the man be, let him speak up and oppose his arguments with arguments of yours, cold and reasonable (also, truth is usually hard and cold and it hurts from times to times, try not to make a mistake by mixing up real truth with the facts you want to be truth). If his arguments are thrown over as false and illogical then he can't be taken seriously, if you put away people just because they're a little loose on mind, then remember - nazis also put mentally ill people to camps. With these actions you would put yourself to the same level with people you so hardly condemn. Act smarter, falsify his reasonings and he's done for.

Justin, most germans didn't deal with stuffings anyway, only some fellows, who were judged anyway, but revisionist history is a little critical in the whole issue, claiming most victims to be dead rather because of starvation and diseases, than real gassing up. I've heard that the Zyclon B was a pesticide and wasn't very suitable to gassing animal organisms, including human. Wonder how much truth is in it. Fact it is that the jewish views on history are enforced, others are mostly supressed. For example, one guy here was convicted for writing "jews to oven" in public forum, but people who say "mass-murder all estonians", "burn them all" (estonians) are free to exercise their freedom of speech. That one-sidedness makes me a little supecting that the financially advantageous legend is served as actual truth.

gm
June 17, 2006, 01:20 PM
as much as I find the whole nazi ideal and the hitler solution offensive, I would be inclined to let the idiot have his memorial. to not do so would mean we would have to ban every single thing here that other folks find offensive as well.

personally, I dont want the man breathing the same air but thats besides the point.I hate nazi's and commies as well...but censorship is the issue.if he wants his memorial to a madman,so be it as long as it isnt something people have to see.(i.e. banner by the roadside)

if he is in fact a warcriminal, he should be kicked out and not be allowed to hide like the vermin rats the whole nazi solution was..

Cosmoline
June 17, 2006, 02:37 PM
Deanimator&Cosmoline, stick your head in a bucket of cold water and cool down. IF I would enforce same policy you here advocate, then every american soldier of that period should be hanged - they're raison d'etre was to kill every single german and japanese alive, exactly what you're saying.

So GI's were the moral equivalent of SS men :D :D It's lucky for you they weren't, since we would have atomized E. Europe and the USSR in the late 1940's if we had been. It amazes me how quickly Europeons forget their own past, and revise history to make the bad guys good and the good guys bad.

Anyway, are you saying we don't have a right to exclude SS men from US citizenship? That's absurd. I'm sure Estonia has far more restrictive immigration policies than we do.

we have had these for centuries and many times.

That doesn't make you much of authority on right & wrong. It's like a fifth generation dry drunk lecturing me about the evils of my nightly IPA.

Medusa
June 17, 2006, 03:01 PM
Cosmoline, are you claiming me to be a drunkard? That is a bad juju, men are killed for lesser things :uhoh:
That doesn't make you much of authority on right & wrong. It's like a fifth generation dry drunk lecturing me about the evils of my nightly IPA.
Also, does that mean that I must bow to your great wisdom& knowledge of right and wrong?
We have not forgotten our pasts (all the naggings, fights, massacres, betrayals), but you seem to forget the truth and make the lack of it up with wants. But let it be. My point was that the US army in Europe had only one purpose - to crush Germany and during the crushing kill as many germans as possible. They didn't go to Europe to picnic and have a blast, did they? This is exactly, what the german army was by your saying - kill every single gypsy, jew, mentally ill etc- , or any other army. If you condemn one, condemn the others as well, or it is hippocracy. This whole deal has gone to blind-bashing nazis and germans as well, especially equalling them, saying out whatever comes to mouth without thinking. This is hippocracy, ignorant and unprofessional behaviour and shall not be tolerated.
IMHO the venerable nazi-suspect is the least of your problems that must be attended, here too publicity hunts nazi symbolics and act, but other problems are let freely to roam around, and far more serious problems. This guy is also a pseudoproblem, something to drive your attention to, to keep other more serious things under cover.

Werewolf
June 17, 2006, 03:04 PM
Yeah, but last time I checked, American ideals in WWII didn't involve stuffing Jews into ovens.No but American ideals did involve stuffing lots of Japanese who WERE US citizens into detainment camps (and yes there is definitely a difference of degree between the two acts but the thought is the same and if truth be known I'd bet there were a whole lot of Americans living on the west coast during the war that would have gladly stuffed Japanese into ovens - they sure had no problem stuffing their property into their pockets and bank accounts). Add to that the regular fire bombings of Tokyo who's only purpose was to break the will of the Japanese civilian by burning to death 100's of thousands of them and some might argue that there is little difference between our treatment of the Japanese and the German's treatment of those they considered undesirables - it's all a matter of degree and intent. On both sides the intent was to eliminate a threat - real or perceived - to the nation.

In war bad things happen - some on purpose and for legitimate reasons (I suppose though that the winner in any war gets to define legitimate - which is a big part of why this discussion is even occuring). Some bad things happen in order to stir the pot and serve up the emotion needed to generate the hatred required to get otherwise sane people to do silly things like attack machine gun nests or give up meat 2 days a week. Some bad things happen just to serve the evil ends of politicians.

No one is innocent in war. Nations, populations, individual persons - they all fight for their own reasons and those reasons seem like good reasons to those doing the fighting on all sides. Absent good reasons to fight - people won't!

Were the SS a bunch of brainwashed demons? By the standards of the allies most assuredly. By the standards of the German people I'd bet they were considered patriotic warriors serving the cause.

Is the guy in WI evil or just a whacko? Beats me - but by the standards of the United States of America, which most here profess to believe and many here have served to preserve it really doesn't matter - he has every right to raise a shrine to whom ever he wishes and to do so without restraint; the 1st Amendment says he does. To those who think differently - DEAL WITH IT or choke on the hypocrisy.

Don't like the shrine - then don't visit it. Another option might be to picket the site as an active exercise in free speech. Undoubtedly there are other options as well. One thing I am sure of though is that playing beaurocratic games (which the local pols are doing) to prevent the raising of the shrine in direct opposition to one of - if not the - prime rights held most dear by the people of the United States of America is not the answer to what some perceive as a problem.

Denying that Wisconsin farmer the right to raise his shrine by either thought or deed makes the deniers no better than those whom they profess to revile.

Wake up people. In a land of the free sometimes another's exercise of freedom may be offensive and we don't have a right not to be offended (though I imagine the PC crowd think different).

Deanimator
June 17, 2006, 03:22 PM
Deanimator, my thought was that if the guy is a criminal and it is proven so, then you have every right to be angry and demand the court of law and possibly expel the guy. But as long as he can't be proven a criminal and advocate of violence, then you cannot judge the guy for just what he says, and especially if you don't like his words, there isn't a thing like thought-crime or future-crime.
He says he was an SS man. Did they ask him what he did prior to coming to the United States? Did he tell them the truth? Bet he didn't. That's grounds for deportation. Don't believe me? Ask John Demjanjuk.

I only need to judge him by what he IS.

Cosmoline
June 17, 2006, 03:25 PM
Cosmoline, are you claiming me to be a drunkard?

I'm comparing a European lecturing an American about the relative merits of serving the SS and serving the US army with a dry drunk lecturing me about how evil my glass of IPA is. The drunk has no credibility on the subject, and no room to talk. He's just trying to foist all of his personal misdeeds on a chemical compound, just as the Europeans blame all the horrible things they did to each other in the past 100 years on WAR. WAR is evil in their opinion, they're not evil. In other words, Hitler was not evil because of the murder of so many innocents, he was evil because he waged an illegal war. And anyone who fights a war is equal, with all of them deemed victims of combat no matter which side they fought on. In this world view, Hitler would have been fine and legitimate if he'd simply not invaded Poland and France.

But let it be. My point was that the US army in Europe had only one purpose - to crush Germany and during the crushing kill as many germans as possible.

No, the purpose of the US military was to LIBERATE Europe, including Germany. If we'd been trying to slaughter every last Krautlander, why the devil do I still have to listen to so many of them quip and moan these days? We had MILLIONS of them, both unarmed civilians and POW's, under our guns. We could have slaughtered most of the population of Western Germany by simply feeding them into their own concentration camps.

he has every right to raise a shrine to whom ever he wishes and to do so without restraint; the 1st Amendment says he does. To those who think differently - DEAL WITH IT or choke on the hypocrisy.

And if he lied about his military history on his immigration forms, we have every right to boot him out. And we should.

Deanimator
June 17, 2006, 03:26 PM
No but American ideals did involve stuffing lots of Japanese who WERE US citizens into detainment camps (and yes there is definitely a difference of degree between the two acts but the thought is the same and if truth be known I'd bet there were a whole lot of Americans living on the west coast during the war that would have gladly stuffed Japanese into ovens - they sure had no problem stuffing their property into their pockets and bank accounts)
The Japanese internment was evil and stupid. To compare it to the MILDEST things the Germans and Japanese did is simply foolish.

What was the mortality rate of US POWs and civilian internees in the Pacific?

What was the mortality rate of Japanese-American internees in the US?

JERRY
June 17, 2006, 03:28 PM
zee vay i seez it, vee are bekumink more like zee left zen vee care to admitz.


so the guy was a german soldier, so he feels Hitler wasnt all the blame for the wrongs that happened.......

why are "you" (as in the white liberal nancys) so appologetic to muslims for being profiled in America because they speak of "death to Americans" in thier mosks, because its thier free speach rights, yet condem an old man for doing the same in a extremely milder tone?


so what.......its his property, its his belief, and anyone who is offended need not attend or listen.

what this guys is doing is no more inflamitory than the belief of a "Chocolate City" that is open to the public yet still run by incompetents and criminals.


i dont care for either the black Hitlers belief in N.O. or the white ones in Wisc.

so i will simply stay away.:) to say it in a way that should appeal to the N.O. crowd, Zieg Hiel Cuz.

Deanimator
June 17, 2006, 03:30 PM
Were the SS a bunch of brainwashed demons? By the standards of the allies most assuredly. By the standards of the German people I'd bet they were considered patriotic warriors serving the cause.

By the standards of NAMBLA, Father Geoghan was a kindly "mentor".

If you only judged by the criminal's standards, nobody would ever be guilty of anything.

If I hunted down and killed everyone who defended Nazis, you couldn't condemn for that because after all, that would be judging me by YOUR standards...

Cosmoline
June 17, 2006, 03:49 PM
Yes, the internment of US citizens solely because of their ethnic background was a serious crime. But getting sent to Arkansas is not the same as getting sent to a death camp. It's also worth remembering that not all of the internees were kept illegally. It is standard practice to intern foreign nationals from nations you are at war with. So when hostilities began Germans in India were rounded up, as were Brits in Italy. We had every right to detain Japanese nationals, and every right to keep an eye on US citizens of German and Japanese extraction or with political ties to those nations. What the government didn't have a right to do is preemptively detain all people who happened to have Japanese blood.

telomerase
June 17, 2006, 03:50 PM
Yeah, but last time I checked, American ideals in WWII didn't involve stuffing Jews into ovens.

There were plenty of Jews among the 2.5 million Russians (including 90,000 Italian civilians with no connection to WWII) that were rounded up by American GIs and sent to die in Siberia.

If you study "our side's" atrocities and try to figure out how to keep "our" politicians under control in the future, then you are different from those who put up monuments to Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Roosevelt, Pol Pot, Amin, Nyerere, etc. Otherwise you're just wearing a different color jersey.

Cosmoline
June 17, 2006, 03:52 PM
Siberia is part of the US? I didn't know that. I'm gonna put my land claim in right now and go homestead over there.

AJAX22
June 17, 2006, 03:54 PM
Just a thought, but regardless of his original truthfullness on his imigration forms, wouldn't the blanket amnesty which was declared a decade or so back grant him citizenship legitimately? Assuming he spent the required time in the US and did not return to his home country.

JohnBT
June 17, 2006, 04:20 PM
"Actually, both conceptually and practically, they're eerily similar.

1. They're two groups of racists in black uniforms and coal scuttle helmets, armed with German submachineguns.

2. Their victims were chosen on the basis of race, ethnicity, etc. Do a Google search on "Good Old Boy's Roundup" to see what the BATF(E) is all about. Find yourself a group picture of the Branch Davidians. Then ask yourself why they were chosen.

3. They both wet themselves and initially ran screaming like schoolgirls when their intended victims unexpectedly fought back."
________________________________________________________________

1. Racists?
2. Chosen on the basis of race, ethnicity, etc. ??
3. Ran like schoolgirls?

If you don't have any FACTS to back up your assertions, just say so. There's no need to make up stuff.

John

Deanimator
June 17, 2006, 04:43 PM
what this guys is doing is no more inflamitory than the belief of a "Chocolate City" that is open to the public yet still run by incompetents and criminals.

Did I mention that I loathe Ray "I've killed more Black people than the Klan" Nagin too?

Deanimator
June 17, 2006, 04:46 PM
1. Racists?
2. Chosen on the basis of race, ethnicity, etc. ??
3. Ran like schoolgirls?

If you don't have any FACTS to back up your assertions, just say so. There's no need to make up stuff.

You didn't do that Google search, did you?

The turned tail and ran when faced by starving Jews with a few handguns.

The BATF turned tail and ran WITH THEIR HANDS IN THE AIR when the Branch Davidians shot back. "Time" and "Newsweek" ran the pictures.

c_yeager
June 17, 2006, 05:11 PM
As for people's "ideals", NAMBLA has ideals too. Their right to do so aside, do you ENCOURAGE them to advocate those ideals?


Well, I do.

I like it when crazy people, idiots, and general undesirables self-identify themselves, and make the lunacy of their ideals public for all to see.

Tell me this. Lets say you have a neighbor, lives right next door to you and your kids. The man is a pedophile. Would you rather:

A) The man kept his desires secret, was really nice to you and your kids, and even had a nice little swimming pool in back that he lets the neighborhood children use.

or

B) Rabidly advertises his status as a NAMBLA member and constantly fights for "his rights" while sitting all by himself in his kiddie pool.

The sharpest edge to freedom of speach is that not only does it allow people to speak their minds, but it gives the rest of us the chance to hear their words and come to our own estimations of the speaker.

Byron Quick
June 17, 2006, 05:15 PM
Just a thought, but regardless of his original truthfullness on his imigration forms, wouldn't the blanket amnesty which was declared a decade or so back grant him citizenship legitimately? Assuming he spent the required time in the US and did not return to his home country

What blanket amnesty, friend? Seems as if this would have prevented the deportation of John Demjanjuk for being a concentration camp guard if it were a fact. He was deported.

XLMiguel
June 17, 2006, 07:08 PM
I'd be kind a inclined to let him alone. He is entitled to his opinion and to express it openly, peacefully.

Nothing is better for mildew than freash air & sunshine, but I would find it interesting to see who/what actually shows up at his place.

Might it be some WW-II vets with a rope and some gasoline? The JDL? Skinhead/neo-NAZI's? Or the merely curious and tasteless? Welcome to America, where no one ever went broke under-estimating the taste of the American publik.:rolleyes:

One could only hope it just dies from lack of interest:evil:

Deanimator
June 17, 2006, 07:20 PM
Tell me this. Lets say you have a neighbor, lives right next door to you and your kids. The man is a pedophile. Would you rather:
I want his identity known so that people can protect their kids.

His advocating RAPE, only potentially incites rapists. He might have the legal right to do so. That doesn't make it GOOD.

Deanimator
June 17, 2006, 07:26 PM
Might it be some WW-II vets with a rope and some gasoline? The JDL? Skinhead/neo-NAZI's? Or the merely curious and tasteless? Welcome to America, where no one ever went broke under-estimating the taste of the American publik.
Funny you should mention the first line.

Something very similar happened to the perpetrator of the Malmedy massacre... at his farm... IN FRANCE!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joachim_Peiper

Just when you think you hate the French 100%, a few of them go and ruin the whole thing... ;)

Deanimator
June 17, 2006, 07:30 PM
What blanket amnesty, friend? Seems as if this would have prevented the deportation of John Demjanjuk for being a concentration camp guard if it were a fact. He was deported.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Demjanjuk

Not deported YET, I believe, but soon, soon! :D

YellowLab
June 17, 2006, 07:36 PM
He thinks Hitler is a OK dude... there are others who think that Satan is an OK dude and have temples and worship him.

Others worship BinLaden and kill in HIS name.

Don't go to his shrine.... how is that so hard to do?

XLMiguel
June 17, 2006, 11:00 PM
Deanimator - Thanks, kharma works in good time. I could handle a Hitler museum in a historical/research sense, but glorifying him, well, reap the wind . . .

Derby FALs
June 17, 2006, 11:37 PM
Do a Google search on "Good Old Boy's Roundup"

That would be the "Good O' Boy Round Up" (http://searchjustice.usdoj.gov/search?q=good+o%27+boy+roundup&q=site%3Awww.usdoj.gov%2Foig&sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&client=default_frontend&proxystylesheet=default_frontend&site=default_collection)

American By Blood
June 18, 2006, 03:33 PM
Deanimator-

Why are you so in favor of the unjust treatment of men who have not been convicted of any crimes in legitimate proceedings?

Take Standartenführer Peiper, for example. His conviction was the result of (exerpt taken from the Wikipedia entry you linked to) "confessions...coerced by the use of mock hangings and harsh beatings of the prisoners." Also, according to your provided link, his sentence was drastically reduced due to that fact. When convicts are treated in such a lenient fashion and liberal "compassion" isn't at play it's a sign that the court is choosing not to overturn the conviction outright for the sake of saving face. A conviction gained through torture is not a legitimate conviction.

The link you posted also had this to say about Peiper's character: "On another note, while in Italy, Peiper discovered that the Italian government had captured a group of Jews. Peiper had them released to him, and he then set them free. One of the Jews was a rabbi, who later wrote a testimony to Peiper's kindness during his war crimes trial." This does not sound like the behavior of a butcher.

Applauding the lynching of an old man by communists is sick.

As for Mr. Demjanjuk, you seem to forget the fact that the Israeli Supreme Court overturned his crimes against the Jewish people conviction and sent him back to the US. Additionally, shortly after returning to the States it was determined by the 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals that he was the victim of prosecutorial misconduct and that his last name wasn't even remotely similar to that of the true "Ivan the Terrible." As for the second revocation of his citizenship, it's no exaggeration to characterize that as a gross miscarriage of justice. The court accepted shaky evidence that he served in the camps and demanded that he counter the accusations with virtually unobtainable records of his internment.

One can only hope that if he is unjustly deported to Ukraine he'll face better treatment there than he has here for the past couple of decades.

Deanimator
June 18, 2006, 09:47 PM
1. If you lied on your immigration forms, you need to leave the US.

2. Joachim Peiper was responsible AT LEAST for Malmedy and Ouradour sur Glaine. He deserved to die, but Joe McCarthy got him off. He got justice later.

3. I believe that there is serious doubt as to whether John Demjanjuk is "Ivan the Terrible". There's NO doubt that he's a concentration camp guard. After all, HE says so. His defense was, "I'm not THAT concentration camp guard, I'm a DIFFERENT concentration camp guard." He needs to be deported, NOW.

JERRY
June 18, 2006, 10:14 PM
come on, the guy had his family threatened with death if he didnt serve, so when he served, they put him at a consentration camp, like he had a choice....like the russian front.

Deanimator
June 18, 2006, 10:53 PM
come on, the guy had his family threatened with death if he didnt serve,
Really? That's a new one. The typical story is that they served as guards so they wouldn't starve in German POW camps. I doubt the Germans knew or cared where his family was.

We have enough evil people who were born here. There's no need to import them.

American By Blood
June 18, 2006, 11:25 PM
3. I believe that there is serious doubt as to whether John Demjanjuk is "Ivan the Terrible". There's NO doubt that he's a concentration camp guard. After all, HE says so. His defense was, "I'm not THAT concentration camp guard, I'm a DIFFERENT concentration camp guard." He needs to be deported, NOW.

O RLY?

Again from Wikipedia: "Demjanjuk himself testified during the trial in Israel that he was imprisoned in a camp in Chelmno until 1944, when he was transferred to another camp in Austria, where he remained until he joined an anti-Soviet Russian military unit funded by the German government until the surrender of Germany to the Allies in 1945." (Emphasis added)

Has your bloodlust caused you to ignore the fact that one of the major pieces of evidence against Mr. Demjanjuk was an ID card from his alleged training period at Trawniki and that said piece of identification has been denounced as a forgery by the commandant who supposedly signed it, Mr. Karl Streibel? As a side note, 5000 prisoners were trained as guards at Trawniki--only 300 of them going on to serve at concentration camps. The overwhelming majority protected bridges, supply dumps, etc.

Terrible things happened to civilians during WWII, but there's no solid evidence that Mr. Demjanjuk was responsible for any of it.

Art Eatman
June 18, 2006, 11:30 PM
Kinda wandereed well away from anything remotely resembling anybody's civil rights...

Art

If you enjoyed reading about "Retired WI Farmer Hitler Memorial" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!