You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Nazi trial
December 9 2023 11.57pm

Nazi trial

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 > Last >>

 

Catfish Flag Burgess Hill 15 Jul 15 5.17pm

[Link]

He worked at Auchwitz doing the admin and knew what was going on. He didn't play a part in killing people but has been convicted as an accessory.

Yes, he is guilty and has much to feel guilty about but has any good been done? Having got him to confess, perhaps more good would have been done by pursuading him to give a full account that further undermines holocaust denials in the future.

The policy after the war was to go after the leaders and those who had committed high profile atrocities. It was simply not possible to convict every person who worked for the Nazis or breached a convention. everybody wanted to move on and I think they were right to do so.

 


Yes, I am an agent of Satan but my duties are largely ceremonial

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Frickin Saweet's Profile Frickin Saweet Flag South Cronx 15 Jul 15 5.43pm Send a Private Message to Frickin Saweet Add Frickin Saweet as a friend

Quote Catfish at 15 Jul 2015 5.17pm

[Link]

He worked at Auchwitz doing the admin and knew what was going on. He didn't play a part in killing people but has been convicted as an accessory.

Yes, he is guilty and has much to feel guilty about but has any good been done? Having got him to confess, perhaps more good would have been done by pursuading him to give a full account that further undermines holocaust denials in the future.

The policy after the war was to go after the leaders and those who had committed high profile atrocities. It was simply not possible to convict every person who worked for the Nazis or breached a convention. everybody wanted to move on and I think they were right to do so.


Having got him to confess, perhaps more good would have been done by pursuading him to give a full account that further undermines holocaust denials in the future.

He already has, see extract taken from Vice referencing a 2005 BBC documentary:

Groening appeared in a 2005 BBC documentary titled Auschwitz: The Nazis and the Final Solution. Responding to Holocaust deniers, he stated clearly: "I saw the gas chambers. I saw the crematoria. I saw the open fires. I was on the ramp when the selections [for the gas chambers] took place. I would like you to believe these atrocities happened because I was there."

[Link]

I find Groening's and a Holocaust survivor's comment really interesting. She asks why he and those like him, cultured and educated, did not challenge that atrocities that were happening. He effectively says he was following orders, being obedient:

"There was a self-denial in me that today I find impossible to explain," Groening said during the trial. "Perhaps it was also the convenience of obedience with which we were brought up, which allowed no contradiction. This indoctrinated obedience prevented registering the daily atrocities as such and rebelling against them."

But on that - what happens if you challenge orders of the Nazi hierarchy? Probably get shot. So to not follow orders is suicide. And what does that say about soldiers carrying out orders that are later deemed illegal. Are they all put on trial - where do you draw the line? Will hundreds of Serbian soldiers be facing trial too for the mass murder of civilians?

I'm not defending it - my gut reaction is that they should all hang for the atrocities, but it's a bloody complex thing.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Lombardos barber's Profile Lombardos barber Flag 15 Jul 15 5.50pm Send a Private Message to Lombardos barber Add Lombardos barber as a friend

My late grandfather served in an Armoured Regiment during the Second World War.

I remember a conversation I had with him as a kid when he said he'd have done anything to escape combat, such was the savagery of his experiences. He had empathy with the camp guards, as bizarre as that sounds (Purely from the perspective of not having to live from hour to hour, and see your mates blown to pieces or burnt alive next to you).

Difficult, and very easy to judge.

Note that Groening wasn't an Officer (as per the BBC). The officers and decision makers largely got away with it).

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View TUX's Profile TUX Flag redhill 15 Jul 15 6.13pm Send a Private Message to TUX Add TUX as a friend

This trial is completely pointless. What's to be gained? Nothing other than what we know already.

Many, many people were forced to do things against their will and to resist, as 'Frickin' points out, would be suicidal.
Self-preservation would be paramount to all 'recruits' involved at the time and I'd be the bloody same, do as I was told and hope it's over as quickly as possible.


 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View corkery's Profile corkery Flag Cork City 15 Jul 15 8.59pm Send a Private Message to corkery Add corkery as a friend

The Stanly Milgram investigation proved that people will do anything they are told.

 


We'll never die

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View bexleydave's Profile bexleydave Flag Barnehurst 16 Jul 15 11.02am Send a Private Message to bexleydave Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add bexleydave as a friend

He would have been, at the time, in his very early twenties, if that, at the start. As has been mentioned, such service could have looked a preferable option to the eastern front or north Africa. Wasn't most of the German nation guilty, to varying degrees, of turning a blind eye to atrocities?

 


Bexley Dave

Can you hear the Brighton sing? I can't hear a ******* thing!

"The most arrogant, obnoxious bunch of deluded little sun tanned, loafer wearing mummy's boys I've ever had the misfortune of having to listen to" (Burnley forum)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 16 Jul 15 11.16am

Quote corkery at 15 Jul 2015 8.59pm

The Stanly Milgram investigation proved that people will do anything they are told.

Gibsons investigation of Milgram's experiment presents a very good critical analysis of Milgram's Obedience study that presents a very valid argument against the simplistic parameters Milgram established (he shows that negotiation is the core of obedience and power, not a inherent construct).

Milgram's work suffers from very strong experimenter bias and its assumptions are faulty, when you look at the results in term of discourse analysis (the rate of obedience drops dramatically when you listen to the faux authority figure and the subjects discourse.

Sorry I wrote my last essay on Gibson and Milgram, and I'm a huge Zimbardo and Milgram fan.


 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View johnfirewall's Profile johnfirewall Flag 16 Jul 15 11.16am Send a Private Message to johnfirewall Add johnfirewall as a friend

What if he'd done the accounts as a job for an external firm, or worked for Allianz to insure the camps?

I won't go so far as to mention the story that Cola Cola invented Fanta for the Nazis as they didn't have the ingredients to make the actual cola in Germany, or whichever oil company it was who had to develop a new fuel for the Luftwaffe's planes or Boss designing the uniforms, but there was a lot more direct involvement that could equally be punishable.

I can't boycott the whole country (who signed up for it) as I'm off there to see Palace this weekend.

I'm with the survivor who says he should be given community service lecturing on what he saw.

Edited by johnfirewall (16 Jul 2015 11.19am)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 16 Jul 15 11.28am

Quote Frickin Saweet at 15 Jul 2015 5.43pm

Quote Catfish at 15 Jul 2015 5.17pm

[Link]

He worked at Auchwitz doing the admin and knew what was going on. He didn't play a part in killing people but has been convicted as an accessory.

Yes, he is guilty and has much to feel guilty about but has any good been done? Having got him to confess, perhaps more good would have been done by pursuading him to give a full account that further undermines holocaust denials in the future.

The policy after the war was to go after the leaders and those who had committed high profile atrocities. It was simply not possible to convict every person who worked for the Nazis or breached a convention. everybody wanted to move on and I think they were right to do so.


Having got him to confess, perhaps more good would have been done by pursuading him to give a full account that further undermines holocaust denials in the future.

He already has, see extract taken from Vice referencing a 2005 BBC documentary:

Groening appeared in a 2005 BBC documentary titled Auschwitz: The Nazis and the Final Solution. Responding to Holocaust deniers, he stated clearly: "I saw the gas chambers. I saw the crematoria. I saw the open fires. I was on the ramp when the selections [for the gas chambers] took place. I would like you to believe these atrocities happened because I was there."

[Link]

I find Groening's and a Holocaust survivor's comment really interesting. She asks why he and those like him, cultured and educated, did not challenge that atrocities that were happening. He effectively says he was following orders, being obedient:

"There was a self-denial in me that today I find impossible to explain," Groening said during the trial. "Perhaps it was also the convenience of obedience with which we were brought up, which allowed no contradiction. This indoctrinated obedience prevented registering the daily atrocities as such and rebelling against them."

But on that - what happens if you challenge orders of the Nazi hierarchy? Probably get shot. So to not follow orders is suicide. And what does that say about soldiers carrying out orders that are later deemed illegal. Are they all put on trial - where do you draw the line? Will hundreds of Serbian soldiers be facing trial too for the mass murder of civilians?

I'm not defending it - my gut reaction is that they should all hang for the atrocities, but it's a bloody complex thing.

Its important to remember that the Death Camps etc. were not staffed by the German Army but by the SS, who were volunteers, specifically. Waffen SS drafted after 1943 were given different legal rights to Waffen SS volunteers.

Punishment for those who were compassionate or questioned the gassing, wasn't execution, but transfer to the Waffen SS unit (which was fairly common). So until 1943 the camp SS were all there voluntarily.

As for the Serbian soldiers, less so, but most of the autrocities committed in the Bosnia and Croat conflicts weren't the army, but the volunteer nationalist militias.


 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
leggedstruggle Flag Croydon 16 Jul 15 12.29pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 16 Jul 2015 11.16am

Quote corkery at 15 Jul 2015 8.59pm

The Stanly Milgram investigation proved that people will do anything they are told.

Gibsons investigation of Milgram's experiment presents a very good critical analysis of Milgram's Obedience study that presents a very valid argument against the simplistic parameters Milgram established (he shows that negotiation is the core of obedience and power, not a inherent construct).

Milgram's work suffers from very strong experimenter bias and its assumptions are faulty, when you look at the results in term of discourse analysis (the rate of obedience drops dramatically when you listen to the faux authority figure and the subjects discourse.

Sorry I wrote my last essay on Gibson and Milgram, and I'm a huge Zimbardo and Milgram fan.


You should be sorry - in fact you should be put on trial for crimes against plain English.

 


mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 16 Jul 15 12.31pm

Quote leggedstruggle at 16 Jul 2015 12.29pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 16 Jul 2015 11.16am

Quote corkery at 15 Jul 2015 8.59pm

The Stanly Milgram investigation proved that people will do anything they are told.

Gibsons investigation of Milgram's experiment presents a very good critical analysis of Milgram's Obedience study that presents a very valid argument against the simplistic parameters Milgram established (he shows that negotiation is the core of obedience and power, not a inherent construct).

Milgram's work suffers from very strong experimenter bias and its assumptions are faulty, when you look at the results in term of discourse analysis (the rate of obedience drops dramatically when you listen to the faux authority figure and the subjects discourse.

Sorry I wrote my last essay on Gibson and Milgram, and I'm a huge Zimbardo and Milgram fan.


You should be sorry - in fact you should be put on trial for crimes against plain English.

Probably; its the product of a Conservative State Education, so I blame Thatcher, at least from the age of 9 onwards. Its always someone else's fault, right


 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
leggedstruggle Flag Croydon 16 Jul 15 12.36pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 16 Jul 2015 12.31pm

Quote leggedstruggle at 16 Jul 2015 12.29pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 16 Jul 2015 11.16am

Quote corkery at 15 Jul 2015 8.59pm

The Stanly Milgram investigation proved that people will do anything they are told.

Gibsons investigation of Milgram's experiment presents a very good critical analysis of Milgram's Obedience study that presents a very valid argument against the simplistic parameters Milgram established (he shows that negotiation is the core of obedience and power, not a inherent construct).

Milgram's work suffers from very strong experimenter bias and its assumptions are faulty, when you look at the results in term of discourse analysis (the rate of obedience drops dramatically when you listen to the faux authority figure and the subjects discourse.

Sorry I wrote my last essay on Gibson and Milgram, and I'm a huge Zimbardo and Milgram fan.


You should be sorry - in fact you should be put on trial for crimes against plain English.

Probably; its the product of a Conservative State Education, so I blame Thatcher, at least from the age of 9 onwards. Its always someone else's fault, right


We could blame Margaret for a number of things - but for creating Jamie Martin? She would feel like Dr.Frankenstein if she had.

Edited by leggedstruggle (16 Jul 2015 12.38pm)

 


mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 > Last >>

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Nazi trial