Dude wasn't a big part of it at all, I mean if we're just throwing everyone under the bus who knew about it, let's put every single German w… moreho lived near the concentration camps or every german who was ever stationed near them on trial.
Was he apart of it? Yes. If there's anything we can take from the Nuremberg Trials is that this is completely pointless.
Are you serious? What do you think paramedics did in Auschwitz? Helped people? His comrades who fell from guard tower or were beaten by prisoners? Joseph Mengele was a "medic" in the same place. Read about his work. It was huge FABRIC of DEATH, far from front line! Zafke, member of Schutzstaffel, was involved in this horrible crime.
"Come to grandpa, boy, I'll tell you about the war. It scared me; those explosions, machine guns,dirty trenches. That's why I choosed concentration camp. It was safe place, fine clean accommodation, good food, kind people. As a paramedic I had a lot free time."
Very funny. He was but a stationed paramedic, Not Rudolf Höss, nor Ilse Koch, but a paramedic. Being a medical professional in these camps d… moreoes not necessarily equate to taking direct part in the experiments or killings. Furthermore, it is even actually so that he played no direct part in the killings or experimentation. His only involvement is that he was stationed there as a medic and had knowledge of what was happening. What was he to do with this knowledge? Incite a revolt? Inform the Allies?
Also - before anyone calls me out on it - yes, he could have requested a transfer. But as a paramedic, a transfer request would likely have landed him on the front against the Russians. I, in his shoes would have chosen to stay stationed at the camp then be put on the front line,
The part about "SS lovers" is a gross over-exaggeration.
I can see where people are coming from in that because he was involved he needs … moreto face "justice". But, as I see it, having him placed on trial simply out of association and having knowledge of what was happening is a miscarriage of justice. We might as well go ahead and imprison every last German veteran of the Eastern front. After all, they knew very well of the razings and killings of entire towns and villages and where a part of the system.
Yes, there is a difference between a Wehrmacht recruit and being SS, just as there is also a sizable difference between being stationed at a place for the medical needs of the stationed personnel and actually having any role in the killings. I reiterate, that he was only a paramedic there. He was no sadist like Ilse Koch. He was not the one to flip the switch on the chambers. He was not Rudolf Höss or Heinrich Himmler. Besides, again reiterating from other statements, as an SS Paramedic, it was either the camps, the front or facing the Hauptamt SS-Gericht for insubordination.
Like Goust said, were you there? Did you see this man kill 3,691 people? You're trying to sentence an man for the crime of being in the wrong place. I'm defending an man who shouldn't be blamed for deaths he wasn't responsible for. If you want to pull the emotional "He's a Nazi" card, do it, it's not winning you anything.
We shouldn't try a man for just being on the wrong side of history. The faster we learn this, the faster we can actually go to preventing such atrocities in the future and punishing the right current criminals.
For the last time. What do you think SS medical personel did in KL Auschwitz? Helped wounded inmates, cured prisoners maybe? Of course not! Read the books. He was not "only a paramedic". Not in such place.
Work for KL Auschwitz Birkenau is better option than frontline effort? I'm sure Zafke's defenders will use that argument...
Yes, there is a difference between a Wehrmacht recruit and being SS, just as there is also a sizable difference between being stationed at a… more place for the medical needs of the stationed personnel and actually having any role in the killings. I reiterate, that he was only a paramedic there. He was no sadist like Ilse Koch. He was not the one to flip the switch on the chambers. He was not Rudolf Höss or Heinrich Himmler. Besides, again reiterating from other statements, as an SS Paramedic, it was either the camps, the front or facing the Hauptamt SS-Gericht for insubordination.
For the last time. What do you think SS medical personel did in Kl Auschwitz?
You misinterpreted what I wrote. He was stationed for the betterment of the personnel, not that of those imprisoned. I never implied that he was there for their sake.
" Read the books. He was not "only a paramedic," Not in such a place.
You are saying this under what I interpret as the assumption that any and all medical personel stationed there took part in the killings, which is not true. However, with that being said, I will grant that a majority of them where there for the sake of directly assisting the killings in some form or another (e.g. experiments, "administering" the Zylon-B, etc). He was not among them, from all the sources I have read thus far - all of which state clearly that he was not directly involved in the killings.
On one more note, of course they shall not use my ultimatum arguement. Most would disagree with where it's moral merit stands. It is but only as I see things and nothing more or less.
For the last time. What do you think SS medical personel did in KL Auschwitz? Helped wounded inmates, cured prisoners maybe? Of course not! … moreRead the books. He was not "only a paramedic". Not in such place.
Work for KL Auschwitz Birkenau is better option than frontline effort? I'm sure Zafke's defenders will use that argument...
You speak as if ALL medical professionals on site where there for the purpose of killing or experimentation. This is not true; yes, a majority where there for that, but Zafke is not among them. He was stationed for the needs of the soldiers. As a paramedic, in the middle of a war. It makes sense to station him at a site like that.
Jospeh Mengele was a "medic" in the same place. Read about his work.
I actually have read about his work and I am utterly repulsed (Particularly with the twins experiment). But, he was not a medic. He was a physician there with the express purpose of conducting medicinal experiments. Zafke, on the other hand, was not.
Also, you have misinterpreted my ultimatum arguement. I was looking at it from the perspective of self-preservation. (i.e. working away from the front line vs having the opportunity to be shot by Russians).
Are you serious? What do you think paramedics did in Auschwitz? Helped people? His comrades who fell from guard tower or were beaten by pris… moreoners? Joseph Mengele was a "medic" in the same place. Read about his work. It was huge FABRIC of DEATH, far from front line! Zafke, member of Schutzstaffel, was involved in this horrible crime.
"Come to grandpa, boy, I'll tell you about the war. It scared me; those explosions, machine guns,dirty trenches. That's why I choosed concentration camp. It was safe place, fine clean accommodation, good food, kind people. As a paramedic I had a lot free time."
I don't think that it's directly related to mein kampf. The book is a piece of history, even though it is written by one of the most evil men to exist. I would like to read it someday, I find it interesting. There would be very few who would actually be inspired by the novel to follow in Hitler's footsteps if that's what you are saying. Even none.
He should stand trial, regardless of age. The fact is, this isn't just 'a soldier on the Front'. This is a man who was a direct accessory to the murder of 3,681 people. Three thousand, six hundred and eighty-one people. Read that again.
Why are people referencing soldiers? A soldier doesn't really have a choice, many were forced into the army, and even so in such a gigantic system, no one could question authority unless they wanted to be shot themselves. Many were brainwashed years earlier into believing they were fighting for the right cause (the views of Nazism did not just start in 1939), and of course, I won't deny there were some just generally bad soldiers too, with no conscience whatsoever.
Most probably didn't even realise how big the whole thing was getting, and those that did were part of the gigantic system i'm mentioning, look up 'collective guilt'. It's pretty interesting to be honest. Knowing that what you are doing is wrong, or that your country is committing atrocities, but being completely powerless to do anything due to the scale of it, and so continuing to do it...even if (if, as in just a random percentage) 95% of the Germans believed they were doing the wrong thing.
But this man KNEW, that people were ruthlessly being murdered in Auschwitz, who stood and participated, an accomplice to the murder of all these people. Whoever is charging him has worked it out. I'm not exactly sure where I stand on him actually suffering consequences at such an old age, but I completely understand if they go through with it.
Anyone who could continue to work in a place that killed 1.2 million Jews over it's lifetime, does not earn a place in my book. Being a part of the SS doesn't help either.
He should stand trial, regardless of age. The fact is, this isn't just 'a soldier on the Front'. This is a man who was a direct accessory to… more the murder of 3,681 people. Three thousand, six hundred and eighty-one people. Read that again.
Why are people referencing soldiers? A soldier doesn't really have a choice, many were forced into the army, and even so in such a gigantic system, no one could question authority unless they wanted to be shot themselves. Many were brainwashed years earlier into believing they were fighting for the right cause (the views of Nazism did not just start in 1939), and of course, I won't deny there were some just generally bad soldiers too, with no conscience whatsoever.
Most probably didn't even realise how big the whole thing was getting, and those that did were part of the gigantic system i'm mentioning, look up 'collective guilt'. It's pretty interesting to be honest. Knowing that what you are doing is wrong, … [view original content]
For all of you saying: "It doesn't matter how old he is, he should stand trial." Well know that he DID. He was sentenced in 1948. He was imprisoned for four years. After that he settled in eastern Germany, became married and had 4 sons. There is no evidence that he was directly involved in killing anybody, he is accused of merely serving in the camp. And if he does get sentenced, he'll get about 4 to 5 years in prison. It really is ponitless, if you ask me.
I don't think that it's directly related to mein kampf. The book is a piece of history, even though it is written by one of the most evil me… moren to exist. I would like to read it someday, I find it interesting. There would be very few who would actually be inspired by the novel to follow in Hitler's footsteps if that's what you are saying. Even none.
I found it interesting. Just prepare yourself if you do read it; it warps so many truths and completely ignores others, some omissions of which can fly over your head. You can find an accurately translated and annotated text of it here.
I don't think that it's directly related to mein kampf. The book is a piece of history, even though it is written by one of the most evil me… moren to exist. I would like to read it someday, I find it interesting. There would be very few who would actually be inspired by the novel to follow in Hitler's footsteps if that's what you are saying. Even none.
SS camp medics sometimes poured Zyklon B into the gas chambers
A majority of them did. However, every source I have read states clearly that he was not directly involved in the killings, so Zafke cannot be counted among that majority.
SS camp medics sometimes poured Zyklon B into the gas chambers.
It's a shame the Poles didn't put a bullet in the brain of this SS thug at the end of the war. He's lived 70 years longer than he should have.
He should stand trial, regardless of age. The fact is, this isn't just 'a soldier on the Front'. This is a man who was a direct accessory to… more the murder of 3,681 people. Three thousand, six hundred and eighty-one people. Read that again.
Why are people referencing soldiers? A soldier doesn't really have a choice, many were forced into the army, and even so in such a gigantic system, no one could question authority unless they wanted to be shot themselves. Many were brainwashed years earlier into believing they were fighting for the right cause (the views of Nazism did not just start in 1939), and of course, I won't deny there were some just generally bad soldiers too, with no conscience whatsoever.
Most probably didn't even realise how big the whole thing was getting, and those that did were part of the gigantic system i'm mentioning, look up 'collective guilt'. It's pretty interesting to be honest. Knowing that what you are doing is wrong, … [view original content]
I made an argument in the case of Oskar Groeing (who spent only a few months sorting the valuables of Auschwitz prisoners and sending them to Berlin and was sentenced to jail last year) and I'll make it again; why are we not encouraging former Nazis to actually speak to younger generations about the atrocities the group committed? These people only have a few years left in them, and are among the last people who can give firsthand accounts of what actually happened. So instead of leaving them to rot in prison, would it not be better for them to education people? Oskar Groeing spoke about his time in Auschwitz and admitted that what he did was morally wrong, even though he wasn't a big part of it. So why shouldn't we allow these people to make a difference and educate people and actually do some good?
Like Goust said, were you there? Did you see this man kill 3,691 people? You're trying to sentence an man for the crime of being in the wron… moreg place. I'm defending an man who shouldn't be blamed for deaths he wasn't responsible for. If you want to pull the emotional "He's a Nazi" card, do it, it's not winning you anything.
We shouldn't try a man for just being on the wrong side of history. The faster we learn this, the faster we can actually go to preventing such atrocities in the future and punishing the right current criminals.
I made an argument in the case of Oskar Groeing (who spent only a few months sorting the valuables of Auschwitz prisoners and sending them t… moreo Berlin and was sentenced to jail last year) and I'll make it again; why are we not encouraging former Nazis to actually speak to younger generations about the atrocities the group committed? These people only have a few years left in them, and are among the last people who can give firsthand accounts of what actually happened. So instead of leaving them to rot in prison, would it not be better for them to education people? Oskar Groeing spoke about his time in Auschwitz and admitted that what he did was morally wrong, even though he wasn't a big part of it. So why shouldn't we allow these people to make a difference and educate people and actually do some good?
That's a good idea, use old remorseful people to explain what they did was wrong, the first hand experiences, the stories, the remorse they still feel to that day. It would be a useful and overall positive idea to help people realize that 1. The event itself was terrible and should not be repeated 2. The people that ordered were guided by hatred and those who committed were guided by fear, hatred, or propaganda 3. Not everyone who participated wanted to or like what they did.
It would should humanity in people, for us to sympathize with all angles. Sadly, governments see fear as a better weapon against the atrocities than sympathy and remorse.
I made an argument in the case of Oskar Groeing (who spent only a few months sorting the valuables of Auschwitz prisoners and sending them t… moreo Berlin and was sentenced to jail last year) and I'll make it again; why are we not encouraging former Nazis to actually speak to younger generations about the atrocities the group committed? These people only have a few years left in them, and are among the last people who can give firsthand accounts of what actually happened. So instead of leaving them to rot in prison, would it not be better for them to education people? Oskar Groeing spoke about his time in Auschwitz and admitted that what he did was morally wrong, even though he wasn't a big part of it. So why shouldn't we allow these people to make a difference and educate people and actually do some good?
SS camp medics sometimes poured Zyklon B into the gas chambers
A majority of them did. However, every source I have read states clearly that he was not directly involved in the killings, so Zafke cannot be counted among that majority.
The verb "bilden" does not have a meaning "to draw". In fact, it's the equivalent of "to build" or "to form". The use of the article isn't correct either, I think. It should've been "wie einen deiner bayerischen Übermenschen", although I'm not sure about the accusative case, so I may be wrong.
Bilden has a vareity of applications, drawing among them. Hell, even the noun "Bilde" means image. You are right about the article, though. I used the "er" on the wrong word. "Bilde mich wie einen deiner bayerische Übermenschen" Is how it should have gone.
The verb "bilden" does not have a meaning "to draw". In fact, it's the equivalent of "to build" or "to form". The use of the article isn't c… moreorrect either, I think. It should've been "wie einen deiner bayerischen Übermenschen", although I'm not sure about the accusative case, so I may be wrong.
Duden dictionary doesn't support your assertion, however. The closest it comes to "to draw" is to "to form" or "to model".
"In künstlerischer Weise plastisch gestalten; modellieren"
A little nitpick, but the noun is "Bild" (no "e"). Even though it does mean "image", a similar verb may have a similar meaning only on some semantical level and not directly. So, perhaps it is better to use "malen" in this case.
Bilden has a vareity of applications, drawing among them. Hell, even the noun "Bilde" means image. You are right about the article, though. … moreI used the "er" on the wrong word. "Bilde mich wie einen deiner bayerische Übermenschen" Is how it should have gone.
Comments
3.691 murders... that's the number of murders he took part in.
3,691 murders... That's the number of murders his commanders ordered others to do, his crime was merely being around them.
He's 95 and has dementia. Just put a bullet in his head.
Oh right, yeah because you were totally there to know, stop defending a nazi.
Are you serious? What do you think paramedics did in Auschwitz? Helped people? His comrades who fell from guard tower or were beaten by prisoners? Joseph Mengele was a "medic" in the same place. Read about his work. It was huge FABRIC of DEATH, far from front line! Zafke, member of Schutzstaffel, was involved in this horrible crime.
"Come to grandpa, boy, I'll tell you about the war. It scared me; those explosions, machine guns,dirty trenches. That's why I choosed concentration camp. It was safe place, fine clean accommodation, good food, kind people. As a paramedic I had a lot free time."
It's not about every German soldier from wwII. It's about SS member, who worked in biggest KL. Don't you see a difference?
Then you love the uniforms, not the SS itself.
Yes, there is a difference between a Wehrmacht recruit and being SS, just as there is also a sizable difference between being stationed at a place for the medical needs of the stationed personnel and actually having any role in the killings. I reiterate, that he was only a paramedic there. He was no sadist like Ilse Koch. He was not the one to flip the switch on the chambers. He was not Rudolf Höss or Heinrich Himmler. Besides, again reiterating from other statements, as an SS Paramedic, it was either the camps, the front or facing the Hauptamt SS-Gericht for insubordination.
I will just put this out there. I foresee yet another strike of the mighty Thread Mjölnir.
Like Goust said, were you there? Did you see this man kill 3,691 people? You're trying to sentence an man for the crime of being in the wrong place. I'm defending an man who shouldn't be blamed for deaths he wasn't responsible for. If you want to pull the emotional "He's a Nazi" card, do it, it's not winning you anything.
We shouldn't try a man for just being on the wrong side of history. The faster we learn this, the faster we can actually go to preventing such atrocities in the future and punishing the right current criminals.
For the last time. What do you think SS medical personel did in KL Auschwitz? Helped wounded inmates, cured prisoners maybe? Of course not! Read the books. He was not "only a paramedic". Not in such place.
Work for KL Auschwitz Birkenau is better option than frontline effort? I'm sure Zafke's defenders will use that argument...
So you mean to tell me that you like the SS as a group?
You misinterpreted what I wrote. He was stationed for the betterment of the personnel, not that of those imprisoned. I never implied that he was there for their sake.
" Read the books. He was not "only a paramedic," Not in such a place.
You are saying this under what I interpret as the assumption that any and all medical personel stationed there took part in the killings, which is not true. However, with that being said, I will grant that a majority of them where there for the sake of directly assisting the killings in some form or another (e.g. experiments, "administering" the Zylon-B, etc). He was not among them, from all the sources I have read thus far - all of which state clearly that he was not directly involved in the killings.
On one more note, of course they shall not use my ultimatum arguement. Most would disagree with where it's moral merit stands. It is but only as I see things and nothing more or less.
I do not think I will ever unsee that.
You speak as if ALL medical professionals on site where there for the purpose of killing or experimentation. This is not true; yes, a majority where there for that, but Zafke is not among them. He was stationed for the needs of the soldiers. As a paramedic, in the middle of a war. It makes sense to station him at a site like that.
I actually have read about his work and I am utterly repulsed (Particularly with the twins experiment). But, he was not a medic. He was a physician there with the express purpose of conducting medicinal experiments. Zafke, on the other hand, was not.
Also, you have misinterpreted my ultimatum arguement. I was looking at it from the perspective of self-preservation. (i.e. working away from the front line vs having the opportunity to be shot by Russians).
I don't think that it's directly related to mein kampf. The book is a piece of history, even though it is written by one of the most evil men to exist. I would like to read it someday, I find it interesting. There would be very few who would actually be inspired by the novel to follow in Hitler's footsteps if that's what you are saying. Even none.
He should stand trial, regardless of age. The fact is, this isn't just 'a soldier on the Front'. This is a man who was a direct accessory to the murder of 3,681 people. Three thousand, six hundred and eighty-one people. Read that again.
Why are people referencing soldiers? A soldier doesn't really have a choice, many were forced into the army, and even so in such a gigantic system, no one could question authority unless they wanted to be shot themselves. Many were brainwashed years earlier into believing they were fighting for the right cause (the views of Nazism did not just start in 1939), and of course, I won't deny there were some just generally bad soldiers too, with no conscience whatsoever.
Most probably didn't even realise how big the whole thing was getting, and those that did were part of the gigantic system i'm mentioning, look up 'collective guilt'. It's pretty interesting to be honest. Knowing that what you are doing is wrong, or that your country is committing atrocities, but being completely powerless to do anything due to the scale of it, and so continuing to do it...even if (if, as in just a random percentage) 95% of the Germans believed they were doing the wrong thing.
But this man KNEW, that people were ruthlessly being murdered in Auschwitz, who stood and participated, an accomplice to the murder of all these people. Whoever is charging him has worked it out. I'm not exactly sure where I stand on him actually suffering consequences at such an old age, but I completely understand if they go through with it.
Anyone who could continue to work in a place that killed 1.2 million Jews over it's lifetime, does not earn a place in my book. Being a part of the SS doesn't help either.
This ^^^^
Kill me...
For all of you saying: "It doesn't matter how old he is, he should stand trial." Well know that he DID. He was sentenced in 1948. He was imprisoned for four years. After that he settled in eastern Germany, became married and had 4 sons. There is no evidence that he was directly involved in killing anybody, he is accused of merely serving in the camp. And if he does get sentenced, he'll get about 4 to 5 years in prison. It really is ponitless, if you ask me.
As i said. If you believe you believe, if you don't you don't, it won't change anything by reading the book.
There was just some minor moral panik when there was a spike in sales.
DRAW ME LIKE ONE OF YOUR FRENCH GIRLS!
SS camp medics sometimes poured Zyklon B into the gas chambers.
It's a shame the Poles didn't put a bullet in the brain of this SS thug at the end of the war. He's lived 70 years longer than he should have.
Draw me like one of your bayerische Übermenschen.
I found it interesting. Just prepare yourself if you do read it; it warps so many truths and completely ignores others, some omissions of which can fly over your head. You can find an accurately translated and annotated text of it here.
I sure hope so.
A majority of them did. However, every source I have read states clearly that he was not directly involved in the killings, so Zafke cannot be counted among that majority.
Just one tiny problem
This would imply, as per the use of direct, that he was directly involved, which he was not. Everything else is a legitimate arguement.
I made an argument in the case of Oskar Groeing (who spent only a few months sorting the valuables of Auschwitz prisoners and sending them to Berlin and was sentenced to jail last year) and I'll make it again; why are we not encouraging former Nazis to actually speak to younger generations about the atrocities the group committed? These people only have a few years left in them, and are among the last people who can give firsthand accounts of what actually happened. So instead of leaving them to rot in prison, would it not be better for them to education people? Oskar Groeing spoke about his time in Auschwitz and admitted that what he did was morally wrong, even though he wasn't a big part of it. So why shouldn't we allow these people to make a difference and educate people and actually do some good?
With that line of thinking you might soon find yourself in there with them. Damn Nazi lover (joke).
That's a good idea, use old remorseful people to explain what they did was wrong, the first hand experiences, the stories, the remorse they still feel to that day. It would be a useful and overall positive idea to help people realize that 1. The event itself was terrible and should not be repeated 2. The people that ordered were guided by hatred and those who committed were guided by fear, hatred, or propaganda 3. Not everyone who participated wanted to or like what they did.
It would should humanity in people, for us to sympathize with all angles. Sadly, governments see fear as a better weapon against the atrocities than sympathy and remorse.
Where have you read that? On the Stormfront forums?
Where did you read otherwise, Tumblr?
Construct me like one your Bavarian overpeople.
Meh. They should just leave the old guy alone and be happy WW2 is over.
It does not quite work when translating it literally and directly into English.
"Draw me like one of your Bavarian Supermen"
Do not even dare to imply that I am a part of those scum. Google search Hubert Zafke and find me one source stating that he was directly involved.
The verb "bilden" does not have a meaning "to draw". In fact, it's the equivalent of "to build" or "to form". The use of the article isn't correct either, I think. It should've been "wie einen deiner bayerischen Übermenschen", although I'm not sure about the accusative case, so I may be wrong.
Bilden has a vareity of applications, drawing among them. Hell, even the noun "Bilde" means image. You are right about the article, though. I used the "er" on the wrong word. "Bilde mich wie einen deiner bayerische Übermenschen" Is how it should have gone.
Duden dictionary doesn't support your assertion, however. The closest it comes to "to draw" is to "to form" or "to model".
"In künstlerischer Weise plastisch gestalten; modellieren"
A little nitpick, but the noun is "Bild" (no "e"). Even though it does mean "image", a similar verb may have a similar meaning only on some semantical level and not directly. So, perhaps it is better to use "malen" in this case.