Talk:Seán Russell

message: I am very concerned that my fellow Irishmen are engaging in something of a "soft soap" regarding both Sean Russell and the Irish Free State's engagements with Nazism.
The fact is that the overwhelming majority of people in the IFS were indifferent to the world war, and only such indifference could explain how a statue of a Nazi factotum such as Russell would remain in a European capital city for almost 55 years without controversy. To use the term "naive" is POV, and an offensive one at that to those many millions who suffered so horrifically during those benighted years.
Some of the words above are very similar to those on Russell's page, and in the hopes of averting a revert war, I am anxiously soliciting opinions from the wider Wikipedia community regarding this matter.
Please respond at your earliest convenience.
Thanks!!
Brandubh Blathmac 03:19, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: There is not one jot of evidence that Russell was aware of the Holocaust, much less that he was in any way complicit with it.  The quote from the allegedly "anti-fascist" group needs to be referenced, or it should be removed.  In such a short article, this section seems to outweigh everything else.  I have removed the following paragraph, and bring it here for discussion:
:Of course, Seán Russell died in August 1940, over a year before the Wannsee conference of January 1942. Never the less, Germany under Nazi rule was overtly anti-semetic and had already implemented the racial Nazi Nuremberg Laws of 1935 and perpetrated the largescale Kristalnacht pogrom (9th and 10th November, 1938). Though one could, depending on one's point of view, argue as far as saying that Russell was guilty of compliance with Germany's anti-semetic laws, it is by no means possible, as evinced by the timeline of events, to state that the holocaust was a price "Russell was prepared to pay to end partition." There appears to be no question that Russell had foreknowledge of the Wannsee conference and the impending murder of "Six million Jews, thousands of political dissidents, homosexuals, Roma people, Soviet prisoners of war and the disabled".(See Wannsee conference for the evolution of extermination of the Jews as policy in Nazi Germany).
This paragraph attempts to have it both ways, and is, therefore, full of weasel words like "one could say".  Yes, one can say anything they bloody well like, but in the absence of evidence, such things cannot be said in an article on Wikipedia. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 16:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have asked the anonymous user to come here and comment on why he continues to add this unreferenced and POV material to the article, but he, so far, refused to do so.  As I said above, and as I will reiterate, we cannot add speculative and unreferenced material to the article, or any kind of commentary on what Russell may or may not have known about the situation in Nazi Germany.  As it stands, no evidence---not one jot---has ever been presented to indicate Russell in any way sympathized with Nazism.  I would still like to see a source for the villainous, profane, and slanderous "statement" issued by the alleged "anti-fascists" who defaced Russell's memorial. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 17:40, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right that he didn't sympathize with Nazism, overtly, but that still leaves open the question whether he had sound good judgement. I might disagree with American policy, but never to the extent of joining Al-Quaeda.86.42.208.89 (talk) 20:30, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The implication of your analogy is that Russell joined the Nazis.  There is no evidence whatsoever that he did so. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 23:04, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Taking support from side A in a war when you and side A are both fighting side B amounts to an unsigned alliance, but not to the extent of approving of all of side A's activities. Regarding the Holocaust, compare and contrast Russell with the Jewish group Lehi which proposed an alliance with Nazi Germany against Britain in 1941. Lehi then went on to complain that the allies didn't do enough to stop the Holocaust. We can see now that Russell was being used by the Germans but he didn't see it.86.42.207.57 (talk) 15:03, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Russell and the Holocaust 

message: :"A campaign allegedly arose in the 1990s aimed at forcing Dublin City Council to remove Russell's memorial from Fairview Park[citation needed]. It is claimed that agitation against the memorial to Seán Russell has involved Kevin Myers, former Irish Times Columnist, and Fianna Fáil MEP Eoin Ryan, (formerly Dublin City Council councillor)."
Either a question was put down for discussion by the Council, or it was not. Could at least the date of the question be given, or this para must be removed as speculative.86.42.207.57 (talk) 15:23, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What did Russell actually achieve for Ireland in his life to deserve a statue? The objective answer is absolutely nothing.78.16.104.162 (talk) 19:41, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Campaign to remove his statue

message: Mary Lou McDonald was not an MEP in 2003. 
84.203.1.46 (talk) 00:23, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Mary Lou McDonald

message: Apologies, I got two sites mixed up before. As opposed to History Ireland, I was thinking of The Irish History. However, I don't believe  in the "Nazi Germany" section is a neutral summary of the History Ireland article. I believe a summary of that should be placed in the "Legacy" section. My concerns with the previous version are
*The IRA don't appear to have been "extremely pro-Nazi and anti-Semitic" during Russell's lifetime, or when he was in Ireland. I won't quote HI in full, but there is a sentence beginning , with another sentence after this. Then there is a section break, with the new section titled "Anti-Semitic propaganda". This begins  (my emphasis) So during the time period being talked about (1940 onward) Russell was either not in Ireland (assuming our article is accurate, and I see no reason to dispute this) or dead at this time, so it hardly seems fair to attribute authorship of "War News" to him. 
*Regarding anti-Semitism within the IRA, HI states . I have no objection to this, but it's not about Russell.
*Specifically regarding Russell's politics, HI states . So Russell appears to have had no interest in left or right-wing politics, only armed struggle.
*Regarding Russell's supporters, HI states . They didn't accuse Russell, but his supporters such as O’Flaherty.
I think the HI article makes a reasonable summation of the Russell/Nazi connections, I believe  is not a neutral summary of the HI article. It is cherry-picking. FDW777 (talk) 18:50, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I refer again to point 3, . Russell had no interest in left or right-wing politics, and per point 1 it's not even referring to a period when Russell was in Ireland. FDW777 (talk) 08:55, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

text: Regarding the "Jew exterminator" addition, this is completely off-topic. The passage from O'Reilly reads  Since Seán Russell died in 1940, the subsequent actions of Veesenmayer in 1944 have got nothing to do with Seán Russell. FDW777 (talk) 09:00, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  History Ireland article 

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.historyireland.com/20th-century-contemporary-history/oh-heres-to-adolph-hitler-the-ira-and-the-nazis/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  — Yours, Berrely • Talk∕Contribs 09:10, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed