Nazi concentration camp guard found in Atlanta

[Eris]

Of course not. That's why I wrote "scum who willingly joined the SS". A conscript deserves sympathy, if for no other reason than because he was forced into service. This isn't to say all SS conscripts are innocent victims ; quite a few comitted war crimes out of their own volition, especially if they were told to murder people they hated (like the infamous Ukrainian SS unit)

But a volunteer in SS service just makes me twitch. It's not like their goals were a closely held secret.

I know of the foreign SS divisions, but I was under the impression the SS was an all volunteer organization. Am I way offbase with this?

Ooh! I actually have an interesting story about this. Originally, yes, it was. And they had very high standards about things like racial purity. As the war went on, they relaxed standards and eventually even started drafting people into service. After they started drafting, there was a non-trivial number of young Germans who enlisted in the military just so they wouldn't be drafted into the W-SS, who were notorious for having absurdly high casualty rates. I can't point you to a written source, since this was related to me by a colleague of my father at my Uni who actually used this trick and served in a Wehrmacht infantry unit with intent of making sure he didn't serve in a W-SS one. Consequently, I'm not sure exactly when the policy shift happened, though.

[Eris]

Edit: Blast, PeZook beat me to it, and he seems to have a better idea of when it started as well.

[Norseman]

I know that it was impossible to punish a soldier for refusing to participate in mass executions. Indeed high up Nazi's complained about that.

I'm also fairly certain that it was very easy to get out of being a camp guard, and you wouldn't run any risk of legal punishment if you said "This sucks, send me to the front or wherever."

In short I really don't have any sympathy for him, not only did he volunteer, but he could easily have gotten out of camp duty.

[CJvR]

I know of the foreign SS divisions, but I was under the impression the SS was an all volunteer organization. Am I way offbase with this?

No not to far. The savage battles of the Eastern front depleted the Waffen SS divisions faster than proper Aryan volunteers could fill them. As a result the SS ended up drafting the pick of the conscripts to fill out the ranks so you could end up in the SS without being a nazi.
To confuse matters even more the SS also organized most foreign volunteers and while many of those were Nazis many others were anti-communists and joined to fight Stalin ( a very worthy cause ). This is how you ended up with Kossaks, Bosnians, Albanians, Russians and other "sub-humans" to do the realy filthy jobs in the Aryan elite corps.

http://www.axishistory.com/index.php?id=49

An Example: Dirlewanger (36 SS Div)

Code: Select all

Composition                 July 40-   July 42-   July 43-   July 44-   Dec 44-   Feb 45-  
                                  June 42   June 43   June 44   Nov 44   Feb 45   May 45  
Waffen-SS Troops (1)   5%   5%   5%   5%   5%   5%  
Poachers                   94%   60%   15%   5%   5%   5%  
Non-German                0%   15%   30%   10%   5%   5%  
Penal Troops               1%   20%   15%   40%   45%   40%  
Inmates (2)                0%   0%   35%   40%   40%   14%  
Heer Troops (3)           0%   0%   0%   0%   0%   30%  

1. Regular Waffen-SS soldiers attached to the unit.

2. Concentration camp inmates excluding poachers but including political prisoners as well as regular criminals.

3. Regular Heer soldiers attached to the unit after it was designated a division.

[CJvR]

I know of the foreign SS divisions, but I was under the impression the SS was an all volunteer organization. Am I way offbase with this?

No not to far. The savage battles of the Eastern front depleted the Waffen SS divisions faster than proper Aryan volunteers could fill them. As a result the SS ended up drafting the pick of the conscripts to fill out the ranks so you could end up in the SS without being a nazi.
To confuse matters even more the SS also organized most foreign volunteers and while many of those were Nazis many others were anti-communists and joined to fight Stalin ( a very worthy cause ). This is how you ended up with Kossaks, Bosnians, Albanians, Russians and other "sub-humans" to do the realy filthy jobs in the Aryan elite corps. Then there were penal formations and partisan fighting units some filled with some of the worst scum imaginable...

http://www.axishistory.com/index.php?id=49

An Example: Dirlewanger (36 SS Div)

Code: Select all

Composition                 July 40-   July 42-   July 43-   July 44-   Dec 44-   Feb 45-  
                                  June 42   June 43   June 44   Nov 44   Feb 45   May 45  
Waffen-SS Troops (1)   5%   5%   5%   5%   5%   5%  
Poachers                   94%   60%   15%   5%   5%   5%  
Non-German                0%   15%   30%   10%   5%   5%  
Penal Troops               1%   20%   15%   40%   45%   40%  
Inmates (2)                0%   0%   35%   40%   40%   14%  
Heer Troops (3)           0%   0%   0%   0%   0%   30%  

1. Regular Waffen-SS soldiers attached to the unit.

2. Concentration camp inmates excluding poachers but including political prisoners as well as regular criminals.

3. Regular Heer soldiers attached to the unit after it was designated a division.

[CJvR]

That was supposed to be an edit... grumble!

[Kanastrous]

The only suitable death for a Nazi war criminal is at the end of a rope.

Yup.

Short-drop method.

[K. A. Pital]

1) He's not the last one

2) He deserves punishment

3) There have been far worse Nazis routinely pardoned by the U.S. prosecutor general in the West German territories, like Krupp

[Kanastrous]

The level of impracticality and social repercussion in administering punishment.

Not to mention that punishing Germany had already lead to the situation they were cleaning up at the time.

More than that, I think, we needed them to anchor central Europe against the Soviets. Morgenthau's plan to reduce Germany to a dismembered bunch of agricultural mini-states might have been satisfying payback, but would have left the heart of Europe open the the Red Army, which was already there in some force, by 1945.

The usual policy of embracing one set of bastards, for their utility against a different set of bastards.

[Kanastrous]

1) He's not the last one

2) He deserves punishment

3) There have been far worse Nazis routinely pardoned by the U.S. prosecutor general in the West German territories, like Krupp

Don't forget Reinhardt Gehlen. From SS officer, to head of the West German intelligence services, because he was smart enough to surrender to the Americans and bring bargaining chips they couldn't resist.

[Kanastrous]

The savage battles of the Eastern front depleted the Waffen SS divisions faster than proper Aryan volunteers could fill them. As a result the SS ended up drafting the pick of the conscripts to fill out the ranks so you could end up in the SS without being a nazi.

I always got a chuckle from Himmler's proclamation that Haj Amin El Husseini (Grand Mufti of Jerusalem; moved to Iraq, organized a failed campaign against the British there, fled to Nazi Germany) was in fact a 'true Aryan man' and that his Muslim recruits were therefore suitable for Waffen-SS membership.

The definition of 'Aryan' got conveniently flexible, toward the end of the war.

[CJvR]

The Arabs are not Aryans, the Persians are.

[Kanastrous]

Well, in Nazi Germany, the Aryans are whoever Heinrich Himmler says they are.

I mean, sure, you're right, but since when did facts or truth ever make a difference to the Nazis?

[Eleas]

“By commencing these proceedings against a man who participated in the victimization of those who were interned there, the Justice Department continues to make good on its pledge to ensure that the United States does not become a sanctuary for human rights violators.”

I'm sorry if this constitutes thread hijacking, but for obvious reasons, I found the above statement too funny for words.

Regarding the article itself, of course Henss should be prosecuted. Claiming complete ignorance of what the camps were for is a spurious defense indeed - it just shows that he actively ignored the implications of what he saw. Unless he's simply lying about that.

[K. A. Pital]

Unless he's simply lying about that.

A most common defense for Nazis. I mean, Mannstein, when faced with his own criminal order, signed by his own hand, claimed that it wasn't him

[Mayabird]

Well, in Nazi Germany, the Aryans are whoever Heinrich Himmler says they are.

I mean, sure, you're right, but since when did facts or truth ever make a difference to the Nazis?

Speaking of, for everyone who wondered about that alliance with Japan...

The propaganda machine started portraying the Japanese as "Aryans of the East". For example, the Japanese delegation to the Berlin Olympic in 1936 was given much attention and its achievements glorified in photos and films. Pseudo scientists suddenly discovered Aryan features in the Japanese, and Nazified linguists found links between Japanese and German.

Link

While I'm here, I'm glad to have escaped Georgia.

[Frank Hipper]

“Hundreds of thousands of persons were confined under horrific conditions at Dachau and Buchenwald on the basis of their race, religion, national origin or political opinion,” said Assistant Attorney General Alice S. Fisher of the Criminal Division in a release.

Thanks, Alice; the incompleteness of that set, especially when we're talking about fucking Dachau, leaves me completely unsurprised.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

The Japanese escaped rather lightly in light of the nonsense they perpetrated against Asians and the Allied POWs.

[Imperial Overlord]

Thanks, Alice; the incompleteness of that set, especially when we're talking about fucking Dachau, leaves me completely unsurprised.

Of course she left out homosexuals. We can't have people doing the math of: nazi=evil + nazi=antihomosexual bigotry. When the subject comes up all good Republikans should stick their fingers in their ears and sing loudly so no logic or morality can penetrate the ferrous cranium. As we all know, treating homosexuals with the same dignity and respect as heterosexuals will cause flaming pits to open in the earth and molten sulfur to rain from the skies.

[Sea Skimmer]

The Japanese escaped rather lightly in light of the nonsense they perpetrated against Asians and the Allied POWs.

That they did. This was because of three major factors, the Japanese didn’t keep anything like the records the Nazis did of atrocities, several nations which saw the worst of the atrocities got involved in civil wars right after the end of WW2, and the whole areas was simply further away from allied attention. In total about 5,500 Japanese were convicted of war crimes, with 920 executed. That included one general executed for cannibalism of downed allied pilots…

IIRC the total number of convicted Germans was more like 50,000

[Adrian Laguna]

- and the SS of all things, the man's no filing clerk

Some of the worst SS officers were literally filing clerks, far worse than most SS combat troops.

First off, SS filing clerk != generic Nazi filing clerk.
Second, how so? The people ordering the deaths are higher ranked than filing clerks, all the clerks do is pass the orders along and then archive them.

That they did. This was because of three major factors, the Japanese didn’t keep anything like the records the Nazis did of atrocities, several nations which saw the worst of the atrocities got involved in civil wars right after the end of WW2, and the whole areas was simply further away from allied attention.

A lot of Japanese war criminals also killed themselves when they lost the war, though I'm not sure how much of an effect this had (hundreds? thousands?).

I know that it was impossible to punish a soldier for refusing to participate in mass executions. Indeed high up Nazi's complained about that.

Ah well that's interesting. I was always under the impression that disobeying orders was disobeying orders. Which tends to result in bad things for the one not obeying.

I'm also fairly certain that it was very easy to get out of being a camp guard, and you wouldn't run any risk of legal punishment if you said "This sucks, send me to the front or wherever."

I hear there's people with guns who shoot at you in the front.

A thought occurs to me, thought note that it does not apply to the guy we're discussing in this thread. If one is a camp guard (drafted and wound-up a guard somehow) and does little things to make the lives of one or two inmates slightly less of a living hell, wouldn't the moral thing be to stay rather than request being sent to the front? After all, the chances are overwhelming that whoever replaces one will not be so nice, and there is a possibility that he might even be sadistic. Thus transferring would cause a net increase in suffering, which is bad, no?

Now here's a second thought. Suppose the camp guard is not nice, but also not mean. He just stands around guarding, doesn't bother the prisoners, doesn't do anything for them either. If he requests getting sent to the front he'd be in the unpleasant situation of being shot at. Meanwhile back at camp someone would replace him for no change at all in the camp's situation or that of the prisoners. Hence the transfer would affect him only, and it would affect him adversely. This is, again, a net increase in suffering, though less so than the earlier example. Since nobody would be affected positively by his leaving, or negatively by his staying, wouldn't then electing to stay be justified?

[Dominus Atheos]

How do you not see how that applies? It's simple, in every human being, there exists an inherent, instinctual compulsion to not harm other humans.

Evidence? Because I sure as fuck have not seen any evidence that there is some compulsion to not harm others and the whole of human history actually disagrees with this preposterous claim of yours.

Empathy? You want evidence for the existence of empathy?

I personally do not suffer from anything like that if a situation warrants violence, but generally it does not.

Then maybe there's something wrong with you. I certainly feel a compulsion to prevent harm.

Anyone who can willing break this compulsion needs to be punished so they never break it again. (one way or another)

So, self-defense is not justified on account it harms someone else? How fucking delusional were you again?

I remember someone having a sig quote about Godzilla having to rise out of the water to fight a really huge strawman. This one might require Mothra to help.

But to answer your strawman anyway, do they have the option of not fighting without receiving injury themselves? Because if they fight when they have they option not to, then that is bad. But if they're being forced to fight to protect themselves, then it's not really willing, is it?

[Sea Skimmer]

A lot of Japanese war criminals also killed themselves when they lost the war, though I'm not sure how much of an effect this had (hundreds? thousands?).

I've not heard of very many Japanese committing suicide after the war was over, that would kind of go against the will of the Emperor after all. It shouldn’t matter anyway, since a noteworthy number of Nazis, particularly SS officers also committed suicide, after hearing that Hitler was dead.

[Edi]

How do you not see how that applies? It's simple, in every human being, there exists an inherent, instinctual compulsion to not harm other humans.

Evidence? Because I sure as fuck have not seen any evidence that there is some compulsion to not harm others and the whole of human history actually disagrees with this preposterous claim of yours.

Empathy? You want evidence for the existence of empathy?

Empathy != compulsion to not harm.
Empathy
Compulsion

Now, maybe you want to rephrase what you wanted to say in English or maybe you don't, but I am not going to bother trying to divine your intentions from a crystal ball if you can't be arsed to spell them out accurately. So far, I have not seen any indication that there is a compulsion in humans to not harm each other and I've got the whole fucking history of our species to back that up. We band together and take care of those immediately around us who we know and identify as allies, but strangers are another matter entirely, as I pointed out in my previous post. There are no such built-in inhibitions against violence with regard to strangers. The kind of non-violent behavior in all circumstances as you are talking about MUST be taught and learned

I personally do not suffer from anything like that if a situation warrants violence, but generally it does not.

Then maybe there's something wrong with you. I certainly feel a compulsion to prevent harm.

What the fuck are you smoking, moron? Because you do not seem to understand English, let me spell it out in really small words: I am not by default a violent person in my behavior. I prefer to avoid violence, because people generally do not like having it done to them. I don't. So I'm not going to initiate it. However, if violence becomes necessary, I have absolutely no qualms about using direct, brutal violence to solve a situation. If it leaves the other party completely fucked up and needing medical care, tough shit.

Anyone who can willing break this compulsion needs to be punished so they never break it again. (one way or another)

So, self-defense is not justified on account it harms someone else? How fucking delusional were you again?

I remember someone having a sig quote about Godzilla having to rise out of the water to fight a really huge strawman. This one might require Mothra to help.

How the fuck was that a strawman? You made a ridiculous claim about there being a compulsion against violence in humans, despite a massive amount of evidence to the contrary and you also made a direct, unqualified statement that anyone who violates this supposed compulsion must be punished, so I asked you what happens when things go to their logical conclusion. Explain to me how that is a strawman on my part instead of you making a really fucking stupid argument.

But to answer your strawman anyway, do they have the option of not fighting without receiving injury themselves? Because if they fight when they have they option not to, then that is bad. But if they're being forced to fight to protect themselves, then it's not really willing, is it?

People who fight when they have the option to escape are stupid, because they risk serious injury or even death by doing so. Aside from that, the only reason fighting in that situation is bad is because even in self-defense cases the victim tends to end up getting into serious legal trouble. I couldn't really care less about what happens to the assailant. If you can't escape, you have to fight and risk being fucked up or be guaranteed to get fucked up. Something like several million years of natural selection have guaranteed that we have little inhibitions against violence in this sort of situations, though the human capacity to go against instinct is pretty staggering. That still has nothing to do with your initial assertion about a compulsion against violence.

Next time you want to make an argument, try to avoid using words you do not understand.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Why does brainwashing eliminate one's personal responsibility for one's actions? Where does responsibility come from?

For the same reason insanity eliminates someone's personal responsibility.

Insanity limits someone's personal responsibility because he may be so delusional that he does not realize that he is committing an illegal action. I don't see how that applies to brainwashing. They know perfectly well what they're doing, but they are following an ideology. Would you say that Osama Bin Laden should get off too, as a result of religious brainwashing?

I'm appalled by this apologists' crowd's lack of any discernable ethical clarity. And I bet all these people hop on the regular anti-fundie bandwagon. People like this give liberals a bad name. Can we really find it that difficult to hold fucking SS Nazi concentration camp guards accountable? Jesus