From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Subject: Re: Jews For Germans
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 03:08:28 GMT

In article <1993Jan19.173700.3057@island.COM> green@island.COM (Robert Greenstein) writes:
>In article <46285@unlisys.in-berlin.de> stingray@unlisys.in-berlin.de (Christian Lampl) writes:
>>green@island.COM (Robert Greenstein) writes:

>>>Yes, the SS was "kinda special" all right. That's why they were considered
>>>a criminal organization. No one forced your grandfather to join the SS.
>>>He may not have committed any atrocities directly himself (maybe he did.
>>>Its doubtful he would tell you the truth), but in any case, he was
>>>certainly an accomplice. As far as I'm concerned he should have been
>>>executed after the war as a war criminal. I can understand your wanting
>>>to defend him since he is your grandfather, but it still seems like 
>>>you are trying to whitewash the whole thing. 

>>No. The only thing I want to tell you is that it's easy to say
>>*afterwards* the SS was a criminal organization and that he
>>wasn't forced to join it. Did you tell him these things
>>when he thought about joining the SS ? Who did ?
>>Do ya think they said to him " Sorry dude, if ya wanna join
>>us you have to rape a jewish woman first."
>>If you ask me why he joined the SS and not the Wehrmacht.
>>Well, why do people join the Marines and not the Army.
>>I don't want to compare the U.S. Marines with the SS,
>>but for people of this time it was the same.
>>I told you before that I certainly not know what he
>>has done, but for me he hasn't done any crime as long
>>someone can prove the opposite.
>>I can imagine that he has seen many cruel things 
>>during the war on both sides, if this makes him a 
>>war criminal or an accomplice in your eyes
>>it's your oppinion.

>Your constant attempts to explain away Nazi atrocities and German complicity
>in it are disgusting. 

Your accusation is even more so, for Christian has not explained away, 
or tried to explain away, any atrocities at all.  Can you point to
where he did?

>>In the Vietnam war, for example, there were members of
>>the U.S. Marines who raped women or shot civil persons.
>>Do ya want to judge the people who did this cruelty or do ya want
>>every member of the U.S. Marines. 

>So now we're supposed to let members of the SS off the hook?

No.  But we are now not supposed to say that as far as we a re concerned, 
people whose names we don't even know, let alone what they did, should 
have been executed.

A little decency would do you good, sir.  Also a little more 
of those things we Jews like to value: justice, decency, rachmones.

>About your grandfather, you said:

>>Maybe I'm just a bit stupid, but can someone please
>>tell me what is his guilt ? Fear ? Unknowledge ?

>You are very stupid if you think that someone who joins the SS is
>not guilty of anything. 

All right, lay it out for us.  EXACTLY what is this man guilty of,
other than naivete?  (Last I looked, that was not a capital crime
anywhere.)

>In an earlier post, you claimed the SS were
>just soldiers, like the Wehrmacht. Now you say you can understand
>why it was declared a criminal organization, but still your grandfather
>loved his mother. 

If you wish to be taken seriously, please refrain from this sort of
crap, OK?

>How could he be a criminal? You say he was driven by
>fear, yet no one forced him to join the SS. He wasn't forced to get
>that tattoo, like the concentration camp victims were.

Tattoos aren't punished capitally, either, friend.  Kindly cut to the
chaser and tell us what this man *did*.

No, nobody forced him to join the SS.  Did he know what the SS was doing
abroad when he joined?  (Hint: almost certainly not.)  What's your point?

>About Hitler, you say:

>>Well, it's very easy to judge things afterwards, but remember:
>>The people of 1933 didn't know what Hitler is going to do later.

>>So if it is a crime to vote for somebody who promises these
>>things you have to explain this to me once more.

>>Sure, there were people who hated the jews and the propaganda
>>of the Nazis was one of the best, but I think most of
>>the people who were rioting the jewish shops just did it
>>because of the same reasons today rioters do it.
>>The psychological fun of destruction and the opportunity to
>>get everything you want and one of the best drugs for
>>a human being: Power.

>So now these murderers were just out for some good clean fun!

You ought to be ashamed of yourself.  

a) He said rioters, not murderers.  

b) He said nothing about fun.  He spoke of lust for power, about
frustration, propaganda, and made analogies to drugs.  

c) In no way did he defend those people.  However, he correctly noted
that most of those who rioted in 1933 were not interested in participating
in genocide as was done later -- and you have no evidence to the contrary.

Unless you can do better than this, I suggest that you post less and 
spend more time at remedial reading classes.

>The sad part of this is that you're not alone. In a poll conducted
>for Der Spiegel Magazine by the Emnid Institute, 42% of those
>questioned said that Nazism had its good points, while on 17% felt
>that there was no good side to the Hitler era. 

What did they say the good points were?  Surely not the genocide.
How many people supported that?

Also, tell me how the question was worded.  Direct quotation would
be especially credible.

>It seems that many of your countrymen share your sickening views.

Where, sir, did he *express* any of those views?  Has he said that 
he agrees with the 42%? If so, show me where.

>If you represent your generation of Germans, I see little hope
>for the future.

If you represent my fellow Jews, I'm close to despair.

On the other hand, with more like you, we'll finally get rid of the
rap of having greater intelligence.  Your witless distortions of
what he said, plus your boorish lust for revenge, suggest that 
you don't think very often.

Roger