US Role in Holocaust Fatalities?

Gladiator · Mar 9, 2009

There was a TV Show I saw last night that described how many of the visions of the Holocaust, stacks of bodies, other physical evidence of brutality, human skin lamp shades etc., were not the result of the German brutality, but rather the attempt to create photos, as evidence of Hitler's brutality.

To understand, and counter, Holocaust deniers, it may be useful to examine the US contributions to the photographic eveidence of the Holocaust.

The TV program showed that many of the photos that Eisenhower used to document the suffering in Concentration Camps were largely a result of the US bombing of Germany, in the months before the Allied invasion, to make the Allied invasion of Germany less risky to Allied Soldiers.

The conditions in the concentration camps, upon the Allied invasion of Germany, in the Spring of 1945, had deteriorated, as a result of US Bombing of Electrical, Water, Transportaion and infra-structure of Germany before the Allied invasion. So health care, food supplies, and safe drinking water were in short supply, for the Concentration Camps, in the months before many photos of camps were taken.

Eisenhower's Holocaust - His Slaughter Of 1.7 Million Germans

Typhus was a disease caused by body lice, and US soldiers had been innoculated for Typhus. Germany did not have the Typhus vaccine, and body lice was a problem in the concentraion camps, partiularly after there was a shortage of water for bathing.

Instead of burying those who died in the camps during the Allied Invasion of Germany, the boies were stacked for photos to be taken, for several weeks. So images of stacked bodies, shortly after the invasion of Germany, were partly a result of the condions resulting from the US bombing, in preparation for the invasion.

Some of those in the concentration camps who were alive during the invasion, died from the care provided by the Allied forces, such as providing full meals to inmates who were near starvation. According to the TV show, some concentration camp prisoners died the day after eating a full meal, from gastro-intestinal problems resulting from eating a full meal, when in a near starvation conditon

So understanding that Eisenhower, and US Army Psych Ops Units created conditions to graphically depict horrors of Germany's concentration camps, may be important in understanding the photos taken during, and shortly after, the invasion of Germany. The photos of stacked bodies are more a result of the US bombing of Germany, rather than a direct result of Hitler's brutality

There is probably plenty of evidence of Jewish bodies in graves near Concentration camps, and evidence the Jewish people had been born, but disappeared into gas ovens, so Hitler's Concentration Camps did result in deaths of Jewish people.

Eisenhower's failure to put the invasion photos into perspective, has created a basis of exaggeration claims by Holocaust Deniers. Eisenhower could have stated that the US bombing of Germany was a factor in the conditons at the concentration camps, during and shortly after, the Allied Invasion.

Typhus Disease Reference

Medical Science in the Light of the Holocaust: Departing from a Post-war Paper by Ludwik Fleck -- Hedfors 38 (2): 259 -- Social Studies of Science

..

Tashah · Mar 9, 2009

Gladiator said:
There was a TV Show I saw last night that described how many of the visions of the Holocaust, stacks of bodies, other physical evidence of brutality, human skin lamp shades etc., were not the result of the German brutality, but rather the attempt to create photos, as evidence of Hitler's brutality.

Instead of burying those who died in the camps during the Allied Invasion of Germany, the boies were stacked for photos to be taken, for several weeks. So images of stacked bodies, shortly after the invasion of Germany, were partly a result of the condions resulting from the US bombing, in preparation for the invasion.

This is true to an extent. In many concentration camp liberations within Germany, it was imperative for Allied soldiers to stack the bodies strewn about the camp on wooden wagons and deliver them to an open pit for a quick mass burial. Health issues dictated this course of action.

Conditions were terrible within the camps. According to the memoirs of US General Omar Bradley, General Eisenhower ordered General George Patton to report to a liberated concentration camp immediately. Patton arrived the next morning. After completing a tour of the camp, Patton ducked behind a wooden shed and wretched for a full quarter hour.

Gladiator said:
Some of those in the concentration camps who were alive during the invasion, died from the care provided by the Allied forces, such as providing full meals to inmates who were near starvation. According to the TV show, some concentration camp prisoners died the day after eating a full meal, from gastro-intestinal problems resulting from eating a full meal, when in a near starvation conditon.

This is also true. Mis-managing the diet of many prisoners resulted in their deaths.

Gladiator said:
So understanding that Eisenhower, and US Army Psych Ops Units created conditions to graphically depict horrors of Germany's concentration camps, may be important in understanding the photos taken during, and shortly after, the invasion of Germany. The photos of stacked bodies are more a result of the US bombing of Germany, rather than a direct result of Hitler's brutality

Not so. The bodies in and of themselves are lurid evidence of Nazi brutality. No concentration camps within Germany were bombed during the war. Stacked bodies originated from two causes: 1) originally stacked by camp prisoners and not yet buried, 2) stacked after liberation by soldiers or local German conscripts.

Gladiator said:
There is probably plenty of evidence of Jewish bodies in graves near Concentration camps, and evidence the Jewish people had been born, but disappeared into gas ovens, so Hitler's Concentration Camps did result in deaths of Jewish people.

Evidence - oral/material/photography abounds. Most surviving photographs were taken by either German Wehrmacht soldiers who witnessed executions or by SS guards who worked within the camps. Other photographs were taken by locals (Poles, Ukranians, etc) and by Allied and Russian military forces.

Gladiator said:
Eisenhower's failure to put the invasion photos into perspective, has created a basis of exaggeration claims by Holocaust Deniers. Eisenhower could have stated that the US bombing of Germany was a factor in the conditons at the concentration camps, during and shortly after, the Allied Invasion.

The Allied bombing of Germany had virtually nothing to do with the horrific conditions within the camps. All the camp types (I/II/III/IV) were intended and organized to kill people through various differing methods... gassing, hanging, shooting, injection, torture, medical experiments, starvation, fatigue, disease, and suicide.

Arch Enemy · Mar 9, 2009

The biggest crime committed in the war was not the US led holocaust or the Nazi led holocaust it was the, seemingly, indifference of nations and states altogether. There were blank stares throughout the world, deer in head-lights, wtf should we do about this....

Inaction is the worst crime.

Gladiator · Mar 9, 2009

Tashah said:
The Allied bombing of Germany had virtually nothing to do with the horrific conditions within the camps. .

Gemany was being bombed for several years before the Spring of 1945. Particular heavy bombing in the mounths before the Allied Invasion, in preparation for the invastion.

Certainly there are accounts that the conditons in Concentration Camps were not ideal before US Bombing. I don't know how to assess the amount of deteration in conditons due to the US bombing. The Concentraion Camps were not far from railway sations. Perhaps a decline in goods traveling by rail might give an indication of how supplies were even shorter, in March and April of 1945, than before the US Bombing.

I was taught to think that the conditons in Concentration camps in Germany, discovered during the Allied invasion of Germany, was an accurate snapshot of the Camp conditions since 1936, or so. Now I realize I did not account for a logical deterioration of conditions, that must have resulted due to the US bombing of Germany, in preparation for the invasion.

While I am not against the US trying to save Allied lives in the Invasion of Germany, I think an aknowledgement that the US bombing made conditions in Concentration Camps worse, than before 1944 or 1945, could be acknowledged, and an apology formulated, for the passively false impressions given by Eisenhower.

Battle of the Bulge was finished in Jan. 1945.

April 29, 1945, Dachu was liberated

Battle of the Bulge - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 8, 1945, Germany Surrendered.

Dresden and other German Cities were heavily bombed in February, 1945.

Bombing of Dresden in World War II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Page 279, Describes the Freight Car Loading dropping from 900,000 Cars per Month in Aug, 1944, to 214,000 Freight Cars Per Month in March, 1945.

Bombing to Win: Air Power and ... - Google Book Search

The Freight Car loadings per month gives a measure that supplies inside Germany, were not as ordinarily available, as before 1945.

If the Holocaust deniers are owed a partial apology, a properly worded apology would take wind out of their sails.

..

Gladiator · Mar 9, 2009

Arch Enemy said:
The biggest crime committed in the war was not the US led holocaust or the Nazi led holocaust it was the, seemingly, indifference of nations and states altogether. There were blank stares throughout the world, deer in head-lights, wtf should we do about this....

Inaction is the worst crime.

What should other nations have done?

When should they have done i?

With what level of certainty did various contries have of Conditions in Nazi Concentration camp conditions?

With what degree of denial did leaders fail to inform the public about Nazi Concentration Camps?

..

PeteEU · Mar 9, 2009

Arch Enemy said:
The biggest crime committed in the war was not the US led holocaust or the Nazi led holocaust it was the, seemingly, indifference of nations and states altogether. There were blank stares throughout the world, deer in head-lights, wtf should we do about this....

Inaction is the worst crime.

The public at large and most of the political establishment had no clue it was happening until they liberated the camps. It is a big misconception in today's world that the war was about the holocaust... it was not.

Tashah · Mar 9, 2009

Gladiator said:
Gemany was being bombed for several years before the Spring of 1945. Particular heavy bombing in the mounths before the Allied Invasion, in preparation for the invastion.

Certainly there are accounts that the conditons in Concentration Camps were not ideal before US Bombing. I don't know how to assess the amount of deteration in conditons due to the US bombing. The Concentraion Camps were not far from railway sations. Perhaps a decline in goods traveling by rail might give an indication of how supplies were even shorter, in March and April of 1945, than before the US Bombing.

I was taught to think that the conditons in Concentration camps in Germany, discovered during the Allied invasion of Germany, was an accurate snapshot of the Camp conditions since 1936, or so. Now I realize I did not account for a logical deterioration of conditions, that must have resulted due to the US bombing of Germany, in preparation for the invasion.

The conditions in German concentration camps did indeed deteriorate in the extremis beginning in December of 1944. I imagine the Allied bombing of Germany did contribute to this deterioration in some measure... but not in the degree of measure you suggest.

The camps located within Germany were not extermination camps like Auschwitz in Poland. These German camps primarily worked people to death in stone quarries etc. The food ration for Jewish prisoners was always the same... around 300 calories per day. They worked at hard labor for 12 hours every day except Sunday. Since a typical adult not engaged in hard labor requires around 1000 calories per day, it is not difficult to understand why the fatality rate among Jewish prisoners was extremely high...

Constant hard labor + chronic malnutrition = death within a few months

I would suggest to you then that the Jewish camp prisoners were still doomed to perish regardless of any decrease in the 300 calories per day caused by Allied bombings.

The main reason the fatality rate in German camps increased from December 1944 onwards was due to overcrowding. Just ahead of the Russian advances in Poland, the prisoners in Polish camps were forced marched south and many camps were leveled to destroy the evidence. Tens of thousands of prisoners perished in these forced marches through the snow and ice. Any prisoner who fell from exhaustion or hypothermia was shot on the spot. Those who survived the forced marches from Poland were dumped into the German camp system. The camps were horribly overcrowded. Nazi Germany made no provision to either feed or house the influx of new arrivals. People slept on the ground in the harsh winter elements and the meagher food ration was further diminished. This is the reason that when the camps were liberated by Allied forces, bodies were simply strewn everywhere. The fatality rate was so high that the SS could not keep up... even with mass burials. It was in these conditions that Anne Frank from the Netherlands perished.

Gladiator said:
If the Holocaust deniers are owed a partial apology, a properly worded apology would take wind out of their sails.

Holocaust deniers are owed nothing beyond universal condemnation.

Arch Enemy · Mar 9, 2009

PeteEU said:
The public at large and most of the political establishment had no clue it was happening until they liberated the camps. It is a big misconception in today's world that the war was about the holocaust... it was not.

Of course the war was not about the holocaust it was about the militaristic stance that Germany took with her invasion of Poland, thus, her hostility-rating increase 10 folds.
I think it is accurate to say "the public at large", but I will not for a second consider that politicians had no idea what was happening. I am not submitting the population to condemnation because their politicians did not act on their behalf, I am condemning those who did know what was happening and still did nothing.

Tashah · Mar 9, 2009

Gladiator said:
What should other nations have done?

Increased the immigration quota for European and Eastern Jews.

Gladiator said:
When should they have done i?

From around 1936 to the invasion of Poland in 1939.

Gladiator said:
With what level of certainty did various contries have of Conditions in Nazi Concentration camp conditions?

Everyone knew with certainty by spring of 1942.

Gladiator said:
With what degree of denial did leaders fail to inform the public about Nazi Concentration Camps?

The Allied leaders didn't deny it, but they downplayed it as much as possible for as long as possible. The one thing they did not want, was to increase any perception among their citizens that the war against Germany was being waged to save European Jewry.

When it became quite apparant that the Nazis were about to deport Hungarian Jews to the death camps in Poland, the Allied leaders could no longer remain silent. They publicly warned Hungarian leader Admiral Horthy not to assist in the Jewish deportations. They publicly warned every Axis nation that whomever participates is such acts will be tried after the war as a war criminal.

Horthy did not assist the Nazis (perhaps because the Red Army was fast approaching the border?). Nevertheless, 650,000 Hungarian Jews were gassed at Auschwitz.

Gladiator · Mar 9, 2009

Tashah said:
The camps located within Germany were not extermination camps like Auschwitz in Poland. These German camps primarily worked people to death in stone quarries etc. The food ration for Jewish prisoners was always the same... around 300 calories per day. They worked at hard labor for 12 hours every day except Sunday. Since a typical adult not engaged in hard labor requires around 1000 calories per day, it is not difficult to understand why the fatality rate among Jewish prisoners was extremely high...

Constant hard labor + chronic malnutrition = death within a few months

I would suggest to you then that the Jewish camp prisoners were still doomed to perish regardless of any decrease in the 300 calories per day caused by Allied bombings.

.

"Warsaw: The capital of Poland, where about 350,000 Jews lived on the eve of WW II. In October-November of 1940, the Germans established the Warsaw Ghetto, into which some 500,000 Jews were crowded to live and die in cramped, cold, unsanitary conditions and restricted to approximately 135 calories of food a day. An average of 5,000 to 6,000 died each month from starvation, disease, exposure to cold, and shootings. "

Vermont-NEA / Holocaust Curriculum

..

dirtpoorchris · Mar 9, 2009

Arch Enemy said:
The biggest crime committed in the war was not the US led holocaust or the Nazi led holocaust it was the, seemingly, indifference of nations and states altogether. There were blank stares throughout the world, deer in head-lights, wtf should we do about this....

Inaction is the worst crime.

Inaction every great once in a while could strategically save your life. As long as you are just playing possum though. Playing. And you better be making a plan the whole time once your possum playing gives you leeway.

Tashah · Mar 9, 2009

Gladiator said:
"Warsaw: The capital of Poland, where about 350,000 Jews lived on the eve of WW II. In October-November of 1940, the Germans established the Warsaw Ghetto, into which some 500,000 Jews were crowded to live and die in cramped, cold, unsanitary conditions and restricted to approximately 135 calories of food a day. An average of 5,000 to 6,000 died each month from starvation, disease, exposure to cold, and shootings. "

Vermont-NEA / Holocaust Curriculum

I think you are understanding the situation much better. Warsaw was never bombed by the Allies, and the fatality rate in the Warsaw ghetto was astronomical. Overcrowding yields many things and none of them are good... poverty, depression, starvation, tuberculosis, typhus, suicide, etc.

This doesn't even take into consideration the simultaneous Aktions (deportations) to nearby Nazi death camps in Poland such as Auschwitz, Treblinka, Sobibor, and Belzic.

bub · Mar 9, 2009

Gladiator said:
There was a TV Show I saw last night that described how many of the visions of the Holocaust, stacks of bodies, other physical evidence of brutality, human skin lamp shades etc., were not the result of the German brutality, but rather the attempt to create photos, as evidence of Hitler's brutality.

To understand, and counter, Holocaust deniers, it may be useful to examine the US contributions to the photographic eveidence of the Holocaust.

The TV program showed that many of the photos that Eisenhower used to document the suffering in Concentration Camps were largely a result of the US bombing of Germany, in the months before the Allied invasion, to make the Allied invasion of Germany less risky to Allied Soldiers.

The conditions in the concentration camps, upon the Allied invasion of Germany, in the Spring of 1945, had deteriorated, as a result of US Bombing of Electrical, Water, Transportaion and infra-structure of Germany before the Allied invasion. So health care, food supplies, and safe drinking water were in short supply, for the Concentration Camps, in the months before many photos of camps were taken.

Eisenhower's Holocaust - His Slaughter Of 1.7 Million Germans

Typhus was a disease caused by body lice, and US soldiers had been innoculated for Typhus. Germany did not have the Typhus vaccine, and body lice was a problem in the concentraion camps, partiularly after there was a shortage of water for bathing.

Instead of burying those who died in the camps during the Allied Invasion of Germany, the boies were stacked for photos to be taken, for several weeks. So images of stacked bodies, shortly after the invasion of Germany, were partly a result of the condions resulting from the US bombing, in preparation for the invasion.

Some of those in the concentration camps who were alive during the invasion, died from the care provided by the Allied forces, such as providing full meals to inmates who were near starvation. According to the TV show, some concentration camp prisoners died the day after eating a full meal, from gastro-intestinal problems resulting from eating a full meal, when in a near starvation conditon

So understanding that Eisenhower, and US Army Psych Ops Units created conditions to graphically depict horrors of Germany's concentration camps, may be important in understanding the photos taken during, and shortly after, the invasion of Germany. The photos of stacked bodies are more a result of the US bombing of Germany, rather than a direct result of Hitler's brutality

There is probably plenty of evidence of Jewish bodies in graves near Concentration camps, and evidence the Jewish people had been born, but disappeared into gas ovens, so Hitler's Concentration Camps did result in deaths of Jewish people.

Eisenhower's failure to put the invasion photos into perspective, has created a basis of exaggeration claims by Holocaust Deniers. Eisenhower could have stated that the US bombing of Germany was a factor in the conditons at the concentration camps, during and shortly after, the Allied Invasion.

Typhus Disease Reference

Medical Science in the Light of the Holocaust: Departing from a Post-war Paper by Ludwik Fleck -- Hedfors 38 (2): 259 -- Social Studies of Science

..

I didn't read you whole post but what is your point?

That the USA are responsible of the death of prisonners because they bombed Germany and cut food supplies?

Then what do you think about the Wehrmacht & Waffen SS executing 2 or 3 millions of Russian soldiers just after Barbarossa (= before Pearl Harbor)?

Arch Enemy · Mar 9, 2009

dirtpoorchris said:
Inaction every great once in a while could strategically save your life. As long as you are just playing possum though. Playing. And you better be making a plan the whole time once your possum playing gives you leeway.

But You don't know whether or not it WILL save your life, until it has already saved your life.

Have to act with good intentions, and you have to act.

dirtpoorchris · Mar 9, 2009

Arch Enemy said:
But You don't know whether or not it WILL save your life, until it has already saved your life.

Have to act with good intentions, and you have to act.

I think there could be a few hypothetical scenarios though where it would be better for mankind to let the criminals come out from behind the podiums and then think of a way to fix it. Red handed is much better than never caught and toned down sometimes I think.

Arch Enemy · Mar 9, 2009

dirtpoorchris said:
I think there could be a few hypothetical scenarios though where it would be better for mankind to let the criminals come out from behind the podiums and then think of a way to fix it. Red handed is much better than never caught and toned down sometimes I think.

However, WWII and Nazi Holocaust is not a hypothetical situation.

I don't understand your scenario..

Gladiator · Mar 9, 2009

bub said:
I didn't read you whole post but what is your point?

That the USA are responsible of the death of prisonners because they bombed Germany and cut food supplies?

Then what do you think about the Wehrmacht & Waffen SS executing 2 or 3 millions of Russian soldiers just after Barbarossa (= before Pearl Harbor)?

I agree that War involved Killing. Each battle can be evaluated for indications of excessive killing. The Russians encircled some German divisions later, Winter, 1942-43. Many of those encircled German soldiers died. 5000 of the 85,000 German Soldiers who surrendered, survived to the end of the war.

Eastern Front (World War II) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Apparently the Germans should have killed more Russians in Barbarossa, 1941, because the Russians embarrassed Germany in the winter of 42-43.

Operation Barbarossa - World War 2 Today

What are good reasons to Kill more or less People? Soldiers?

My point in my first post was that I may have gotten hoodwinked into not realizing that the conditions of the Concentration camps at the end of WWII, may not have been the same conditions as in 1936 to 1943, when Germany was winning the war.

..

dirtpoorchris · Mar 9, 2009

Priest uncovers 'Holocaust by Bullets' - Europe- msnbc.com

KIEV, Ukraine - The Holocaust has a landscape engraved in the mind's eye: barbed-wire fences, gas chambers, furnaces.

Less known is the "Holocaust by Bullets," in which over 2 million Jews were gunned down in towns and villages across Ukraine, Belarus and Russia. Their part in the Nazis' Final Solution has been under researched, their bodies left unidentified in unmarked mass graves.

Real Talk · Mar 9, 2009

I beleive that the hollocaust was brutal enough that any doctoring of coverage of this event for propoganda purpouses is unforgivable, as it fuels unreasonable scepticism. Let us be clear.
It matters no whather 8, 6 or 4 million victims (jewish, gypsie, homosexual, socialist or otherwise) died in the concentration camps.
It matters not if they were marginally more or less brutal towards there captives than photos suggest.
Regardless of the specifities of facts of the matter, the prime lesson is the same. The policy of the nazi's vis a vis its concentration camp victims (and other victims of its persecution) was immoral, and further still impractical and lacking any real utility from a national interest perspective.

By trying to exagerate this case, people are actualy undermining it.
And in my opinion, an understating of the case is actualy less dangerous.

I once had a discussion with a hollocause revisionist. He tried to convince me of many 'facts' about the hollocaust. My argument was: Even if I accept this data that you assert to be true as truth, what are its implications for my historical interpretation of the event?

No amtter what figures I am quoted with, I come to the same conclusion. "**** is neither cool nor useful. Dont be a nazi faggot"

By contrast, exagerations are often used by people to undermine these lessons. This is far harder to do with udnerstatements.

bub · Mar 9, 2009

Gladiator said:
My point in my first post was that I may have gotten hoodwinked into not realizing that the conditions of the Concentration camps at the end of WWII, may not have been the same conditions as in 1936 to 1943, when Germany was winning the war.

..

Look at the name: "extermination camps", "final solution"...I don't think they waited april 1945 to start killing prisonners

Real Talk · Mar 10, 2009

Arch Enemy said:
The biggest crime committed in the war was not the US led holocaust or the Nazi led holocaust it was the, seemingly, indifference of nations and states altogether. There were blank stares throughout the world, deer in head-lights, wtf should we do about this....

Inaction is the worst crime.

To elaborate on this point. We (western nation states) did not take jews as refugees. Think of how many lives could have been saved without firing a shot, if only people could drop the predjudice and said to jes in germany and poland "it looks like its really ****ed up over there, and we dont see why you would want to stay. Come here if u want. We will help u find a home, a job and welcome you with open arms.

This did not occur.
Because western antion states were, and to a degree remain ethnocentric and/or racist.
The lesson is not nececarily, why did we not invade germany sooner and protect the jews. But why do we share such strikingly simmilar attitudes to the cultural makeups of our nation states? Refusing troubled peoples plees for help (MANY people wanted to leave from quite early on in the piece, and at points where it would have been quite easy) when it would have been such a simple and non violent act to help them, because they are the 'other'.

Its a real shame.

gree0232 · Mar 10, 2009

Real Talk said:
To elaborate on this point. We (western nation states) did not take jews as refugees. Think of how many lives could have been saved without firing a shot, if only people could drop the predjudice and said to jes in germany and poland "it looks like its really ****ed up over there, and we dont see why you would want to stay. Come here if u want. We will help u find a home, a job and welcome you with open arms.

This did not occur.
Because western antion states were, and to a degree remain ethnocentric and/or racist.
The lesson is not nececarily, why did we not invade germany sooner and protect the jews. But why do we share such strikingly simmilar attitudes to the cultural makeups of our nation states? Refusing troubled peoples plees for help (MANY people wanted to leave from quite early on in the piece, and at points where it would have been quite easy) when it would have been such a simple and non violent act to help them, because they are the 'other'.

Its a real shame.

There is something here that is being denounced along with the Halocaust, that I think we are missing here. Ahmadinejad's denials are purely political and should be condemned with every bit the virality that such comments deserve. However, it is the recent case of the rehabilitated, almost, Catholic Priests that brings in another component entirely.

Not all denials are driven by political calculation. Could it be possible that these preists, from the very villages where the Halocaust took place might be legitimately confused? Could it be that walking around these villages and seeing mother's and father's dotting on children, kind and affectionate grandparents (those who committed these terrible acts) and arrive at the conclusion that there is NO way these kind, generous, and charitable people could have conducted themselves with such pure evil?

Lets back up before WWII, when Anti-Semitism was seen in things such as the Dreyfus Affair in France and pogroms further East. A terrible problem to be sure, but not mass industrialized murder. Krystallnacht looks like a harbinger of doom in hind sight, but at the time, and in context, this looked like little more than another pogrom driven by a regime eager to scape goat its failings. Let us also bear in mind that Stalin's purges were in full swing in the run up to WW II, and that communist Russia was widely seen as a far larger problem than just another scape goating regime in Germany.

The full extent of both Hitler's murderous plan and indeed the world's ability to do anything about it were not revealed until the war, for all intents and purposes, was in full swing. Even then, many people had trouble wrapping their minds around something so horrific and purely evil. Prior German conduct, even at its worst in WW I and earlier, did not even begin to approach this scale of barbarity. The same question the priests ask today was relevant then, why would a nominally good people engage in something so horrific and so absolutely pointless?

As has been proven in many cases since then, the differnece is driven by political design. The seeds of the Holocaust were sown in the aftermath of WW I when Hindenberg and, in particular, Lundendorf were incapable of acknowledging defeat and blamed subversive elements at home (the Jews) for thwarting what should have been a sure victory. As the Depression hit and the puntative measure of the Treaty of Versailles further crippled Germany, the Anti-Semitism and demgogery grew proportionately. This is turn allowed men like Hitler who were preaching the same virtulent Anti-Semitism to make their way into the political spot light and then surround themselves with murderous sociopaths to conduct industrialized murder.

This is also the reason the Allies pushed on for unconditional surrender. There would be no more myths of subversion and irresponsibility this time.

This pattern is not unique to Germany, as the same thing happened with Serbs in Bosnia and Kosovo. The same thing is happening now in Sudan and Darfur. Yet where were the calls to allow greater, even mass, immigration to alleviate the suffering in these two regions?

We have promised, "Never again." How many times since we uttered this promise have our politicians followed the same path of indifference, only to be left to deal with the shattered chaos that has followed these destructive paths?

It is easy to condemn what is undefensible. It is much harder to draw lessons and apply them to policy making. Iran's denials and their political motivation deserve to be countered and countered with absolute ferocity. A couple of preists who possibly cannot wrap their minds around something so evil deserve to be educated and informed of threat of their inability to confront evil prior to their denunciation.

Bear in mind, these men have been punished servely for their actions as we also bear in mind that the center of Christianity is unconditional love of our fellow men and forgiveness of even great sin (Quite possibly the Pope understands this). We see the Catholic Church routinely threaten liberal politicans by barring them from communion. To those who are not religious, this may seem silly (and indeed it may be). However to those who are faithful, who believe in communion and transubstantiation, this is literally sharing a spirtitual essence with God, and barring this effectively blocks ones relationship with God. These offending priests were excommunicated from the church entirely. They were banished in perpetuity from a community and from any relationship with God according to their beliefs. A fate considered by many devote Catholics as one worse than death.

Have these men learned from their time in spiritual wilderness? Are they worthy of forgiveness of even terrible sins? Is there greater power in unconditional love of our fellow man and forgiveness than there is in condemnation?

I think it is worth making the distinction that context and reasoning are important as they lead us to use the right tool to redress the wrong. Tools used to confront and stop this sort of evil are necessary and, despite the lessons we shoud have learned, all too infrequently used when the real dangers of politicized hatred come to bear.

It is a sad substitution that we attack a few individuals effetively while ignoring the much more difficult and destructive policies of state sponsored hatred and murder. These few men have perhaps earned their condemnation, but they, as men unwilling to confront an enormous evil, also deserve a chance to be educated.

Threats to break relations between Israel and the Catholic Church may be appropriate, but so to would inviting these priests to tour the sites of the Halocaust with Jewish Rabbis and to show these men why they are being denounced, why the wounds are still raw, and why it is important to acknowelged and confront evil.

Ultimately, we could all use a refresher course in confronting evil, as it requires more than denunciation to defeat.

Gladiator · Mar 10, 2009

gree0232 said:
There is something here that is being denounced along with the Halocaust, that I think we are missing here. Ahmadinejad's denials are purely political and should be condemned with every bit the virality that such comments deserve.

Iran denies the Holocaust, partly to irritate the West, as a child looking for attention from his parents, does something naughty, with just not enough secrecy, so he gets caught, and receives a Payoff, Attention.

Iran is also posing a Quandry for the West, in denying the Holocaust, by saying Western Cultures are criticizing Iran as being Barbaric with public whippings, and Capital Punishment, so how could the Holocaust have occurred in these respectful sounding countries? How now condemn IRAN as brutal? The Holocaust was an impossibility, given the tone and morality with which the West Conemns Iran.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/middle-east/41815-obama-insults-iranians.html

It is precisely because Iran is CONDEMNED by the West, that Iran denies the Holocaust. So the ANSWER is not to FURTHER Condemn Iran, the Answer is to find avenues for mutual respect with Iran. The Holocaust Denial by Iran is an indication there is not sufficient respect between Iran and the West. The Holocaust denial by Iran is not a sufficient reason, by itself, for Condemnation by the West.

..

gree0232 · Mar 10, 2009

Gladiator said:
Iran denies the Holocaust, partly to irritate the West, as a child looking for attention from his parents, does something naughty, with just not enough secrecy, so he gets caught, and receives a Payoff, Attention.

Iran is also posing a Quandry for the West, in denying the Holocaust, by saying Western Cultures are criticizing Iran as being Barbaric with public whippings, and Capital Punishment, so how could the Holocaust have occurred in these respectful sounding countries? How now condemn IRAN as brutal? The Holocaust was an impossibility, given the tone and morality with which the West Conemns Iran.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/middle-east/41815-obama-insults-iranians.html

It is precisely because Iran is CONDEMNED by the West, that Iran denies the Holocaust. So the ANSWER is not to FURTHER Condemn Iran, the Answer is to find avenues for mutual respect with Iran. The Holocaust Denial by Iran is an indication there is not sufficient respect between Iran and the West. The Holocaust denial by Iran is not a sufficient reason, by itself, for Condemnation by the West.

..

You do not begin to find venues of mutual respect by demanding tolerance for the intolerable.

Iran condemns Americans and Europeans for our tolerance of homosexuals, does it make it OK for either party deny the Halocaust? Does it make it OK to once again hand political power to elements that are based in pure evil?

If Iran wants to be respected, than it can itself begin by showing respect. No country is free of problems and crictism, and to respond to current problems with such a brazenly thoughtless arguement deserves exactly what it is bringing Iran: Condemnation and the isloation deserving of the bones being tossed by the stupid to manipulative.

I fully support engagement and attempts to moderate Iran, that does not begin with the abandonment of morality and facts however.

Gladiator · Mar 11, 2009

gree0232 said:
You do not begin to find venues of mutual respect by demanding tolerance for the intolerable.

Iran condemns Americans and Europeans for our tolerance of homosexuals, does it make it OK for either party deny the Halocaust? Does it make it OK to once again hand political power to elements that are based in pure evil?

If Iran wants to be respected, than it can itself begin by showing respect. No country is free of problems and crictism, and to respond to current problems with such a brazenly thoughtless arguement deserves exactly what it is bringing Iran: Condemnation and the isloation deserving of the bones being tossed by the stupid to manipulative.

I fully support engagement and attempts to moderate Iran, that does not begin with the abandonment of morality and facts however.

If a bully knocks your hat off, and your hat falls to the ground, should you focus on your hat?

How about focusing on the power aspects between you and the bully?

The Bully has indicated he can disrespect you with impunity. What is your response?

Israel is unhappy about Iran's support of attack against Israel. How can Israel gain more respect form Iran?

Iran complains about Isreal's attacks against Lebanaon, the Gaza Strip, Palestinian Civilians. Are these complaints genuine? Or just Propaganda? If Iran was actually concerned about attacks by Israel, Iran would stop fomenting discontent and attacks against Israel. Iran is the bully, and Israel is the shool boy who does not understand the undercurrents that command respect and give real spiritual power.

Real Spritual Power comes from the strength of a capacity for foregiveness, an aspriation to lofty principles, and an abiltity to appeal to reason.

Engagement with Iran must be in the undercurrent levels, and Israel, or it's Western Allies, are just scratching the surface.

..

US Role in Holocaust Fatalities?

Verifier

Familiaist

Verifier

Verifier

Familiaist

Verifier

King of Videos

R.I.P. Léo

Familiaist

King of Videos

Familiaist

Verifier

King of Videos

R.I.P. Léo

Verifier

Verifier