Holocaust Memorial Day today 27th Jan

[Harleyman]

De Gaulle drove both Churchill and Eisenhower to the edges of insanity. As Churchill exclaimed in a moment of frustration

 

"Of all the crosses I have to bear, the cross of Lorraine is perhaps the heaviest"

[plekhanov]

The fact however remains "the Holocaust, from its conception to its implementation had a distinctly Jewish aspect to it and, arguably without this Jewish aspect, there would have been no Holocaust. Most of the non-Jewish people would not have been killed because the killing machinery would not have been put into operation. "

 

http://www.holocaust-history.org/jews-central/

The fact remains that large numbers of people who weren't Jewish even by the standards of the Nazis blood laws were slaughtered by the Nazis and there is no justification for omitting them from the historical record or public discourse. Whether or not they'd still have been murdered if Hitler hadn't been so insanely anti-semitic is irrelevant to whether or not Gypsy victims of the Nazis deserve to be mentioned which they clearly do.

 

They did what they could. France wasn't like Yugoslavia, Greece or Russia, rugged mountainous terrain ideal for hit and run ambushes which were very effective in doing most harm to the occupiers by killing them and keeping divisions tied down that were needed elsewhere.

 

Major cities in France were well garrisoned by the Germans and even small towns had enough soldiers to maintain a pretty tight grip. In short, France was a much easier place to occupy and control than any of the others previously mentioned. There were quite a lot of French who were sympathetic to the Germans also and betrayal by a neighbour even was always a possibility.

 

Not so in Russia or Yugoslavia where the Germans were universally loathed due to their atrocities and in Greece where any invader of any kind was historically an enemy to be slaughtered whenever possible

I never said that the French who resisted didn't do what they could I simply pointed out that they couldn't do that much.

 

As you point out there are easily understandable reasons for the lack of achievement compared to the Greek and Yugoslav resistances but that in no way undermines my claim that the French resistance did not make "a hell of a contribution to the allies" in fact it helps explain why that was so.

[plekhanov]

De Gaulle drove both Churchill and Eisenhower to the edges of insanity. As Churchill exclaimed in a moment of frustration

 

"Of all the crosses I have to bear, the cross of Lorraine is perhaps the heaviest"

Indeed when I first read about his conduct during the war I could hardly believe some of the stuff he tried to pull and his astonishing lack of gratitude to the British and Americans who gave him everything he had.

[depoix]

The fact remains that large numbers of people who weren't Jewish even by the standards of the Nazis blood laws were slaughtered by the Nazis and there is no justification for omitting them from the historical record or public discourse. Whether or not they'd still have been murdered if Hitler hadn't been so insanely anti-semitic is irrelevant to whether or not Gypsy victims of the Nazis deserve to be mentioned which they clearly do.

 

 

I never said that the French who resisted didn't do what they could I simply pointed out that they couldn't do that much.

.

this is exactly what you said ...

 

 

http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showpost.php?p=5873188&postcount=55

[John X]

Very clear to anyone that the descent to madness had already begun

 

Yes, but how low that descent would go was not that obvious.

 

It is human nature to be optimistic, and when things get bad it is natural to think that this is as bad as it can get and things can only get better.

 

The fact that so many Jewish people remained in Germany despite being obviously the target of Nazi hate, shows most really never thought that they would end up being exterminated.

 

Even when the war was finished, Albert Speer managed to convince the Nurnberg trials that he had no knowledge of the use of forced labour, never mind that millions had been murdered in the death camps and Speer was a Reichsminister and personally close to Hitler.

 

I've studied Speer and personally think that he did know, but the fact that he was able to convince the judges at Nurnberg, showed that the death and labour camps were not as widely known about as some might think.

 

John X

[depoix]

Yes, but how low that descent would go was not that obvious.

 

It is human nature to be optimistic, and when things get bad it is natural to think that this is as bad as it can get and things can only get better.

 

The fact that so many Jewish people remained in Germany despite being obviously the target of Nazi hate, shows most really never thought that they would end up being exterminated.

 

Even when the war was finished, Albert Speer managed to convince the Nurnberg trials that he had no knowledge of the use of forced labour, never mind that millions had been murdered in the death camps and Speer was a Reichsminister and personally close to Hitler.

 

I've studied Speer and personally think that he did know, but the fact that he was able to convince the judges at Nurnberg, showed that the death and labour camps were not as widely known about as some might think.

 

John X

i recall the bbc showing old footage taken at one of the camps in germany,the local villagers denied knowing that the camp existed ,an allied officer had all the villagers rounded up and made them walk through the camp while the prisoners were still there,very humiliating for them but they still denied knowing the camp was on their doorstep

the allies certainly knew about the camps as they flew over them repeatedly

 

http://en.auschwitz.org.pl/m/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=371&Itemid=8

[Wildcat]

The fact remains that large numbers of people who weren't Jewish even by the standards of the Nazis blood laws were slaughtered by the Nazis and there is no justification for omitting them from the historical record or public discourse. Whether or not they'd still have been murdered if Hitler hadn't been so insanely anti-semitic is irrelevant to whether or not Gypsy victims of the Nazis deserve to be mentioned which they clearly do.

 

In the context of the anniversary of Auschwitz which killed nearly 50 times the number of Jews to Roma. I think the primary focus on the Jewish numbers in a short article in the Star report is excusable.

 

The more important observation is that the official website of holocaust memorial day makes no such "error".

 

http://www.hmd.org.uk/

[Wildcat]

i recall the bbc showing old footage taken at one of the camps in germany,the local villagers denied knowing that the camp existed ,an allied officer had all the villagers rounded up and made them walk through the camp while the prisoners were still there,very humiliating for them but they still denied knowing the camp was on their doorstep

the allies certainly knew about the camps as they flew over them repeatedly

 

http://en.auschwitz.org.pl/m/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=371&Itemid=8

 

You might be thinking of the film by Hitchcock.

 

Link to film - Viewer discretion required

 

about 13 mins in the Burgermeisters are brought in to see the piles of bodies and about 40 mins in the locals get to visit the camp and are shown lampshades and preserved skins with tattoos on.

 

.

Edited January 29, 2010 by Wildcat

[plekhanov]

this is exactly what you said ...

 

 

http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showpost.php?p=5873188&postcount=55

I'm well aware of what I said and the fact remains that at no point did I criticise those who actually resisted I simply said they did not make "a hell of a contribution to the allies" I never said this was their fault, you simply imagined I did.

 

As Harleyman pointed out the French Resistance's comparitive lack of effectiveness is largely because only a small number of French people actually resisted and because the natural and human geography in France wasn't less advantageous to insurgent forces than Greece or Yugoslavia.

 

You could perhaps take my comments as a criticism of all those French people who could have resisted but didn't (an implicit criticism made of course by someone in a position of blissful safety) and in this regard the French as a people compare very poorly to the Greeks and Yuogslavs but there is absolutely no justification for your blatantly false claims that I was in anyway criticising the regrettably small minority of French people who actively resisted the Nazis and Vichy regime.

[plekhanov]

In the context of the anniversary of Auschwitz which killed nearly 50 times the number of Jews to Roma. I think the primary focus on the Jewish numbers in a short article in the Star report is excusable.

 

The more important observation is that the official website of holocaust memorial day makes no such "error".

 

http://www.hmd.org.uk/

1. It's not a 'primary focus' upon Jewish victims it's an exclusive focus there is a rather significant difference.

2. This is supposed to be a day to remember not only the Nazi-holocaust as a whole but all genocides which just happens to be tagged to a date involving a notorious institution in the most notorious genocide. As such it is completely inexcusable to only focus upon Jewish victims of this one genocide as by your apologist reasoning only Jewish victims of the Nazis ever need be remembered on 'Holocaust Memorial Day' from now and for evermore. At least in the 'short articles' which are of course all that the vast majority of people ever read.

 

You are sadly trying to justify a perpetuation of this ongoing distortion of history which not only denies the significance of all genocides but one but it also denies the significance the all but a single subset of that genocide's victims.

 

Besides your apologism doesn't even hold together on it's own terms as the article wasn't solely about the victims of Auschwitz but the holocaust as a whole

 

"Holocaust Memorial Day marks the day the Auschwitz-Birkenau Nazi death camp was liberated on January 27 1945 - bringing an end to the horrific state-sponsored genocide in which an estimated six million Jews were massacred."

 

Now you should be well aware that the "six million Jews" figure is for all the Jewish victims of the Nazi-holocaust as a whole not that one camp and seeing as between 500,000 to 1,000,000 Gypsies were slaughtered by the Nazis you can cram your "nearly 50 times the number of Jews" crap and your speech marks around 'error'. As it absolutely is an error, one that is all too common and which you mystifyingly seem to want to excuse.