QuotePolish leaders outraged over FBI head's column referring to Poles as Nazi 'accomplices'
BY RICH SCHAPIRO NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Saturday, April 18, 2015, 8:31 PM
Poland's ambassador to the U.S., Ryszard Schnepf, was not happy after the director of the FBI suggested that Poland shared responsibility for the Holocaust.
Polish officials were up in arms Saturday after FBI Director James Comey suggested that their country shared responsibility for the Holocaust.
Comey, in a Friday column in the Washington Post, compared Poles and Hungarians to the Nazis during World War II.
"In their minds, the murderers and accomplices of Germany, and Poland, and Hungary, and so many, many other places didn't do something evil," Comey wrote.
"They convinced themselves it was the right thing to do, the thing they had to do. That's what people do. And that should truly frighten us."
FBI Director James Comey, in a Friday column in the Washington Post, compared Poles and Hungarians to the Nazis during World War II.
The column, adapted from a speech Comey delivered Wednesday at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum's 2015 National Tribute Dinner, incensed Polish Ambassador Ryszard Schnepf.
Schnepf fired off a letter to Comey, "protesting against the falsification of history, especially for accusing Poles of perpetrating crimes which not only did they not commit, but which they themselves were victims of," the Polish embassy said.
In his letter, Schnepf also emphasized the role of Poles like Jan Karski, an underground fighter who was the first to alert the world that the Holocaust was underway.
The FBI did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
A similar uproar broke out in 2012 after President Obama mistakenly uttered the term "Polish death camp" while honoring Karski with the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/polish-leaders-upset-fbi-head-nazi-comparison-article-1.2190340
What do you think, guys? Is this a fair description of Holocaust?
There were quite a few collaborators in Eastern Europe.
Antisemitism in Poland? Sounds unlikely.
Poland was under Nazi occupation at the time. The Poles were under Nazi gunpoint. Can't blame the Poles.
Fair enough.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 19, 2015, 12:39:03 AM
There were quite a few collaborators in Eastern Europe.
Unlike in Western Europe?
WTF? Poland had a very significant resistance movement. Warsaw was the only major european capital annihilated through resistance action. That isn't to say there weren't collaborators, but to compare them to the Hungarians who allied with the Germans and invaded the USSR with them?
Quote from: alfred russel on April 19, 2015, 01:09:27 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 19, 2015, 12:39:03 AM
There were quite a few collaborators in Eastern Europe.
Unlike in Western Europe?
WTF? Poland had a very significant resistance movement. Warsaw was the only major european capital annihilated through resistance action. That isn't to say there weren't collaborators, but to compare them to the Hungarians who allied with the Germans and invaded the USSR with them?
He is not just comparing Poles to Hungarians. If you parse the sentence I highlighted, he is essentially comparing Poles to Germans. He makes it sound as if Holocaust was some sort of joint undertaking by Germans, Poles and Hungarians.
Incidentally, while this is not actually an example of this, have you noticed how in many modern references to the World War II, the bad guys aren't Germans any more, but "the Nazis"?
I normally do not support hysterical reactions of "Polish anti-defamation league", but you can see how this - and references to "Polish death camps" (like the one by Obama last year) can eventually lead to the public having a completely distorted view of who set up and run death camps like Auschwitz (where, by the way, 160 thousands non-Jews, mainly ethnic Poles, were also killed).
Quote from: Martinus on April 19, 2015, 01:23:21 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on April 19, 2015, 01:09:27 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 19, 2015, 12:39:03 AM
There were quite a few collaborators in Eastern Europe.
Unlike in Western Europe?
WTF? Poland had a very significant resistance movement. Warsaw was the only major european capital annihilated through resistance action. That isn't to say there weren't collaborators, but to compare them to the Hungarians who allied with the Germans and invaded the USSR with them?
He is not just comparing Poles to Hungarians. If you parse the sentence I highlighted, he is essentially comparing Poles to Germans. He makes it sound as if Holocaust was some sort of joint undertaking by Germans, Poles and Hungarians.
I think that parses things too strongly - he does mention "many, many other places" as well.
Poland is correct to point out the error, but is wrong to take offence.
He does, but he singles out three nations - Germany (the perpetrator), Hungary (their closest ally in Eastern Europe) and Poland. I don't think Poland is wrong to take offence.
Poland is, in fact, the only occupied country that did not form its own national Waffen SS unit. French, Belgians, Ukrainians, Lithuanians, Swedes etc. all did.
I am not saying Poland does not need to come to terms with Poles' complicity in Holocaust but I do think this is offensive.
Quote from: Martinus on April 19, 2015, 01:33:58 AM
He does, but he singles out three nations - Germany (the perpetrator), Hungary (their closest ally in Eastern Europe) and Poland. I don't think Poland is wrong to take offence.
Poland is, in fact, the only occupied country that did not form its own national Waffen SS unit. French, Belgians, Ukrainians, Lithuanians, Swedes etc. all did.
I am not saying Poland does not need to come to terms with Poles' complicity in Holocaust but I do think this is offensive.
Swedes weren't occupied.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 19, 2015, 01:45:42 AM
Quote from: Martinus on April 19, 2015, 01:33:58 AM
He does, but he singles out three nations - Germany (the perpetrator), Hungary (their closest ally in Eastern Europe) and Poland. I don't think Poland is wrong to take offence.
Poland is, in fact, the only occupied country that did not form its own national Waffen SS unit. French, Belgians, Ukrainians, Lithuanians, Swedes etc. all did.
I am not saying Poland does not need to come to terms with Poles' complicity in Holocaust but I do think this is offensive.
Swedes weren't occupied.
The Swedes were occupied...with selling iron ore to the Nazis.
That's why their unit was rather small.
A lot of Poles were drafted into the Wehrmacht.
Quote from: Martinus on April 19, 2015, 01:23:21 AM
He is not just comparing Poles to Hungarians. If you parse the sentence I highlighted, he is essentially comparing Poles to Germans. He makes it sound as if Holocaust was some sort of joint undertaking by Germans, Poles and Hungarians.
He's not comparing Poles to anything. He's making a statement about Germans, Poles, Hungarians, and others who murdered and collaborated. Those that didn't murder and collaborate are not included in his comment.
So including Jews in a statement like this (after all there were a few Jews actually collaborating and serving as guards etc.) would not cause a furore either?
Besides, Germans did not *collaborate* with the Nazis. Germans *were* the Nazis. The Nazi state was a legitimate German state just as the Soviet state was a legitimate Russian state. Poles were complicit in Nazi crimes to the same degree as Ukrainians and Lithuanians were complicit in Stalinist crimes.
Quote from: Martinus on April 19, 2015, 01:33:58 AM
Swedes etc. all did.
This is patently untrue. Swedish volunteers joined other units, like the 'Nordland' and 'Wiking' divisions, all of which were mostly German or Volksdeutsche, but with strong Norwegian, Danish and Dutch elements.
I think the FBI representative misses the point entirely, when you look at the history of the occupation of Poland. No other country was subjected to such a harsh treatment. The General Government was essentially a terror regime.
I'd like someone to show me what country that was occupied that
wasn't complicit in the Holocaust. The only one I can think of that actually did something grand was Denmark. Individiuals risked their lives to save Jewish refugees and get them to neutral territory, but on the whole, the Holocaust isn't just a black spot on German conscience, but European conscience. The main issue in many Western countries probably wasn't rabid anti-semitism, but rather huge indifference. And if we're pointing fingers, I think the Baltic countries get off too easily here. Lithuanians were enthusiastic collaborators.
I only fault the Germans.
I don't think the FBI would get the wrong guy.
Quote from: The Brain on April 19, 2015, 05:55:21 AM
I don't think the FBI would get the wrong guy.
Yeah I don't understand why the FBI is involved in this in the first place :lol:
Quote from: Monoriu on April 19, 2015, 05:27:04 AM
I only fault the Germans.
Which is exactly what the rest of Europe wants you to do so you don't underneath
their beds when investigating the subject.
Quote from: Monoriu on April 19, 2015, 06:05:49 AM
Quote from: The Brain on April 19, 2015, 05:55:21 AM
I don't think the FBI would get the wrong guy.
Yeah I don't understand why the FBI is involved in this in the first place :lol:
That's because you are thinking that the head of the FBI is the FBI. He's just a guy who made a speech. :lol: The rest of the bureau isn't involved.
As far as the topic is concerned, this issue (the exceptionalism of German antisemitism and the Holocaust) has been debated in US academia since at least the 1990s. The two seminal works on the subject are probably
Ordinary Men by Christopher Browning, and
Hitler's Willing Executioners by Daniel Goldhagen.
Browning argues that the people who carried out the Holocaust were, like the subjects of the Milgram Experiement, merely deferring to authority and submitting to peer pressure. He notes that non-Germans also served in these roles, and argues that they did so for similar reasons. This appears to be Comey's thesis as well.
Goldhagen argues that the Germans participated because of the exceptional nature of German antisemitism, in that German antisemitism didn't seek the suppression of the Jews, but their elimination from German society. He argues that, while non-Germans participated in the Holocaust, they did so out of fear, not hatred. The Polish ambassador obviously believes something more along these lines.
Quote from: alfred russel on April 19, 2015, 01:09:27 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 19, 2015, 12:39:03 AM
There were quite a few collaborators in Eastern Europe.
Unlike in Western Europe?
WTF? Poland had a very significant resistance movement. Warsaw was the only major european capital annihilated through resistance action. That isn't to say there weren't collaborators, but to compare them to the Hungarians who allied with the Germans and invaded the USSR with them?
There were plenty in Western Europe as well.
Quote from: Martinus on April 19, 2015, 03:04:06 AM
So including Jews in a statement like this (after all there were a few Jews actually collaborating and serving as guards etc.) would not cause a furore either?
I think I would add the French and Dutch to that list. There is a perception that the Jews living in Germany and Eastern Europe were within populations ready and willing to kill them--and the Nazis just gave them the opportunity.
Maybe he's considering Polish violence against the survivors after the war?
Quote from: grumbler on April 19, 2015, 09:18:24 AM
As far as the topic is concerned, this issue (the exceptionalism of German antisemitism and the Holocaust) has been debated in US academia since at least the 1990s. The two seminal works on the subject are probably Ordinary Men by Christopher Browning, and Hitler's Willing Executioners by Daniel Goldhagen.
Browning argues that the people who carried out the Holocaust were, like the subjects of the Milgram Experiement, merely deferring to authority and submitting to peer pressure. He notes that non-Germans also served in these roles, and argues that they did so for similar reasons. This appears to be Comey's thesis as well.
Goldhagen argues that the Germans participated because of the exceptional nature of German antisemitism, in that German antisemitism didn't seek the suppression of the Jews, but their elimination from German society. He argues that, while non-Germans participated in the Holocaust, they did so out of fear, not hatred. The Polish ambassador obviously believes something more along these lines.
And that is the crux of the whole thing. The "Willing Executioners" could have had more traction if it was "Europa's Willing Executioners" rather than saying it was mostly Germany/German. While the Milgram thesis might have some overstatements, the willingness to go along with atrocities because others do is not what most people wish to believe they are capable of. I have always found Browning to be the more compelling of the two.
It is far more comforting to believe that one would not do such things, or that perhaps one's own prejudices are not at the level of genocidal violence when in a certain situation, but that is more self-congratulations than a position borne out by documented actions.
Quote from: PDH on April 19, 2015, 12:13:01 PM
And that is the crux of the whole thing. The "Willing Executioners" could have had more traction if it was "Europa's Willing Executioners" rather than saying it was mostly Germany/German. While the Milgram thesis might have some overstatements, the willingness to go along with atrocities because others do is not what most people wish to believe they are capable of. I have always found Browning to be the more compelling of the two.
It is far more comforting to believe that one would not do such things, or that perhaps one's own prejudices are not at the level of genocidal violence when in a certain situation, but that is more self-congratulations than a position borne out by documented actions.
The most interesting part of Browning's tale is that the members of the German police unit he chronicled were given a chance to opt out of killing Jews, and only something like a dozen of the 600 men took advantage of that opportunity, even though there were no punishments given to those who opted out (they were just transferred to another police unit). They were told that killing Jews was important, and so they believed it. There was nothing extraordinary about the unit, other than its mission. They were not picked because it was believed that they would go along, they were just selected from men too old to be drafted, or who suffered from some other disqualification for active military service.
Quote from: grumbler on April 19, 2015, 01:51:01 PM
The most interesting part of Browning's tale is that the members of the German police unit he chronicled were given a chance to opt out of killing Jews, and only something like a dozen of the 600 men took advantage of that opportunity, even though there were no punishments given to those who opted out (they were just transferred to another police unit). They were told that killing Jews was important, and so they believed it. There was nothing extraordinary about the unit, other than its mission. They were not picked because it was believed that they would go along, they were just selected from men too old to be drafted, or who suffered from some other disqualification for active military service.
That is the point I always try to drive home to my students. There is nothing to say that anyone, and I mean even the sanctimonious instructor at the front of the room, might not go along with such things if presented. The truly scary thing about human society is the ability to dehumanize out of simple belonging.
Austrians can probably be named together with Germans when it comes to the Holocaust, but all the rest were just collaborators and do not - especially as whole societies instead of individuals - a comparable historical guilt for the Holocaust.
The Poles are guilty of charging the strange "magic iron carriages" with lances. Which should be enough.
I still don't understand why the FBI head would say something like this. That's like the HK police chief publicly commenting on, say, Rwanda. The first reaction from the public would be a gigantic "WTF, are you out of your mind? What does this have to do with me?!?!?!?1". This will be followed by swift removal and civil service disciplinary action about unnecessarily stirring up international trouble by what is essentially a personal hobby of his that nobody cares about.
The I is for incompetent. Granted not sure what a member of the FBI is doing commenting at the Holocaust museum in the first place.
Quote from: grumbler on April 19, 2015, 09:18:24 AM
Quote from: Monoriu on April 19, 2015, 06:05:49 AM
Quote from: The Brain on April 19, 2015, 05:55:21 AM
I don't think the FBI would get the wrong guy.
Yeah I don't understand why the FBI is involved in this in the first place :lol:
That's because you are thinking that the head of the FBI is the FBI. He's just a guy who made a speech. :lol: The rest of the bureau isn't involved.
As far as the topic is concerned, this issue (the exceptionalism of German antisemitism and the Holocaust) has been debated in US academia since at least the 1990s. The two seminal works on the subject are probably Ordinary Men by Christopher Browning, and Hitler's Willing Executioners by Daniel Goldhagen.
Browning argues that the people who carried out the Holocaust were, like the subjects of the Milgram Experiement, merely deferring to authority and submitting to peer pressure. He notes that non-Germans also served in these roles, and argues that they did so for similar reasons. This appears to be Comey's thesis as well.
Goldhagen argues that the Germans participated because of the exceptional nature of German antisemitism, in that German antisemitism didn't seek the suppression of the Jews, but their elimination from German society. He argues that, while non-Germans participated in the Holocaust, they did so out of fear, not hatred. The Polish ambassador obviously believes something more along these lines.
I didn't think anyone took Goldhagen's work seriously.
Quote from: Monoriu on April 19, 2015, 08:31:29 PM
I still don't under why the FBI head would say something like this. That's like the HK police chief publicly commenting on, say, Rwanda. The first reaction from the public would be a gigantic "WTF, are you out of your mind? What does this have to do with me?!?!?!?1". This will be followed by swift removal and civil service disciplinary action about unnecessarily stirring up international trouble by what is essentially a personal hobby of his that nobody cares about.
Well the FBI is still rather concerned about Nazis. Still shoots them on occasion in fact. How is the topic of Hong Kong collaboration with Japan received these days?
Quote from: Razgovory on April 19, 2015, 08:50:10 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on April 19, 2015, 08:31:29 PM
I still don't under why the FBI head would say something like this. That's like the HK police chief publicly commenting on, say, Rwanda. The first reaction from the public would be a gigantic "WTF, are you out of your mind? What does this have to do with me?!?!?!?1". This will be followed by swift removal and civil service disciplinary action about unnecessarily stirring up international trouble by what is essentially a personal hobby of his that nobody cares about.
Well the FBI is still rather concerned about Nazis. Still shoots them on occasion in fact. How is the topic of Hong Kong collaboration with Japan received these days?
Nobody talks about it :P
Quote from: Monoriu on April 19, 2015, 08:31:29 PM
I still don't understand why the FBI head would say something like this. That's like the HK police chief publicly commenting on, say, Rwanda. The first reaction from the public would be a gigantic "WTF, are you out of your mind? What does this have to do with me?!?!?!?1". This will be followed by swift removal and civil service disciplinary action about unnecessarily stirring up international trouble by what is essentially a personal hobby of his that nobody cares about.
The head of the FBI is a guy. He may have an interest in the Holocaust, and may have done some research about it, or whatever. The Holocaust museum has all kinds of people speaking there. It is ironic that you would suggest that this is a hobby of his that "nobody cares about" when you are posting about his hobby on a board that has nothing to do with him.
You seem to care.
Quote from: grumbler on April 19, 2015, 09:10:36 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on April 19, 2015, 08:31:29 PM
I still don't understand why the FBI head would say something like this. That's like the HK police chief publicly commenting on, say, Rwanda. The first reaction from the public would be a gigantic "WTF, are you out of your mind? What does this have to do with me?!?!?!?1". This will be followed by swift removal and civil service disciplinary action about unnecessarily stirring up international trouble by what is essentially a personal hobby of his that nobody cares about.
The head of the FBI is a guy. He may have an interest in the Holocaust, and may have done some research about it, or whatever. The Holocaust museum has all kinds of people speaking there. It is ironic that you would suggest that this is a hobby of his that "nobody cares about" when you are posting about his hobby on a board that has nothing to do with him. You seem to care.
:lol:
Yes, that's because I am a nerd. Most people aren't nerds. The Holocaust would be an obscure topic here.
America is run by Jews, so its still a topic of interest here.
Anne Applebaum strikes back:
QuoteFBI director got it wrong on the Holocaust
By Anne Applebaum April 19 at 1:15 PM
The Polish ambassador to Washington has protested, the Polish president has protested, the speaker of the Polish parliament (to whom I am married) has protested — and the U.S. ambassador to Warsaw has apologized profusely. Why? Because James Comey, the director of the FBI, in a speech that was reprinted in The Post arguing for more Holocaust education, demonstrated just how badly he needs it himself.
In two poorly worded sentences, he sounded to Polish readers as if he were repeating the World War II myth that most drives them crazy: Namely, that somehow, those who lived in occupied Eastern Europe shared full responsibility for a German policy. Comey put it like this:
"In their minds, the murderers and accomplices of Germany, and Poland, and Hungary, and so many, many other places didn't do something evil. They convinced themselves it was the right thing to do, the thing they had to do."
There are a number of problems with that pair of weak sentences, starting with the vast difference between Germany and the rest. During the war, Germany had a state policy of exterminating the Jews. This policy involved not "accomplices" but hundreds of bureaucrats, tens of thousands of soldiers, train schedules and plans. Germany also encouraged the creation of collaborationist governments in other countries – Vichy France, for example – some of which used their own police officers to send their Jewish citizens into the German death camps.
Germany also occupied Poland, but there was no Polish "Vichy." During the war, there was no Polish state at all. Indeed, it was the absence of the Polish state that enabled the Germans to create a lawless, violent world, one in which anyone could be arbitrarily murdered, any Jew could be deported — and any Pole who helped a Jew could be shot instantly, along with his entire family. Many were. Millions of others died too – Polish intellectuals, priests and politicians were all Nazi targets.
In the course of the war, most of Poland's infrastructure, industry and architecture were destroyed. In that atmosphere, many people were frightened by or indifferent to the fate of the Jews, and some murdered in order to avoid being murdered. But that doesn't mean that "in their minds" they "didn't do something evil."
Although the circumstances were different, Germany's leading role is equally clear in Hungary. The wartime government of Adm. Miklós Horthy did pass anti-Semitic legislation and did align itself with the Nazis. But the mass murder and deportation of the Hungarian Jews to Auschwitz began only in March 1944, when that government dissolved and was replaced with a straightforward German occupation. Once the Hungarian state had been dissolved, in other words, Hungary also became a lawless, violent zone where anything was possible.
So no, it is not true, as Comey made it sound, that "murderers and accomplices" in Germany, Poland and Hungary and lots of other places were somehow responsible for the Holocaust. And no, it isn't true that the Holocaust is a story of so many otherwise "good" people who "convinced themselves it was the right thing to do."
On the contrary, it's a story about the power of fear, the danger of lawlessness and the horror that was made possible by a specific form of German state terror in the years between 1939 and 1945 – a terror that convinced many people to do things that they knew were terribly, terribly wrong. If the FBI director wants to take some lessons from Washington's excellent Holocaust museum, that's very admirable. But first he should make sure he's understood what he's seen.
Yeah comparing Poland where IIRC resistance fighters somewhat got involved with helping Jews and uncovering the death camps and Hungary where there were very sporadic private efforts to help Jews and otherwise a pretty complacent cooperation in robbing Jews blind before and after they were boarded on cattle wagons, is not fair.
On the other hand anti-semitism and general xenophobia is a very nasty thing in Eastern Europe (look at Ukraine in WW2 FFS) and just because Poland had significant portions of its population stand up against it, it shouldn't be excuse enough to pretend its not an integral part of their society like it is for the rest of the region.
As I said, I am fine with saying that some people in Eastern European countries collaborated with the nazis and aided Holocaust (although, again, one cannot really compare the situation on the indigenuous non-Jewish populace under German occupation in countries like Denmark, France or Belgium with the situation in Poland - they truly were apples and oranges).
My biggest beef is listing Germans in the same breath as Poles and Hungarians.
I think that, if the intent of Comey was to provide us with the comic relief of watching a bunch of Polish leaders and their wives fall all over themselves trying to be offended by a true statement, he succeeded very well.
Mentioning Germany in the same sentence as Poland and Hungary and many other places is only offensive to people absolutely determined to be offended.
Applebaum and others seem to forget that there were genocides in other places at other times, and they were not products of "a specific form of German state terror." The claim that no Poles and Hungarians would have gone along with a genocide absent something about this "specific form" doesn't hold water. That's not to say that Poland and Hungary were exceptional in this at all. As Comey notes, it was true of "many other places."
That said, I know a formerly Polish who lived through the Holocaust. He thought the Ukrainian special police were far more brutal than the German. The Ukrainian specialty was beating a man to death on the street in front of his wife or, preferably, wife and family. Right after Sabbath services was their favorite time to strike.
Do you really think that these guys had been terrorized into this behavior?
Three words: Polish Death Camps.
Quote from: Martinus on April 20, 2015, 08:50:23 AM
Quote from: derspiess on April 20, 2015, 08:48:54 AM
Three words: Polish Death Camps.
Elaborate.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2Fa9T9YsoNbl8%2Fmaxresdefault.jpg&hash=b7571865ecda5a85e9bfab0d8e5d7cfa72bb8ab3)
Ok but what exactly is your point? :P
To make a topical swipe at Obama, of course.
Poland cannot into "Thanks, Obama!"?
Quote from: derspiess on April 20, 2015, 08:59:46 AM
To make a topical swipe at Obama, of course.
Well, your post(s) could be interpreted at least in three ways:
"Obama's administration insults Poles again, like with the 'Polish death camps'".
"Poles are insulted over stupid shit again, like with the 'Polish death camps'".
"Poles should not be insulted about being called accomplices of nazis. After all, there were Polish death camps."
Admittedly, the third option is least likely, but still this is Languish, so I needed clarification. :P
Option 1. Polish complicity or non-complicity in the holocaust is a topic worthy of discussion, but Poles are right to take offense at an SS concentration camp being called a Polish Death Camp. Now Poles shouldn't lose too much sleep over it since Obama misspoke and I'm sure he wasn't laying blame on Poles, but it's not something that should have gone unadressed.
Quote from: derspiess on April 20, 2015, 09:38:22 AM
Option 1. Polish complicity or non-complicity in the holocaust is a topic worthy of discussion, but Poles are right to take offense at an SS concentration camp being called a Polish Death Camp. Now Poles shouldn't lose too much sleep over it since Obama misspoke and I'm sure he wasn't laying blame on Poles, but it's not something that should have gone unadressed.
I think this is not really helping people (like me) who believe we should discuss openly Polish role in Holocaust and generally support movies like "Ida". Misspeaks like this help the antisemitic side in the Polish discourse, which claims that the whole Poles-blaming is a "Jewish plot" etc. - they can easily point to stuff like this and claim that this is already happening and the "Holocaust side" is rewriting history.
Does anyone know if Poles were frequently used as camp guards? I've heard a lot about Ukrainians (and of course all the commandants were Austrians), not so much other nationalities.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 20, 2015, 09:45:41 AM
Does anyone know if Poles were frequently used as camp guards? I've heard a lot about Ukrainians (and of course all the commandants were Austrians), not so much other nationalities.
No clue, really. Wikipedia claims there weren't any, but we all know it is not a reliable source.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust_in_Poland
I wouldn't be surprised if there were some - but then, as I said before, many prisoners were actually of Polish etnicity so maybe Poles were not seen as trustworthy.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 20, 2015, 09:45:41 AM
Does anyone know if Poles were frequently used as camp guards? I've heard a lot about Ukrainians (and of course all the commandants were Austrians), not so much other nationalities.
Define "Poles" in this context. Parts of Poland were directly annexed into the Reich, and the former citizens of Poland living in those areas would have been considered German citizens even if of Polish ethnicity, so it's possible some of them did (though I have some doubts). Poles living in the area under the Government General I wouldn't think did. And some of the Ukrainians who were camp guards might have been pre-war citizens of Poland rather than the Soviet Union.
In other words, I don't really know.
Quote from: dps on April 20, 2015, 10:28:54 AM
Define "Poles" in this context. Parts of Poland were directly annexed into the Reich, and the former citizens of Poland living in those areas would have been considered German citizens even if of Polish ethnicity, so it's possible some of them did (though I have some doubts).
Well this was actually kind of a messy thing. IIRC there were two political entities formed from annexed Poland. The governors were told to 'Germanize' their province. One decided to just declare everybody who lived there to be German. The other decided to engage in a brutal regime of ethnic cleansing.
So yeah it would require some research to find out because, according to the Reich, all those Poles were Germans.
Quote from: Valmy on April 20, 2015, 10:33:00 AM
Well this was actually kind of a messy thing. IIRC there were two political entities formed from annexed Poland. The governors were told to 'Germanize' their province. One decided to just declare everybody who lived there to be German.
I read an article a while back that said the German authorities were puzzled when people resisted this in parts of Poland and other areas like Slovenia. I guess they asssumed that people there would be honored to have the opportunity to become German. I mean, it should be pretty easy to get people to ditch their own language and ethnicity, right?
Quote from: Valmy on April 20, 2015, 10:33:00 AM
Quote from: dps on April 20, 2015, 10:28:54 AM
Define "Poles" in this context. Parts of Poland were directly annexed into the Reich, and the former citizens of Poland living in those areas would have been considered German citizens even if of Polish ethnicity, so it's possible some of them did (though I have some doubts).
Well this was actually kind of a messy thing. IIRC there were two political entities formed from annexed Poland. The governors were told to 'Germanize' their province. One decided to just declare everybody who lived there to be German. The other decided to engage in a brutal regime of ethnic cleansing.
So yeah it would require some research to find out because, according to the Reich, all those Poles were Germans.
I don't think this was just based on the decision by the governors, though.
Pre-war Poland had a very large German minority living within its borders, especially in Silesia, but also Wielkopolska and Kaszubia, and even those living in these areas who were not ethnicly German felt distinct enough from ethnic Poles (the latter is especially true for Silesians and Kaszubians who always were more of "distant cousins" for more "mainstream Poles".
German racist ideology also looked at these groups differently, with the likes of Silesians being treated as "mutt Germans" (similar to the way, say, Balts were treated), while Poles being treated as Slavs and thus a slave race.
The areas you mention were delineated in a way taking into account these distinctions (with the "General Governorship" being populated mainly by ethnic Poles and other subhumans).
The Wehrmacht conscripts that were also mentioned before were mainly taken from the ethnic Germans or Silesians/Kaszubians as well.
So this was not an accident but more of a design, really.
Were those guys embraced back into the fold after the war, or raped and sent west?
My impression was that the orders to the governors were very vague by design and it was left up to the governor to decide what he thought would most please Hitler.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 20, 2015, 10:55:21 AM
Were those guys embraced back into the fold after the war, or raped and sent west?
A bit of both.
Ethnic Germans were definitely raped and sent West. Silesians and Kaszubians were allowed to stay (except for Volksdeutsches, i.e. those who signed up to become German citizens - these were frequently executed for treason, if they did not manage to escape) but suppressing their autonomic and ethnic tendencies was what the Polish state was doing - often with brutality - for the next few decades after the war.
So, having a "grandpa in Wehrmacht" would be a well hidden family secret for a long while (in fact, it was something PIS tried to pin on Tusk - a Kashubian - during the last elections - but it turned out not to be true).
Silesian autonomy movement is now on the rise again but it is still very weak (I think only something like 800,000 people declared themselves to be Silesians - next to, not instead of Polish - during the last census few years ago and they were promptly told off by the Supreme Court who told them "there is no such thing as a Silesian").
We are one hell of a homogenous nation right now. Thanks, Hitler and Stalin. :P
My knowledge is shallow at best, but I was under the understanding that the Poles were pretty anti-Semitic themselves, pre-war, and there were examples aplenty of willing or even enthusiastic cooperation with the Nazi's when it came to rounding up the Jews and shoving them into the ghettos, for example. Kind of a "Well, it sucks to be occupied by the Nazi's, but at least they are taking care of these damn Jews..." sort of thing.
I am very willing to be shown wrong on this however...
Were the Poles merely collaborating when they took a chunk out of Czechoslovakia?
Quote from: Razgovory on April 20, 2015, 01:11:15 PM
Were the Poles merely collaborating when they took a chunk out of Czechoslovakia?
That was different. They were neither compelled to do that nor to threaten war should the USSR intervene to aid Czechoslovakia.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 20, 2015, 01:11:15 PM
Were the Poles merely collaborating when they took a chunk out of Czechoslovakia?
That was a pretty shitty (and dumb) move.
Quote from: Berkut on April 20, 2015, 12:56:17 PM
My knowledge is shallow at best, but I was under the understanding that the Poles were pretty anti-Semitic themselves, pre-war, and there were examples aplenty of willing or even enthusiastic cooperation with the Nazi's when it came to rounding up the Jews and shoving them into the ghettos, for example.
The first part of that sentence is definitely right, the second I do not know.
Quote from: Berkut on April 20, 2015, 12:56:17 PM
My knowledge is shallow at best, but I was under the understanding that the Poles were pretty anti-Semitic themselves, pre-war, and there were examples aplenty of willing or even enthusiastic cooperation with the Nazi's when it came to rounding up the Jews and shoving them into the ghettos, for example. Kind of a "Well, it sucks to be occupied by the Nazi's, but at least they are taking care of these damn Jews..." sort of thing.
I am very willing to be shown wrong on this however...
From the memories of the former Polish Jew I mentioned earlier, there were plenty of Poles willing to cooperate with the Nazi police, but also many who helped smuggle food into the ghettos, without which my friend would not have survived. I'll try to remember to ask him if that was a difference between rural Poles and urban Poles.
Quote from: Martinus on April 20, 2015, 01:19:14 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 20, 2015, 01:11:15 PM
Were the Poles merely collaborating when they took a chunk out of Czechoslovakia?
That was a pretty shitty (and dumb) move.
In Poland's defense at least that was done by a small clique of generals.
Though, knowing Eastern Europe, it was probably popular.
Quote from: Berkut on April 20, 2015, 12:56:17 PM
My knowledge is shallow at best, but I was under the understanding that the Poles were pretty anti-Semitic themselves, pre-war, and there were examples aplenty of willing or even enthusiastic cooperation with the Nazi's when it came to rounding up the Jews and shoving them into the ghettos, for example. Kind of a "Well, it sucks to be occupied by the Nazi's, but at least they are taking care of these damn Jews..." sort of thing.
I am very willing to be shown wrong on this however...
The germans took such a uniquely hostile approach in Poland that I think very few actively collaborated in any way. In other places the Germans would show up and annex the place, making everyone German citizens, or they would install a puppet government that people could still attach some loyalty to. But no, the Germans felt they were erasing the very existence of the Polish nation. The General Government was a pure colony, with the intention of making it purely German after the war.
No matter how much you dislike Jews, it's pretty hard for a Pole to go along with that program.
There also wasn't the "at least they're not the Soviets" philosophy that worked in Ukraine.
Quote from: Valmy on April 20, 2015, 01:24:47 PM
Quote from: Martinus on April 20, 2015, 01:19:14 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 20, 2015, 01:11:15 PM
Were the Poles merely collaborating when they took a chunk out of Czechoslovakia?
That was a pretty shitty (and dumb) move.
In Poland's defense at least that was done by a small clique of generals.
Though, knowing Eastern Europe, it was probably popular.
I think it was felt that it righted some perceived past wrong (I think the majority of it was ethnically Polish but Czechoslovakia annexed it in 1919 when Poland was occupied in a war with the Soviets). Of course, most territorial annexations are justified that way (see most recently: Crimea), and of course in retrospect it was a rather shitty and dumb move as I said.
It's similar to today's rumblings of Hungary to annex some parts of Ukraine (especially if, say, in a couple of years, Russia would invade Hungary).
Quote from: Barrister on April 20, 2015, 01:41:18 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 20, 2015, 12:56:17 PM
My knowledge is shallow at best, but I was under the understanding that the Poles were pretty anti-Semitic themselves, pre-war, and there were examples aplenty of willing or even enthusiastic cooperation with the Nazi's when it came to rounding up the Jews and shoving them into the ghettos, for example. Kind of a "Well, it sucks to be occupied by the Nazi's, but at least they are taking care of these damn Jews..." sort of thing.
I am very willing to be shown wrong on this however...
The germans took such a uniquely hostile approach in Poland that I think very few actively collaborated in any way. In other places the Germans would show up and annex the place, making everyone German citizens, or they would install a puppet government that people could still attach some loyalty to. But no, the Germans felt they were erasing the very existence of the Polish nation. The General Government was a pure colony, with the intention of making it purely German after the war.
No matter how much you dislike Jews, it's pretty hard for a Pole to go along with that program.
There also wasn't the "at least they're not the Soviets" philosophy that worked in Ukraine.
Yeah, it is really difficult to compare the situation in Poland with really any other occupied nation. Of course there were a lot of shitty Poles and they were not just bad apples (generally, Poland was very catholic, illiterate, backward and antisemitic at the time - all things being equal, it was a lot like modern day Poland in my mind - only now people are more homophobic than antisemitic) but also there were a lot of pretty decent, upstanding Poles. I think the urban vs. rural split grumbler mentions is a pretty decent rule of the thumb on this, with the rural areas' folk being very backward, obscurantist and antisemitic.
By the way, the plural for "Nazi" is "Nazis". "Nazi's" is a possessive.
It always astonishes me how many native speakers constantly get this wrong.
Quote from: Martinus on April 20, 2015, 02:03:41 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 20, 2015, 01:41:18 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 20, 2015, 12:56:17 PM
My knowledge is shallow at best, but I was under the understanding that the Poles were pretty anti-Semitic themselves, pre-war, and there were examples aplenty of willing or even enthusiastic cooperation with the Nazi's when it came to rounding up the Jews and shoving them into the ghettos, for example. Kind of a "Well, it sucks to be occupied by the Nazi's, but at least they are taking care of these damn Jews..." sort of thing.
I am very willing to be shown wrong on this however...
The germans took such a uniquely hostile approach in Poland that I think very few actively collaborated in any way. In other places the Germans would show up and annex the place, making everyone German citizens, or they would install a puppet government that people could still attach some loyalty to. But no, the Germans felt they were erasing the very existence of the Polish nation. The General Government was a pure colony, with the intention of making it purely German after the war.
No matter how much you dislike Jews, it's pretty hard for a Pole to go along with that program.
There also wasn't the "at least they're not the Soviets" philosophy that worked in Ukraine.
Yeah, it is really difficult to compare the situation in Poland with really any other occupied nation. Of course there were a lot of shitty Poles and they were not just bad apples (generally, Poland was very catholic, illiterate, backward and antisemitic at the time - all things being equal, it was a lot like modern day Poland in my mind - only now people are more homophobic than antisemitic) but also there were a lot of pretty decent, upstanding Poles. I think the urban vs. rural split grumbler mentions is a pretty decent rule of the thumb on this, with the rural areas' folk being very backward, obscurantist and antisemitic.
I think this is a pretty good point, and in respects to the OP, while even if what I said is nominally accurate, the unique violence of the German occupation makes comments that are very generic like this guys perhaps technically accurate, but lacking in the nuance needed to make it not be needlessly inflammatory. It draws a very general parallel between Germans and Poles circa WW2 that might be not strictly incorrect in the specifics of what is being said, but leads to a clearly false conclusion among anyone who does not have a nuanced understanding of the situation.
Quote from: Martinus on April 20, 2015, 02:07:33 PM
By the way, the plural for "Nazi" is "Nazis". "Nazi's" is a possessive.
It always astonishes me how many native speakers constantly get this wrong.
I am astonished myself at how much people get their panty/panties/pantie's all bunched up over things like this...
Quote from: Berkut on April 20, 2015, 02:24:49 PM
I think this is a pretty good point, and in respects to the OP, while even if what I said is nominally accurate, the unique violence of the German occupation makes comments that are very generic like this guys perhaps technically accurate, but lacking in the nuance needed to make it not be needlessly inflammatory. It draws a very general parallel between Germans and Poles circa WW2 that might be not strictly incorrect in the specifics of what is being said, but leads to a clearly false conclusion among anyone who does not have a nuanced understanding of the situation.
the original statements don't refer to "Germans" or "Poles" at all; it refers to "the murderers and accomplices." If modern Poles choose to think of ordinary Poles of 1939-1945 that way, they can choose to be offended. The problem, of course, is that people are responding not to what was said, but to what they think must have been said based on the (faux) outrage. After all, if Comey wasn't saying insulting things, why would the Polish leadership be outraged?
Only the murderers and accomplices need to be outraged.
Quote from: Berkut on April 20, 2015, 02:24:49 PM
Quote from: Martinus on April 20, 2015, 02:03:41 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 20, 2015, 01:41:18 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 20, 2015, 12:56:17 PM
My knowledge is shallow at best, but I was under the understanding that the Poles were pretty anti-Semitic themselves, pre-war, and there were examples aplenty of willing or even enthusiastic cooperation with the Nazi's when it came to rounding up the Jews and shoving them into the ghettos, for example. Kind of a "Well, it sucks to be occupied by the Nazi's, but at least they are taking care of these damn Jews..." sort of thing.
I am very willing to be shown wrong on this however...
The germans took such a uniquely hostile approach in Poland that I think very few actively collaborated in any way. In other places the Germans would show up and annex the place, making everyone German citizens, or they would install a puppet government that people could still attach some loyalty to. But no, the Germans felt they were erasing the very existence of the Polish nation. The General Government was a pure colony, with the intention of making it purely German after the war.
No matter how much you dislike Jews, it's pretty hard for a Pole to go along with that program.
There also wasn't the "at least they're not the Soviets" philosophy that worked in Ukraine.
Yeah, it is really difficult to compare the situation in Poland with really any other occupied nation. Of course there were a lot of shitty Poles and they were not just bad apples (generally, Poland was very catholic, illiterate, backward and antisemitic at the time - all things being equal, it was a lot like modern day Poland in my mind - only now people are more homophobic than antisemitic) but also there were a lot of pretty decent, upstanding Poles. I think the urban vs. rural split grumbler mentions is a pretty decent rule of the thumb on this, with the rural areas' folk being very backward, obscurantist and antisemitic.
I think this is a pretty good point, and in respects to the OP, while even if what I said is nominally accurate, the unique violence of the German occupation makes comments that are very generic like this guys perhaps technically accurate, but lacking in the nuance needed to make it not be needlessly inflammatory. It draws a very general parallel between Germans and Poles circa WW2 that might be not strictly incorrect in the specifics of what is being said, but leads to a clearly false conclusion among anyone who does not have a nuanced understanding of the situation.
I think you hit the nail on its head.
Quote from: Martinus on April 20, 2015, 02:50:18 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 20, 2015, 02:24:49 PM
I think this is a pretty good point, and in respects to the OP, while even if what I said is nominally accurate, the unique violence of the German occupation makes comments that are very generic like this guys perhaps technically accurate, but lacking in the nuance needed to make it not be needlessly inflammatory. It draws a very general parallel between Germans and Poles circa WW2 that might be not strictly incorrect in the specifics of what is being said, but leads to a clearly false conclusion among anyone who does not have a nuanced understanding of the situation.
I think you hit the nail on its head.
I the sense that he completely misses Comey's point, yes. I think he misses the nail, though, in that he isn't deliberately misconstruing Comey's argument in order to justify his feelings of outrage. I just think he hasn't read the statement very carefully (it's not just "not strictly incorrect," it is a statement of opinion that has considerable academic support) and so incorrectly thinks it was a statement about Germans and Poles rather than murders and accomplices.
Quote from: grumbler on April 21, 2015, 07:00:58 AM
Quote from: Martinus on April 20, 2015, 02:50:18 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 20, 2015, 02:24:49 PM
I think this is a pretty good point, and in respects to the OP, while even if what I said is nominally accurate, the unique violence of the German occupation makes comments that are very generic like this guys perhaps technically accurate, but lacking in the nuance needed to make it not be needlessly inflammatory. It draws a very general parallel between Germans and Poles circa WW2 that might be not strictly incorrect in the specifics of what is being said, but leads to a clearly false conclusion among anyone who does not have a nuanced understanding of the situation.
I think you hit the nail on its head.
I the sense that he completely misses Comey's point, yes. I think he misses the nail, though, in that he isn't deliberately misconstruing Comey's argument in order to justify his feelings of outrage. I just think he hasn't read the statement very carefully (it's not just "not strictly incorrect," it is a statement of opinion that has considerable academic support) and so incorrectly thinks it was a statement about Germans and Poles rather than murders and accomplices.
I don't miss his point at all, I just think his statement is not going too be narrowly interpreted in the manner you suggest.
It is very easy to say things that are strictly factually true but suggest things that can and will be taken by people that are very much NOT true.
For example, one could say "The Nazi's and Pole's who worked together to exterminate the Jews were terrible people". That is absolutely true, and yet suggests something that is very much NOT true - that the Poles had some kind of equivalent role to the Nazi's, and someone who knows little about the Holocaust could very well see a statement like that and draw very incorrect conclusions from it. You can argue, of course, that that is a failure on their part, but it is also a failure on the part of the person making the *public* statement as well.
There are plenty of cases where people make comments in that vein where it is in fact intentional to say one very narrow thing while misleading about the more general conclusion. I don't think that is the case here, but the remarks were not well considered. But I find it a poor rhetorical trick when done intentionally, and unfortunate when done unintentionally.
I am not outraged, as I am neither a Pole or a German or a Jew, but I can certainly understand why they would be upset at the implication that some will take from those kinds of comments.
Quote from: Berkut on April 21, 2015, 09:37:07 AM
I don't miss his point at all, I just think his statement is not going too be narrowly interpreted in the manner you suggest.
I think that people who want to be offended will misinterpret his statement (or, if you prefer, "interpret so loosely as to miss his point"), and people who are just looking at his statement itself will interpret is correctly (what you insist is "narrowly"). If you want to misinterpret his statement for the thrill of being outraged, you will. if you want to interpret his statement correctly/narrowly for information, you will. You choose.
QuoteIt is very easy to say things that are strictly factually true but suggest things that can and will be taken by people that are very much NOT true.
For example, one could say "The Nazi's and Pole's who worked together to exterminate the Jews were terrible people". That is absolutely true, and yet suggests something that is very much NOT true - that the Poles had some kind of equivalent role to the Nazi's, and someone who knows little about the Holocaust could very well see a statement like that and draw very incorrect conclusions from it. You can argue, of course, that that is a failure on their part, but it is also a failure on the part of the person making the *public* statement as well.
I am not sure where you are going with this. You can make up any statement you wish, and then create a false statement that you think could be confused with an actual statement, and then... what? Magic? Failure to read is failure to read. Intentional misinterpretation is intentional. there is nothing anyone making a statement can do about either of those.
QuoteI am not outraged, as I am neither a Pole or a German or a Jew, but I can certainly understand why they would be upset at the implication that some will take from those kinds of comments.
So you are arguing that it is understandable that Polish leader's are outraged because someone else might misinterpret Comey's word's?
I am arguing that is understandable that people are upset at comments that are likely to create confusing and inaccurate perceptions of history, especially when that is about history as emotive as the German occupation of Poland and the Holocaust.
I think it was a pretty clumsy statement and could have been worded a lot better.
Quote from: derspiess on April 21, 2015, 10:06:39 AM
I think it was a pretty clumsy statement and could have been worded a lot better.
it was a verbal statement, not a written one, so, yeah, it is going to sound kinda clumsy when written down.
Stripped of the adjectives and subordinate clauses, the statement was ""In their minds, the murderers and accomplices... didn't do something evil. They convinced themselves it was the right thing to do, the thing they had to do. That's what people do. And that should truly frighten us." Not very outrageous at all. In fact, that's what
Ordinary Men was all about.
Quote from: Berkut on April 21, 2015, 10:01:24 AM
I am arguing that is understandable that people are upset at comments that are likely to create confusing and inaccurate perceptions of history, especially when that is about history as emotive as the German occupation of Poland and the Holocaust.
All statements are likely to (and in fact, 100%
will) create confusion and inaccurate perceptions. Some people are just unwilling or unable to comprehend. I'm arguing that the likely reactions of stupid people should not cause self-censorship.
Quote from: derspiess on April 20, 2015, 10:46:47 AM
Quote from: Valmy on April 20, 2015, 10:33:00 AM
Well this was actually kind of a messy thing. IIRC there were two political entities formed from annexed Poland. The governors were told to 'Germanize' their province. One decided to just declare everybody who lived there to be German.
I read an article a while back that said the German authorities were puzzled when people resisted this in parts of Poland and other areas like Slovenia. I guess they asssumed that people there would be honored to have the opportunity to become German. I mean, it should be pretty easy to get people to ditch their own language and ethnicity, right?
I thought a lot were sent to the General Government from Posen/Posznan and those areas that were annexed? I may be wrong, as it's been long since I read Mark Mazower's account.
The point is that Hitler had a personal problem with two groups apart from Jews; Poles and Czechs. He wanted both off the map. The Czechs did get off somewhat easier. Not to mention that Poland's "liberators" didn't much care for them either.
Poznan, not Posznan. ;)
:face:
Another scandal, this time caused by Mattel:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CDTwmgNVEAA2k7Q.jpg)
:lol:
"Shouldn't we write 'Nazi occupied Poland?'"
"Nah, not enough space on the card. Besides, who'll notice?"
Quote from: Syt on April 24, 2015, 03:00:34 AM
"Shouldn't we write 'Nazi occupied Poland?'"
"Nah, not enough space on the card. Besides, who'll notice?"
Yeah. Pretty much. :lol:
They don't even have the excuse of lack of space:
Powerful, real-life story of
Nazi-occupied Poland
See, things like this make me lose my faith in humanity.
Poles have a right to be somewhat miffed at Mattel for this. Yet calls for an international arrest warrant to be sent after the CEO of Mattel seem like we may be overreacting.
I'd be more upset that the Apple looks really excited about the holocaust.
Quote from: Martinus on April 24, 2015, 04:43:58 AM
Yet calls for an international arrest warrant to be sent after the CEO of Mattel seem like we may be overreacting.
If calling people Nazis completely unjustifiably was against the law there wouldn't be anybody left in the US :lol:
Poles are really freaking out about this one, by the way.
Or at least Poles on the Internet. Which may or may not be representative. :hmm:
Are they really under the impression people confuse them with the Nazis? I mean besides the Russians of course.
Quote from: Martinus on April 24, 2015, 09:48:10 AM
Poles are really freaking out about this one, by the way.
Or at least Poles on the Internet. Which may or may not be representative. :hmm:
About the Mattel one?? :huh:
Yes. They seem to think Americans think Poles were Nazis.
We think alot of stupid things about foreign countries here but nobody thinks this.
Yes and yes.
Apparently it is all a plot of :Joos to get Poland to pay reparations.
Quote from: Martinus on April 24, 2015, 09:51:29 AM
Apparently it is all a plot of :Joos to get Poland to pay reparations.
Ok Poland if you want to reassure us you are not Nazis this is not a good way to do it.
Quote from: Valmy on April 24, 2015, 09:52:13 AM
Quote from: Martinus on April 24, 2015, 09:51:29 AM
Apparently it is all a plot of :Joos to get Poland to pay reparations.
Ok Poland if you want to reassure us you are not Nazis this is not a good way to do it.
No kidding. It's funny how people most offended by this seem to be vitriolically antisemitic.
No smoke without fire. I'm leaning towards the Poles were Nazis camp now. The evidence keeps piling up and it gets harder and harder to dismiss.
Quote from: The Brain on April 24, 2015, 12:09:45 PM
No smoke without fire. I'm leaning towards the Poles were Nazis camp now. The evidence keeps piling up and it gets harder and harder to dismiss.
It's never a good thing when the Nazis invite you to camp.
Carry On Up The Chimney is the best Holocaust movie IMHO.