If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   This is not a repeat from 1945   (usatoday.com) divider line 314
    More: News, Demjanjuk, nazi death camps, Nazis, German police, Red Army, U.S. citizenship, Kilian Steger  
•       •       •

37974 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Mar 2012 at 8:15 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



314 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-03-17 09:32:55 AM
Don't be ignorant Notabunny, you don't just walk in there, look around and decide "hmm, this isn't for me, i'm going to move along now"
 
2012-03-17 09:33:01 AM

Bomb Head Mohammed: <b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7000410/75625505#c75625505" target="_blank">Notabunny</a>:</b> <i>Bomb Head Mohammed: 2. Beyond that, NO credible witnesses have come forth to accuse him specifically of any specific acts that warrant the extraordinary level of prosecution that he has been subject to. ZERO.

I get that you're a troll white knighting for a Nazi. It's too early to say you're a racist bigot Nazi troll, but I don't understand why you're so eager to cast yourself in that light. As you know, the key fact you're intentionally leaving out, the key fact on which the prosecution based its case, is that Sobibor was a death camp. Sobibor wasn't a prison, a concentration camp, or a labor camp. It was a death camp. The life expectancy of people arriving at Sobibor was around 4 hours. For 200,000 to 250,000 people murdered at Sobibor, there were very few guards and workers. There were so few, that all of them were directly involved in the murders, or directly assisted in the murders. All of them, even the tower guards, received special training in Trawniki on the "pacification" of Jews. But you know all that, don't you.</i>

Look dipsheep,

I'd have absolutely no problem with him receiving a sentence commensurate with all other guards in similar positions and with similar provable levels of culpability. if you want to make the argument that everybody who has served as a guard or in other capacity in a concntration/death camp should receive a life sentence or the death penalty or whatever, fine - I have no problem with that WHATSOEVER.

What I and others here are saying, if you'd stop with your ludicrous hints that I am an anti-semite or whatever stupidity you are on about, is that consistency in prosecution and sentencing matter, and that this case clearly shows sever prosecutorial bias while others who did similar work and had far more choice than this guy did in being involved in similar work got slim to no sentences ...


If one gets away with it, then they should all get away with it? Now THAT might be the stupidest comment on FARK all week,
 
2012-03-17 09:33:20 AM

chuckufarlie: As for your unethical order, what the hell are you babbling about?


It's not a difficult question. What do you think would have happened to him had he refused?
 
2012-03-17 09:34:43 AM

chuckufarlie: If one gets away with it, then they should all get away with it?


Or maybe it is a difficult question for you. I can see reading comprehension is an issue.
 
2012-03-17 09:34:56 AM

MooseUpNorth: chuckufarlie: As for your unethical order, what the hell are you babbling about?

It's not a difficult question. What do you think would have happened to him had he refused?


Refused what? To become a guard? That is where he started down the wrong path. He did not need to VOLUNTEER to be a guard.
 
2012-03-17 09:35:08 AM

danzak: Don't be ignorant Notabunny, you don't just walk in there, look around and decide "hmm, this isn't for me, i'm going to move along now"


If you were at all familiar with the case, you'd know from the court reporting that that is exactly what happened.
 
2012-03-17 09:36:15 AM

chuckufarlie: Refused what? To become a guard?


Refused to "volunteer", yes. What do you think would have happened to him had he refused/passed up/did not take the "opportunity" to be a guard?
 
2012-03-17 09:37:13 AM

MooseUpNorth: chuckufarlie: If one gets away with it, then they should all get away with it?

Or maybe it is a difficult question for you. I can see reading comprehension is an issue.


Seriously? That is the best that you have? Some lame attempt to insult me because you pose questions that do not even provide a clue as to what you are referring to and I ask for clarification. Maybe you should learn to express yourself more intelligently. TRY - I know you will fail, but TRY.
 
2012-03-17 09:38:27 AM

MooseUpNorth: chuckufarlie: Refused what? To become a guard?

Refused to "volunteer", yes. What do you think would have happened to him had he refused/passed up/did not take the "opportunity" to be a guard?


Nothing would have happened to him. Regardless of your punctuation marks, he did really volunteer. He was not forced to do so.
 
2012-03-17 09:40:08 AM

danzak: Don't be ignorant Notabunny, you don't just walk in there, look around and decide "hmm, this isn't for me, i'm going to move along now"


The trick is to not walk in there in the first place. And the idea that he could not have refused is just plain ignorance. He was not forced into becoming a guard.
 
2012-03-17 09:40:41 AM

MooseUpNorth: chuckufarlie: Refused what? To become a guard?

Refused to "volunteer", yes. What do you think would have happened to him had he refused/passed up/did not take the "opportunity" to be a guard?


Like the others before him, he would have been retrained and reassigned to another job.
 
2012-03-17 09:42:13 AM
i224.photobucket.com
"To have someone in your control. To have them know that they are alive only because you have not decided to the contrary. Do you have that power? Ask yourself. It's not an easy question. I think you know that."

Gandalf the Nazi
 
2012-03-17 09:43:43 AM

Notabunny: Awww... that poor, poor, poor nazi murderer. There were 3 well known groups of guards at Sobibor; those who walked away with their guns (they were exicuted), those who walked away without their guns (they were retrained and reassigned outside the cammp system), and those who chose to stay and assist in the murders.


I lived a few blocks away from Demanjuk's church and have been following the story off and on since he was deported for being 'Ivan The Terrible', so I really am getting a kick out of these replies. I've watched a local family spend 30 years trying to keep Grandpa from being executed, all the while coming to grips with what he actually did during the war.

How many other low-rung guards from Sobibor were prosecuted and sentenced like Demanjuk was?
 
2012-03-17 09:45:07 AM

Notabunny: Bomb Head Mohammed: 2. Beyond that, NO credible witnesses have come forth to accuse him specifically of any specific acts that warrant the extraordinary level of prosecution that he has been subject to. ZERO.

I get that you're a troll white knighting for a Nazi. It's too early to say you're a racist bigot Nazi troll, but I don't understand why you're so eager to cast yourself in that light. As you know, the key fact you're intentionally leaving out, the key fact on which the prosecution based its case, is that Sobibor was a death camp. Sobibor wasn't a prison, a concentration camp, or a labor camp. It was a death camp. The life expectancy of people arriving at Sobibor was around 4 hours. For 200,000 to 250,000 people murdered at Sobibor, there were very few guards and workers. There were so few, that all of them were directly involved in the murders, or directly assisted in the murders. All of them, even the tower guards, received special training in Trawniki on the "pacification" of Jews. But you know all that, don't you.


I'll take "what a complete dick might say" for $200, Alex.
 
2012-03-17 09:45:08 AM
You uneducated morons who believe that this "man" was forced into this job as a camp guard really need to do a little research. The Nazis had no trouble recruiting Ukrainians and others to do their dirty work. Most people in eastern Europe jumped right on the bandwagon when it came to killing and/or torturing Jews. The Nazis had all the volunteers they needed, and then some. This "man" was lying when he said he was forced to do anything in regards to the camp.

Chances are, he was never in the Soviet Army, either.
 
2012-03-17 09:45:44 AM

chuckufarlie: Nothing would have happened to him.


a) With the benefit of our 20/20 hindsight, what do you think Nazi Germany's position was on non-"aryans" they considered unemployed/unemployable? Do you believe that Nazi Germany took proper care of prisoners in their control? Do you think his desperate situation would have been any less desperate for not volunteering?

b) Do you think his decision was fully informed? Meaning, in simple words, do you think they told him where, whom, and in what manner they'd expect him to guard, before he'd signed up?
 
2012-03-17 09:48:17 AM

MooseUpNorth: chuckufarlie: Nothing would have happened to him.

a) With the benefit of our 20/20 hindsight, what do you think Nazi Germany's position was on non-"aryans" they considered unemployed/unemployable? Do you believe that Nazi Germany took proper care of prisoners in their control? Do you think his desperate situation would have been any less desperate for not volunteering?

b) Do you think his decision was fully informed? Meaning, in simple words, do you think they told him where, whom, and in what manner they'd expect him to guard, before he'd signed up?


I think that you are a fool to believe that he was forced into doing anything. The Germans used lots of non-Aryans do to their dirty work. Lots of the guards at the death camps were Eastern Europeans born and raised with a hatred for the Jews. They VOLUNTEERED to help, they were not forced. The same goes for this "man" you are trying to defend.
 
2012-03-17 09:48:28 AM

chuckufarlie: danzak: Don't be ignorant Notabunny, you don't just walk in there, look around and decide "hmm, this isn't for me, i'm going to move along now"

The trick is to not walk in there in the first place. And the idea that he could not have refused is just plain ignorance. He was not forced into becoming a guard.


Interesting point you're leaving out is that there aren't any examples of Sobibor guards being severely punished for refusing their jobs, except for the ones who walked away with their guns. All the other guards who walked away received little or no punishment, and were then retrained and reassigned. There was no basis to assume a punishment so severe as to keep a guard at his post against his will. Unless you have information the prosecution and judges don't, you're assumption of severe punishment is unfounded.
 
2012-03-17 09:51:10 AM
<b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7000410/75625648#c75625648" target="_blank">Notabunny</a>:</b> <i>Bomb Head Mohammed: sever prosecutorial bias

Yes. They were biased against a nazi murderer who they proved guilty in court. What is it that's confusing you?</i>

Sigh. This is my last message to you since you're obviously either trolling or a moran, but as has been explained in this thread innumerable times:

1. nobody has any love for this guy, nor does anybody condone his actions. in fact, there is a not-insignificant chance that he was as brutal and harsh as imagination might make him out to be and if so it's a shame that no reliable evidence has remained in order to convict him and sentence him to a lifetime of hanging upside down by his short hairs. However, we have no evidence of this. You accuse him of being both a "nazi" (which is odd, considering that you seem to know about Trawliki but not enough to realize that the people who became guards via that program were uniformly described as apolitical) and a "murderer" even though nobody accuses him of this. He was accused of being an "accessory to murder" SIMPLY BY HAVING BEEN THERE.

THEY DID NOT PROVE HIM "GUILTY OF BEING A MURDRER" in court. As you seem to be, again, either trolling or a moran, this nuance seems to be lost on you, but it really is kind of important.

2. The consistent and fair application of justice is about the most important thing imaginable in a civil society. It's' what separates us from, say, the Nazis. If this guy is guilty of a crime SIMPLY BY BEING THERE why not the thousands of others who were also there but received zero or near-zero prosecution? WHY HIM? Actually, I have answered this question in my Boobies. Again, for the last time, if you think that he deserves a death sentence or life in prison for just being there, then fine - let it be so. But then this should have been applied to ALL and it very clearly was not.

If the guy was indeed a murderer or sadist, well, then it's a terrible thing. but we have no specific evidence of this. NONE. and, well, "do you know who else liked to engage in the sort of guilt by association games" that you have been?

i'm done with you. judging by the other replies in this thread, I think it's pretty clear rational people have more or less figured out how bankrupt your reasoning is.
 
2012-03-17 09:52:14 AM

Jim_Tressel's_O-Face: Notabunny: Awww... that poor, poor, poor nazi murderer. There were 3 well known groups of guards at Sobibor; those who walked away with their guns (they were exicuted), those who walked away without their guns (they were retrained and reassigned outside the cammp system), and those who chose to stay and assist in the murders.

I lived a few blocks away from Demanjuk's church and have been following the story off and on since he was deported for being 'Ivan The Terrible', so I really am getting a kick out of these replies. I've watched a local family spend 30 years trying to keep Grandpa from being executed, all the while coming to grips with what he actually did during the war.

How many other low-rung guards from Sobibor were prosecuted and sentenced like Demanjuk was?


Ah, then you must be familiar with the low conviction rate based on the (unreasonably?) high standard for conviction, and the prosecutions success with its novel approach.
 
2012-03-17 09:53:54 AM

Bomb Head Mohammed: To call this guy a "convicted Nazi criminal" as the USAToday headline does is terribly misleading


Not really since he was, if fact, convicted of being a Nazi criminal.

Now he may not have been guilty, but he was convicted, making thee headline 100% accurate.
 
2012-03-17 09:54:42 AM

Notabunny: Bomb Head Mohammed: There's a difference between "white-knighting", which NOBODY is doing here,

Dude. You totally are.


There are any number of former Nazi soldiers, even SS, still living in Germany. I happen to know a former Waffen SS member---16 years old in early 1945, 3 weeks basic training, attached to a Waffen SS unit fighting the Americans, captured almost immediately, sent to the Russians to use for prisoner swaps. Spent the next 6 years in Siberia, finally came home in '51 or '52.

Anybody here want his address to go arrest him?
 
2012-03-17 09:55:02 AM
chuckufarlie: You uneducated morons who believe that this "man" was forced into this job as a camp guard really need to do a little research. The Nazis had no trouble recruiting Ukrainians and others to do their dirty work. Most people in eastern Europe jumped right on the bandwagon when it came to killing and/or torturing Jews. The Nazis had all the volunteers they needed, and then some. This "man" was lying when he said he was forced to do anything in regards to the camp.

I don't suppose you have any citations to justify your blatant racism then?
 
2012-03-17 09:56:33 AM

Bomb Head Mohammed: If this guy is guilty of a crime SIMPLY BY BEING THERE


See, this is what a white knight does. You minimize the involvement of the guilty. Before running to the defense of a murderer (yes, my word and not the court's), you may want to familiarize yourself with the facts which convicted him.
 
2012-03-17 09:57:30 AM

Bomb Head Mohammed: chuckufarlie: You uneducated morons who believe that this "man" was forced into this job as a camp guard really need to do a little research. The Nazis had no trouble recruiting Ukrainians and others to do their dirty work. Most people in eastern Europe jumped right on the bandwagon when it came to killing and/or torturing Jews. The Nazis had all the volunteers they needed, and then some. This "man" was lying when he said he was forced to do anything in regards to the camp.

I don't suppose you have any citations to justify your blatant racism then?


I could provide them, but the fact that you had to ask confirms the fact that you are uneducated on this subject.
 
2012-03-17 09:58:09 AM

Notabunny: Ah, then you must be familiar with the low conviction rate based on the (unreasonably?) high standard for conviction, and the prosecutions success with its novel approach.


So few, if any. Thank you, Ms. Grace, you can go back to raving about TOT MOM.
 
2012-03-17 10:00:26 AM

Wulfhardt: I've never heard of a POW being converted to the enemy's camp. That seems to run contrary to the whole concept of what soldiers do. It's one thing if an enemy sympathizer decides to assassinate his cohorts in the field, then slips away to the other side. It's totally another thing for an enemy soldier, captured by force, to shrug and flip his loyalties 180 degrees. It sounds to me that if the accusations are true, then he would have done Nazi guard duty out of a desire to be on the living side of the gas chamber.

Lastly, the dude was just a grunt. Regardless of whether he took his orders from his Red Army CO or a Nazi CO, he was still just a soldier like hundreds of thousands of others. War crimes are typically charged to those whose jobs involved planning military actions; not some guy who agreed to walk the fences to stay alive through the war.

I'm all for hunting down Nazis and prosecuting them, but this case just sounds too much like somebody is using it to further their own political image.


You're not that familiar with the history of the Red Army in WWII I take it. Between the fact much of the USSR was not really all that loyal to Russia, Stalin's treatment of certain republics and the Red Army treatment of all soldiers as expendable it's absolutely no surprise someone would turn.

The Germans had entire divisions of people from countries they invaded.
 
2012-03-17 10:00:31 AM

chuckufarlie: Notabunny: chuckufarlie: danzak: Don't be ignorant Notabunny, you don't just walk in there, look around and decide "hmm, this isn't for me, i'm going to move along now"

The trick is to not walk in there in the first place. And the idea that he could not have refused is just plain ignorance. He was not forced into becoming a guard.

Interesting point you're leaving out is that there aren't any examples of Sobibor guards being severely punished for refusing their jobs, except for the ones who walked away with their guns. All the other guards who walked away received little or no punishment, and were then retrained and reassigned. There was no basis to assume a punishment so severe as to keep a guard at his post against his will. Unless you have information the prosecution and judges don't, you're assumption of severe punishment is unfounded.

Are you drinking this early in the morning?


Please tell me what the punishment would have been had he just dropped his gun and walked away. What punishment was so severe and certain that the mere fear of it kept him at his post?
 
2012-03-17 10:00:33 AM

Notabunny: You minimize the involvement of the guilty.


And this is what Nancy Grace does, maximizes the involvement of the guilty - and then cranks it up to 11 anyways.
 
2012-03-17 10:01:02 AM

I'm over it now: Notabunny: Bomb Head Mohammed: There's a difference between "white-knighting", which NOBODY is doing here,

Dude. You totally are.

There are any number of former Nazi soldiers, even SS, still living in Germany. I happen to know a former Waffen SS member---16 years old in early 1945, 3 weeks basic training, attached to a Waffen SS unit fighting the Americans, captured almost immediately, sent to the Russians to use for prisoner swaps. Spent the next 6 years in Siberia, finally came home in '51 or '52.

Anybody here want his address to go arrest him?


Yeah, if you don't mind.

/EIP
 
2012-03-17 10:01:44 AM
John Demjanjuk volunteered to work as a guard at the Sobibor death camp during the Second World War, prosecutors claimed today.

There was 'no reasonable doubt' that the 90-year-old Ukrainian served at the extermination facility in occupied Poland, said Hans-Joachim Lutz in closing the case against him.


How do you prove he volunteered? you can't. He had worked in 2 POW camps prior to Sobibor, had gotten into trouble and faced disciplinary action before being sent to Sobibor. Maybe his choice was , Sobibor or the Eastern front.

Not everything is black and white, especially in eastern europe during the later days of ww2. Stalin was killing those that the Nazi's missed.
 
2012-03-17 10:02:25 AM

Jim_Tressel's_O-Face: Notabunny: Ah, then you must be familiar with the low conviction rate based on the (unreasonably?) high standard for conviction, and the prosecutions success with its novel approach.

So few, if any. Thank you, Ms. Grace, you can go back to raving about TOT MOM.


So you believe the standard is reasonable?
 
2012-03-17 10:02:35 AM
Notabunny: Ah, then you must be familiar with the low conviction rate based on the (unreasonably?) high standard for conviction, and the prosecutions success with its novel approach.

Then please explain why in all this time the brave prosecutors didn't make a call over to the pensions department of the german army and get a list of the thousands of german volunteer guards in greater positions of choice and responsibility who were not prosecuted. Surely, if there is no specific evidence of a crime and guilt by association is the new "guilty", then in the 25+ years that they took prosecuting Demanjuk somebody could have made that phone call? They could have arrested them as they went to pick up their pension checks.

Again, the argument is not for Demanjuk. The argument is for the equal application of justice, and against politically-based selective prosecution. That your co-moron chuckufarlie would so blatantly reveal himself to be an inveterate racist, if we're going to play guily by association, kind of hints at where you're coming from.
 
2012-03-17 10:04:00 AM

Jim_Tressel's_O-Face: Notabunny: You minimize the involvement of the guilty.

And this is what Nancy Grace does, maximizes the involvement of the guilty - and then cranks it up to 11 anyways.


Ah, two Nancy Grace references back to back. Is there some Nancy Grace reference making the rounds on the AM radio talk shows?
 
2012-03-17 10:05:11 AM

Notabunny: So you believe the standard is reasonable?


If applied equally, and I don't recall any other surviving guards rousted out for trial.
 
2012-03-17 10:05:33 AM
He was also accused of being this guy:

cdn.fd.uproxx.com

That's a bingo!
 
2012-03-17 10:05:35 AM
if this guy is guilty of a crime SIMPLY BY BEING THERE

See, this is what a white knight does. You minimize the involvement of the guilty. Before running to the defense of a murderer (yes, my word and not the court's), you may want to familiarize yourself with the facts which convicted him.


Actually Notabunny, you may want to do that. He was convicted of 28,060 counts of accessory to murder for being a guard at the camp. He was not charged with murder, which would be the case if they had any evidence that HE actually killed someone.
 
2012-03-17 10:07:13 AM
Really? No one has posted The I Was Not A Nazi Polka yet? FARK, you're slipping up today!
 
2012-03-17 10:07:14 AM

Notabunny: Ah, then you must be familiar with the low conviction rate based on the (unreasonably?) high standard for conviction, and the prosecutions success with its novel approach.


Making shiat up? I've no doubt it's easier. There's a reason that's a "novel approach", as you put it.

/ That isn't justice.
 
2012-03-17 10:07:26 AM

Bomb Head Mohammed: Notabunny: Ah, then you must be familiar with the low conviction rate based on the (unreasonably?) high standard for conviction, and the prosecutions success with its novel approach.

Then please explain why in all this time the brave prosecutors didn't make a call over to the pensions department of the german army and get a list of the thousands of german volunteer guards in greater positions of choice and responsibility who were not prosecuted. Surely, if there is no specific evidence of a crime and guilt by association is the new "guilty", then in the 25+ years that they took prosecuting Demanjuk somebody could have made that phone call? They could have arrested them as they went to pick up their pension checks.

Again, the argument is not for Demanjuk. The argument is for the equal application of justice, and against politically-based selective prosecution. That your co-moron chuckufarlie would so blatantly reveal himself to be an inveterate racist, if we're going to play guily by association, kind of hints at where you're coming from.


Again, please familiarize yourself with the high standard for conviction set by the court. Perhaps you'll understand better why this conviction was so rare. Perhaps you'll also change your mind and believe there should have been more convictions.
 
2012-03-17 10:08:11 AM

Notabunny: Ah, two Nancy Grace references back to back. Is there some Nancy Grace reference making the rounds on the AM radio talk shows?


Yes, hi, I'm a sporadic FARK lib(tm) who just last week voted again for Dennis Kucinich. And I'm not sure if you're seriously that obtuse not to get the Nancy Grace references.
 
2012-03-17 10:09:21 AM

Jim_Tressel's_O-Face: Notabunny: So you believe the standard is reasonable?

If applied equally, and I don't recall any other surviving guards rousted out for trial.


Who says the prosecution is finished?
 
2012-03-17 10:10:06 AM
I find it hard to believe that this is an accusation they would come to lightly. I'm sure there were records of some sort that justified this whole thing. Screw the old man. He got 60 years of freedom that he probably didn't deserve.
 
2012-03-17 10:10:58 AM

Notabunny: Who says the prosecution is finished?


If they aren't, I'm sure you'll point out all the other investigations and charges brought up in the ten months since Demanjuk was convicted. Go ahead, we'll wait.
 
2012-03-17 10:11:01 AM

danzak: if this guy is guilty of a crime SIMPLY BY BEING THERE

See, this is what a white knight does. You minimize the involvement of the guilty. Before running to the defense of a murderer (yes, my word and not the court's), you may want to familiarize yourself with the facts which convicted him.

Actually Notabunny, you may want to do that. He was convicted of 28,060 counts of accessory to murder for being a guard at the camp. He was not charged with murder, which would be the case if they had any evidence that HE actually killed someone.


As I said above, "murder" was my word, not the court's. But then I'd also call the guy driving the getaway car a "bank robber". That's just me.
 
2012-03-17 10:11:54 AM

Notabunny: chuckufarlie: Notabunny: chuckufarlie: danzak: Don't be ignorant Notabunny, you don't just walk in there, look around and decide "hmm, this isn't for me, i'm going to move along now"

The trick is to not walk in there in the first place. And the idea that he could not have refused is just plain ignorance. He was not forced into becoming a guard.

Interesting point you're leaving out is that there aren't any examples of Sobibor guards being severely punished for refusing their jobs, except for the ones who walked away with their guns. All the other guards who walked away received little or no punishment, and were then retrained and reassigned. There was no basis to assume a punishment so severe as to keep a guard at his post against his will. Unless you have information the prosecution and judges don't, you're assumption of severe punishment is unfounded.

Are you drinking this early in the morning?

Please tell me what the punishment would have been had he just dropped his gun and walked away. What punishment was so severe and certain that the mere fear of it kept him at his post?


I am not the person who made those comments. Go find the person who did and ask them your question. I never said that he would be punished
 
2012-03-17 10:13:27 AM
Again, please familiarize yourself with the high standard for conviction set by the court. Perhaps you'll understand better why this conviction was so rare. Perhaps you'll also change your mind and believe there should have been more convictions.

Umm, actually:


"But now that the 91-year-old Ukrainian has been found guilty of being an accessory to the murder of 28,060 Jews - based on evidence proving only that he worked at the Sobibor death camp, not that he had committed a specific crime - it has lowered the standard of proof for convictions, opening the door to more nonagenarians standing trial for their part in the Holocaust.

"There are hundreds more Demjanjuks sitting in nursing homes here in Munich and in Germany," said Robert Fransman, a Dutch 70-year-old whose parents were gassed in Sobibor on the first day Demjanjuk started to work there."

From: Guardian (new window)
 
2012-03-17 10:14:00 AM
<b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7000410/75625836#c75625836" target="_blank">chuckufarlie</a>:</b> <i>Bomb Head Mohammed: chuckufarlie: You uneducated morons who believe that this "man" was forced into this job as a camp guard really need to do a little research. The Nazis had no trouble recruiting Ukrainians and others to do their dirty work. Most people in eastern Europe jumped right on the bandwagon when it came to killing and/or torturing Jews. The Nazis had all the volunteers they needed, and then some. This "man" was lying when he said he was forced to do anything in regards to the camp.

I don't suppose you have any citations to justify your blatant racism then?

I could provide them, but the fact that you had to ask confirms the fact that you are uneducated on this subject.</i>

yes, so educate me because I am so uneducated. Please show me one scintilla of evidence for your racist smear comment that "Most people in eastern Europe jumped right on the bandwagon when it came to killing and/or torturing Jews."

We're waiting.
 
2012-03-17 10:14:08 AM

puffy999: McManus_brothers: Germany is REALLY serious about their "See?! We're not Nazis anymore! We're good guys!" attitude. Sometimes to the point of ridiculousness, like in this case.

This is true. (new window)


I once knew a man who worked as the chief counsel (head lawyer) for the [insert name of important American military/civilian agency] in Germany. He used to say, "If there's shiat and it stinks, it's German!"

Granted, he was old school, but he wasn't wrong from what I've seen and read.

/You have to admit, having two world wars and the attempted extermination of an entire religion and numerous races of people on your resume raises some concerns.
 
2012-03-17 10:14:58 AM

Jim_Tressel's_O-Face: Notabunny: Who says the prosecution is finished?

If they aren't, I'm sure you'll point out all the other investigations and charges brought up in the ten months since Demanjuk was convicted. Go ahead, we'll wait.


I agree with you that it's painfully slow. Look how long it's been since the crimes occurred. Look how long it took to straighten out the Sobibor/Treblinka confusion. I think most people would be happier with a faster process.
 
Displayed 50 of 314 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report