91-year-old German woman charged on Nazi allegations
Source: AP
BERLIN (AP) German prosecutors say they've charged a 91-year-old woman with 260,000 counts of accessory to murder on allegations she was a member of the Nazi SS who served in the Auschwitz death camp complex.
Schleswig-Holstein prosecutors' spokesman Heinz Doellel said Monday the woman, whose name wasn't disclosed due to German privacy laws, is alleged to have served as a radio operator for the camp commandant from April to July 1944.
Prosecutors argue that she can be charged as an accessory because she helped the death camp function. A 94-year-old former SS sergeant at Auschwitz was convicted on the same reasoning earlier this year.
Doellel says there are no indications the woman is unfit for trial, though a court likely won't decide on whether to proceed with the case until next year.
Read more: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/bb4acf17e6ca4483a3c58f8483a6d987/91-year-old-german-woman-charged-nazi-allegations
jwirr
(39,215 posts)of mine. He and a bunch of other boys were arrested for stealing gas from a farmer's tank. He said "I did not do it. I was only holding the funnel."
If you are helping another person commit a crime you are an accessory.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)So where does the guilt end? This gal wore a uniform and operated a radio. Certainly, her duties were important and certainly, she knew what was going on at that camp. But where does it end? What about the engineers who ran the trains that brought the prisoners to the camps. Certainly, they didn't have the notion they were bringing folks to vacation sites. Of course, there's the maintenance crews that kept the train running - and the local townspeople - they had to know what was really going on inside all that fencing and guarding.
I don't know...... in Vietnam I helped to see that our bombers were able to deliver their death-dealing loads against folks I never knew. Many of whom I'm SURE had nothing to do with the enemy combatants. Now my president wants to do a trade pact with them (the Vietnamese) so I can keep on wearing clothes they produce cheaply. So was I bad for collaborating in blasting strangers or good for insuring I'd have inexpensive clothes to wear?
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)hitler would have had no power.
Demeter
(85,373 posts)in that "everyone".
Hitler didn't do it with people power--he did it with Big Money! Because Big Money had reduced
Germany to slavery after WWI.
It's a game Big Money likes to play....back and forth, back and forth, and each swing nets another golden shower of riches for the 1%...
and when the designated "tool" starts to fail: be it called Hitler, Saddam, Ghadaffi, then the tool is discarded, and another tool made.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)I don't have a problem with any of the above entities that you mentioned paying reparations to the surviving family members if they haven't already. If they knew they were complicit in mass murder then there's no excuse. if they didn't know what Hitler was doing with the money then they should be ashamed of themselves.
edit; reason number 5712 why we need to disempower the oligarchy in this country and replace it with governing entities that look out for the people.
Demeter
(85,373 posts)restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Why do they get off so easily? If they were complicit in thousands or millions of murders, why haven't those companies been disbanded, their executives back then thrown in jail?
Reason number 5712 why we need 'corporate death sentences' for corporations that commit crimes.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)liquidating the assets of companies made of blood money to compensate the victims' survivors. but since most of people involved are dead, a current ceo should not be put in prison for running a company that at one time was involved in these murders. otoh, companies that are complicit in current crimes against humanity and profit from it, well that is different. i assumed the person was talking about people alive today who inherited a company with blood in its history but was not alive at the time of the crimes.
and yes, I agree with you that murderers are not less horrid because they exist in the form of a corporation. those that are involved in current crimes and profit from suffering should be prosecuted to the hilt.
24601
(3,963 posts)its conviction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Andersen
jwirr
(39,215 posts)those camps was and is still a war crime.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)bucolic_frolic
(43,423 posts)to continue to operate the radio, what would they have done to her?
She would have been disobeying orders.
That could get a lot of soldiers killed in Nazi Germany. Most armies in fact.
Could she have stood for compassion, tolerance, humanity where she was at?
I doubt it.
btw, I don't think you foresaw the clothes you would wear. You did what you
were told. You didn't make up the battle plans. You were told to defend southeast
Asia from the Communist invasions which would make the countries fall like "dominoes"
into Chinese and Soviet hands. You were told it was political.
Now we know it was also economic. Free markets, mineral resources for capitalism, not
for communism. If they invaded, they were going to steal our food, clothes, and refrigerators.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)rest to her crimes. We aren't talking about small things. 260000 lives not lived. Put her away and take her out in a box.
840high
(17,196 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)the "bad cops" do bad things.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)jamzrockz
(1,333 posts)at the death camps can be charged as an accessory to murder? I personally think there should be an age limit for this sort of crimes. These people are very likely to be suffering some from some form of dementia. I can't imagine them being able to remember what happened and therefore won't be able to defend themselves.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)living and doing what they liked in the world, enjoying their families, while their victims remained dead and families were wiped out and entire people devastated, we're supposed to take pity on them because they might have some kind of age-related disease? No, sorry. they sure as hell don't get to play the victim card.
And yes, the cook should be charged as accessory imo.
philosslayer
(3,076 posts)What would you have done in such a circumstance. The cook was likely a military member who was drafted. He was then assigned to be a cook in a death camp. Putting yourself in his place, your options are 1) cook, 2) refuse to cook and be shot. Your choice?
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)what i like to think i might have done in that circumstance. But i will be completely honest and say that I can't know. On the other hand, if the person commanded to shoot the cook who refused to cook also said no, and the person commanded to shoot him said no, the domino effect would've taken over and Hitler would've been rendered powerless. He did not have the capability to murder all those people personally. he had a lot of help. I'm not saying I don't feel for the guy in his desire to remain alive, but I don't think we can ignore the fact that a great many people not only were complicit directly, but were complicit by turning a blind eye. that's how great atrocities can happen, not just because of the person doing it, but because of the people then enable it.
edit,,..hit return too soon. i'm not going to argue with you that it's not a complicated world, it is. And most of the time imo it just plain sucks.
philosslayer
(3,076 posts)But you just condemned a cook. Are you therefore willing to condemn the cooks at Guataneamo?
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)in population between suspected terrorists at gitmo and completely innocent victims ripped from their lives and brutally murdered. I also haven't seen a war crimes trial suggesting that the US military or the entire US population conspired or was complicit in the systematic murder of a particular group of people. if and when that occurs, I imagine many of us would have to reassess our opinions. we now know what the psychologists were doing, at least that's a start.
ps i am not saying i would have hanged the nazi cook. but does he skate free? imo no
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)economic terrorists. At least, that's the pretense they were killed for.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)where, besides in hitlers deluded mind, were these "crimes" being committed?
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)and I'm not willing to recount whole of history of the first half of the 20th century. Hitler was a focal point of hope (much like Donald Trump is) for the dispirited German populace. And he gathered like-minded vermin to help devise and spread his demented ideals. There were many Germans who saw thru what was going on and hated it, but they were (or at least FELT they were) powerless to stop what was happening. And folks needed JOBS - and they craved national honor -and they took what the Nazi regime offered them. Soldiers could expect to have to kill - lesser military roles could seem downright mundane. And mundane, with a regular paycheck, was probably pretty comfy after years of poverty and disrespect. Hitler didn't come to power in the 30s by proclaiming his primary goal was to purge the country of undesirables.
Hell, we're seeing the same sort of thing going on against Muslim folks in this country. Look at the kid with the clock! He didn't end up as charred remains, but it's a start - what's been done to him. All those who rose to the occasion in making an example of him - and being confirmed to have done so - how come they're still holding their positions? Shouldn't that school have a lot of open slots because a number of staff quit on principle? Or would it be reasonable to assume there wouldn't be faculty flight, given that those involved would rather not start at the bottom of the pay scale at some new place of employ?
There were likely some Nazi guards who were herding new arrives - poking them to move with their bayonets or rifle butts - who didn't like the predicament they found themselves in. Of course - they did have a choice. They could apply for a transfer or throw down their rifle and fall in with the doomed they'd been herding. Which option would you have chosen?
I'm NOT advocating for the holocaust - or for a pass for those on the perpetration side. I AM saying that common sense needs to come into play now and then. Put yourself I this gal's boots. Imagine going to your Nazi officer in charge and telling him your conscience won't let you continue. Realistically consider what fate might await you and what impact your demise would have on the flow of innocents to the ovens.
I WILL concede that if the charges against this gal were that she was a torturous guard who personally beat and killed prisoners - yeah, her prosecution would be fair. But a radio operator???
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)the expression "those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it" comes to mind.
and yes there should be some consequences for that school, and i suspect there will be, in the form of civil lawsuits. those who made the decision to persecute this kid should have the most serious consequence or pay the highest part of the suit (in other words, reparations proportional to culpability).
and i certainly would not advocate this woman get the same punishment as those who directly did the killing, but something commensurate to her role in the unit...i don't know what that would be.
I will freely admit that one of my biggest flaws as a human being is that I'm not particularly good at gray in a world that is full of gray. On those personality tests I always come out as the idealist. I think that justice and fairness should exist just because it's right. Maybe that's why i support Bernie. it's something I continue to work on, to understand the pragmatic versus the ideal, what is possible versus what should be. And for what it's worth, I don't recommend going through life as an idealist if you can avoid it. It's a good way to get your heart broken on nearly a daily basis.
peace,
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)It's gotta be tough - striving for the ideal all the time. Matter of fact, I married just such a person (OMG! TWICE - now that I think about it!) She's changed thru the years, but her self-loathing makes her life much more complicated than mine - if that makes sense. She's the one that's been on various anxiety meds for the last 30 years. The meds make it possible for her to function in a less-than-perfect world and deal with her less-than-perfect functions therein. We're different in that I don't CARE whether or not what I do turns out perfect in the end. If it's functional and durable - what's not to like?
Thanks for your reply.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)but we are what we are I suppose. I am also in one of those "mixed marriages" where my husband is much more willing to accept things as they are. I suppose opposites attract and probably help balance each other out. I have studied Buddhism, and other eastern religions a lot over the years, and it's one of the things that has helped me deal with the fact that life is not perfect and that people and the world itself oftentimes really sucks.
namaste
840high
(17,196 posts)Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)to mention these others that were persecuted - but their mention wasn't important to the point I was trying to make. That's why I didn't take care to list them. I'll bet there were others as well.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)are one thing. IF you'd found yourself assigned to operating that radio and had had thoughts about the impact of your work - how strongly would you protest, knowing that you'd likely be shot or end up in the ovens yourself? It's a question one has to ask themselves before they just condemn everyone who had/has ANY role in such situations.
WhoWoodaKnew
(847 posts)and then we'll go to work or school, come home and eat. Watch some TV and go to bed. It's easy to be brave now.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)DustyJoe
(849 posts)Using this analogy, the supply clerk, supply chopper pilot supplying Lt. Calley and his platoon with food and ammunition resupply that killed the people of My Lai in 1968 should also have stood trial for the deaths.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)was a unique entity, and the trials showed that the complicity reached far and wide. I don't know enough about Vietnam to even begin to unravel that war and wouldn't even try other than to say we never belonged there in the first place imo and the US government was the premier decision-maker obviously. I'm glad I'm not in charge of the decisions about the World War II perpetrators. I just don't believe that people who had knowledge of and participated in acts that lead to mass murder should get a free pass. I don't know how it would all breakdown.
NonMetro
(631 posts)And if people follow the chain far enough, pretty soon everyone in the world will be charged!
tabasco
(22,974 posts)you'd be okay with letting them off if they didn't get caught until they were 90?
People had to volunteer for duty with the SS at death camps.
jamzrockz
(1,333 posts)I would first of all consider the role the person is accused of playing. Was he a camp commandant, Hitler's right hand man or just low level worker who probably joined the war as a way to survive. I would consider a lot of thing but I am fairly certain that after such a time has passed, I would forgive the person.
They say "time heals all wounds" and 60 yrs plus is plenty of time for me.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)But I believe justice must be served despite a criminal's successful escape.
840high
(17,196 posts)Sunlei
(22,651 posts)It has taken a lifetime for the Foundation to find these hiding war criminals.
Only one foundation was ever started to find these war criminals. If ANY of the governments had helped it wouldn't have taken as long to find the regular SS members. Nuremberg trials were never enough justice, not even close. Those trials should have gone on until every member of nazi SS were identified.
jamzrockz
(1,333 posts)directly involved in the gassing operation. What I have a problem with is when they go after low level and side workers. Yes, everybody who worked in any part of the gassing operation is guilty (of something) but I think the ones with power should be the ones to pay for the crimes. Also the age, I just cant see the justice in putting a 91 yr old up for crimes he/she did 70 yrs ago.
God knows what I would do if someone put me in her shoes. I am not a bad person but I am not sure I would have challenged the orders from my superior especially if it didn't directly involve me killing anyone.
Hestia
(3,818 posts)that hunted Nazi's all over the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Wiesenthal
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)Thank you for the link
appalachiablue
(41,184 posts)Auschwitz concentration and extermination camp in Poland that had the sadistic "Arbeit Macht Frei"= 'work makes you free' slogan over the entrance gate like the notorious Dachau camp established in 1934 near Munich. His mother and father were young Hungarian Jews transported to Auschwitz in cattle cars. He showed me on his arms where the tattooed id numbers of his parents were located.
The radio operator worked for the commandant, the commander of the extensive Auschwitz network for the SS, the Schutz-Staffel, the powerful Third Reich organization built upon Nazi ideology and responsible for crimes against humanity during WWII, primarily carrying out the Holocaust. This woman didn't work in a hotel in Berlin and clearly knew the function of Auschwitz.
Many German war workers like this woman have lived a full, free life into their 90s, unlike the prisoners and slave laborers in the camps where they worked. Auschwitz and the nearby IG Farben chemical plant exploited prisoners, and the women employed there were under the supervision of SS camp officials in charge who had millions of political prisoners, Romani, Poles, foreigners, homosexuals and Jews, part of Nazi 'Final Solution', tortured, starved, worked to death and exterminated.
PHOTO, Nazi SS camp workers and guards at Bergen-Belsen. German women worked as secretaries, guards, nurses, doctors, domestics, administrators, female companions and in brothels at Nazi labor and concentration camps.
While the Nazi workers alive today may not have all their faculties in tact to recall all and are possibly 'suffering from some dementia' as you say, I'm sure this woman hasn't forgot her time at Auschwitz. And millions of others do remember the events from 70 years ago. People around the world have not forgotten the losses and horrors of that time and will not. My friend well remembers his parents who were prisoners who fortunately survived Auschwitz.
I'm familiar with the history of the war and have uniform insignia of my father when he was in the 7th Army as a 24 year old 1st lieutenant. He gave me these items and others like the SS patches pictured, from the Dachau camp which he helped liberate in April 1945, after receiving the bronze star for courage in combat during the Rhineland Campaign in Germany that I display as my avatar.
PHOTO, liberated prisoners at Auschwitz with Soviet Union military late Jan. 1945. This reminds me of the sad story my father told of Dachau where he saw emaciated, but gleeful, newly freed Polish prisoners who mistakenly drank industrial alcohol to celebrate and perished.
PHOTO, canister of Zyklon B poison crystals from WWII. Zyklon B was used to kill victims by the thousands in the gas chambers of death camps. In the US government collection of Captured Military Records from WWII Nazi Germany in the National Archives where I worked, I saw containers of Zyklon B gas and many objects, documents and materials from the War and Holocaust.
A curator colleague at the National Holocaust Museum works with artifacts including warehouse shelves of hair, teeth, eyeglasses and personal items removed from deceased camp inmates by workers to use for filling mattresses, recycling and aiding German citizens and military of the Third Reich.
Demeter
(85,373 posts)If the woman was in uniform, she was serving in the army.
Enough is enough.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)war crime and can be held accountable for it and the definition of a war crime comes directly from what happened in those camps as described in the Geneva Conventions.
I know we do not listen to them any more but that is a big mistake.
Demeter
(85,373 posts)Please, if you want people to commit suicide, be honest about it. Say they had to, as a matter of conscience, if that's what you really want to have happen.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)define the war crimes in the camps are still used today. It is my understanding that in the US military a soldier can refuse to obey an action that he considers to be a war crime. That is good. And I actually do not know a time that any of them have had to do that. But like our soldier's the Nazi's had choices. It is the Nazi's who failed to make the choices not our soldiers.
You are really not reading what I said correctly. That woman had a choice. She knew what was being done and she continued to help the camp run efficiently. Her choice.
Travis_0004
(5,417 posts)If the order he refuses was unlawful, then nothing should happen to him.
If he refuses a lawful order he could get discharged; or even have a military trial and have other punishment.
In Germany in 1945, your commander could shoot you on the spot, and they get a new radio operator.
gladium et scutum
(808 posts)if the order was unlawful. That soldiers general court martial board will make that decision.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)There are extensive records and witness testimonies of German military members refusing to be part of what they considered immoral (if not illegal) activities. Mostly, they were assigned to other duty. Sometimes their careers suffered if they were career minded. They were not shot on the spot, or sent to the East.
The sad fact is that many who engaged in these activities, from KL guards to police battalions shooting Jewish civilians in the forests, either wanted to to that or were wishy washy enough to get pulled along. Many were true believers in the Nazi ideology. It's actually remarkable how many DID say "Nope, not for me." They were shuffled off with a sneer, and others in the unit gave them shit about it, but they rarely suffered any other consequences.
Behind the Aegis
(54,032 posts)Seems more than a few aren't quite up to snuff when it comes to knowledge of the Holocaust and WWII. Generally, the only ones "shot on sight" for refusing to do their Holocaust "duties" were other prisoners. The refusal to murder innocent civilians, especially children, are what led to the death factories. Many of the men had a very difficult time, also, the leadership were afraid of what kind of soldier they were creating and if such a soldier would actually be able to be controlled in the future. Of course, the death camps didn't start up right away, they started with explosives (which created too much of a mess), portable gas chambers (trucks), which became a logistical nightmare, and then there was the tried and true, getting the local populace to do the dirty work, but when those people realized they would be next, they "grew" a conscious and started providing help to the Jews. As far as am I am concerned, some of the comments equate to nothing more than "get over it."
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)We have good evidence that even Himmler himself was sickened and demoralized by an Einsatzgrup Aktion that he witnessed in Ukraine, and pushed for other, umm, options. Even by late 1941, the Aktions had turned into chaotic sites of refusals, absenteeism, minor mutinies, and drunkenness, but also increasing savagery by those who chose to prosecute them fully (and "tourism" by members of the nearby Wehrmacht, let's not forget).
Despite decades of very good historical research, people still don't understand the Holocaust, as you note. The tendency to excuse Germans who participated because of the perception that they were "following orders" is still very strong. The rejection of that defense at Nuremburg really looms large as a radical legal act.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)FreedomRain
(413 posts)There were, but AFAICT they hadn't gotten around to protecting civilians yet. There were protections for PoWs and medical support, though.
gladium et scutum
(808 posts)except the persons who get to decide if you were justified in disobeyed an illegal order will be the Army officers sitting on your general court martial board.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)Another example of going after the little guys after the people who did have a say in the Holocaust were left to die of old age. When are we getting around to the Hitler's Youth, age 12 to 15 in 1945, who did some guard duty during some point in the removal of many of the survivors of the camps as the Soviet Army liberated them?
These are NOT people who did anything but obeyed orders OR "Volunteered" so they could be feed (Even under American Law, economic duress is NOT duress, thus if you are starving and agree to guard some innocent person for a slice of bread, you are committing a crime and can NOT claim Duress as the reason for what you did).
On the other hand, understanding WHY someone did Something should be a mitigating circumstance, especially given most of the people in actual command positions were permitted to die of old age in the peacefulness of their own home and family.
Things were tough in Germany in the last years of WWII. Rations were cut and given the advance of the Soviet Army, the prospect of a shortage of bread was clear (And older people would tell the young people of the severe shortages of food of the 1914-1918 period, the lost of the Ukraine in 1943 and Poland in 1944 and then France in 1944 cut off Germany from any of the areas where it could import grain from, thus returning to the situation in 1917-1918, a period of severe food shortages that lead to revolution in Germany). Thus securing food or money to buy food was a priority for anyone living in Germany in 1944-1945 period. Times were desperate, this is NOT like the period up to the invasion of Russia where Germany was getting all the grain and oil it wanted from Russia or through 1942 where Germany could steal the crops planted in Russia and the Ukraine (and Poland). We are talking of 1944, where those lands were LOST and food was becoming a real issue in Germany.
AS to the 94 year old man, he was born in 1920, and thus 20 years of age in 1940, 24 in 1944. He was also a sergeant, an Non Commissioned Officer, but an officer. I can see a line being drawn to include him, through as an NCO he had limited ability to agree to disobey orders involving the actual killings. Thus you have to look at his function and role within the larger camp. If he could have minimize harm, he should have been used as a witness to people higher up. I suspect he was not used as a witness against the people above him for the people higher up still had connections and thus no charges against them till they were long dead. Thus another example of going after a witness instead of the real criminal, the people, almost always Commissioned Officers, who were in the position to actually STOP the killings.
potone
(1,701 posts)Most people are not heroes. If your only choice is to obey orders or be shot or hanged, most people will comply. The time to stop Hitler was before he got into power. It is only our collective vigilance that protects civilization and humane values.
Igel
(35,383 posts)When necessary. It's a massive empathy failure. Doesn't mean you can't condemn the people; it just means you have to slog through the rest of the morality, not just the nice, convenient, pre-thought morality.
The more honest ones will say that they don't know if they'd be a mass murderer or face death. Those who are a bit away from that will just say "I don't know what I'd do in that situation," because then they don't have to face the admission that they might have been a mass murderer. Some will say they'd gladly be shot; most of them are just delusional.
Then again it was a different time and culture, and it's hard for people to judge those from afar off. We frequently have trouble feeling empathy for people in our own time and country.
I also don't know what radio traffic was like. Was everything coded, to prevent enemy interception--"Cargo's arriving at 4:05 a.m."? Was it explicit, "We've got a train full of 850 Jews coming to be killed, treat'em harshly"?
randys1
(16,286 posts)Just takes people to act out selfishly, to say they will only work for that which helps them, and fuck everybody else.
It takes that attitude and a whole lot more, of course.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)Did the allies know when they compiled the lists for the trials at Nuremberg? If they decided she wasn't guilty then just because she worked there, she shouldn't be tried today. On the other hand, I really want to see Dick Cheney put on trial for war crimes and I don't care how old he is. So there is that.
Behind the Aegis
(54,032 posts)The operative 'word' there is "SS". It was a voluntary, then hand-picked organization, which was based on the philosophy of the greater Nazi party, and further distinguished itself with its philosophy of "destruction of the Untermenschen. They were not the run-of-the-mill conscripted soldier.
Babel_17
(5,400 posts)That's a great point. I think though that the military SS drafted/compelled people into service near the end.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffen-SS
Even earlier then near the end according to that, for the Waffen SS. But a special branch of the SS was in charge of concentration camps, it seems. There were lots of different branches of the SS, afaik.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS-Totenkopfverb%C3%A4nde
Huh, but there's this.
in 1942 all camp personnel were folded into the Waffen-SS to allow for easier rotation of wounded Waffen-SS personnel into camp positions and for camp personnel to be easily transferred into combat units should the need arise.
It's hard to imagine they found her by coincidence or are thinking of prosecuting her on a whim, so who knows. She might have been similar in spirit to that guard from Lina Wertmuller's Seven Beauties.
I guess it's a matter of wait and see.
Edit: My memory was off. The woman from the concentration camp was the Commandant.
Xithras
(16,191 posts)Combat SS were volunteers, but there were exceptions. The Auxiliary SS, which helped to run the concentration camps at the very end of the war, were primarily conscripts. They were brought in mostly as cannon fodder when the Germans realized that they'd lost the war, and their job was to keep the camps running while the Waffen SS were either shifted to combat positions or tried to escape Germany. Very few of them were ever prosecuted because most were conscripted forcibly.
That doesn't apply in this case though. The Auxiliary SS didn't start serving in the death camps until the very end of the war, in 1945. The woman is being charged with serving for several months in 1944.
One other branch of non-volunteers were the Orpo, or the organized police forces in Germany. In 1936 the Nazi government consolidated all "law enforcement" under the SS. While this obviously included the Gestapo and other famous SS units, and while it included MANY law enforcement units that later participated in atrocities, it also included less objectionable groups like firefighters, rail watchmen, postal inspectors, and the German version of the FCC. For much of the war officers in the Orpo had a choice of whether to become SS or not (and they were permitted to remain outside of the SS), but toward the end of the war the Nazi's changed the rules so that all police of a certain rank were granted SS membership automatically. Once this happened, quite a few police, firefighters, and other civil servants were pushed into the SS when they received promotions or were given certain orders. Opting out wasn't an option.
Again, however, I don't think it applies here.
In all probability, she was a member of the SS Womens Helper Corps (SS Helferinnenkorps or Helferin). Basically, the Nazi's set up entire schools just to indoctrinate teenage girls in Nazi ideology. They were taught how to be good mothers, were drilled in Aryan racist ideals, and were trained in various skills seen as useful to the Nazi's. Volunteers from these schools were pulled into the Womens Helper Corps where they served as Nazi administrative staff, support staff, guards, and other non combat or light arms roles. One of their roles was COMMUNICATIONS...they were radio operators. Starting in 1942, some of them were assigned to serve out these duties at the concentration camps. The records were destroyed so there's no way to know exactly how many of them existed, but their numbers were in the thousands.
She would have been 17 or 18 in 1942, when the Nazi's started recruiting women into these schools, which is a perfect match. She would have been finished by 1944 and ready to serve the SS Helferinnenkorps at that point. Both her posting (at a concentration camp) and her job (a radio operator) are consistent with the type of work she'd have been doing with them. If she was Helferin, and she probably was, she was there because she volunteered.
Babel_17
(5,400 posts)Very informative, thanks. Yeah, volunteering into that SS Helper Corps would probably be a big factor in this case. I was just reading another article, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/21/german-woman-charged-nazi-allegations-auschwitz-death-camp, and some of the comments had me thinking.
In the past, when prosecutors were going after Nazis by the score, a lot of lesser fish seemed less horrible by comparison and many people who enabled that Nazi horror show were either left alone or given relatively short sentences. We were making an example of former Nazis by the hundreds, and the thousands, so we weren't looking like we were being soft on the crimes of that regime.
So when today's prosecutors are (hypothetically speaking) presented with this former "member of the SS Womens Helper Corp", they're in the position of lacking credibility for applying discretion to not prosecute, because they haven't convicted any war criminals. Today's public has been taught to be sensitive to the responsibility for ones official acts. A lot of people aren't kidding when they say they want a lot of prominent politicians from among the democratic governments of the world prosecuted as war criminals.
So, there are keen eyeballs on cases like this. I guess I stick with my position that it will be useful to see what this woman's deal is. What was her thinking then, and what was it now. Was she operating the radio by rote, or was she being a good little Nazi and enthusiastically eliminating her enemies.
After the war when all the truth was known, how did she feel, what did she think. These are some of my questions. I give both her and the prosecution the benefit of the doubt as there's much more to know. The prosecution might know her as some old horror who was then, and is now, an unabashed Nazi. On the other hand, she might be another naive individual who was sucked up into the collective insanity of Hitler. She was young when the madness spread.
writer not writing
(41 posts)If she actually killed anybody, she should be prosecuted. Otherwise, leave her alone. She was a very young woman (practically a girl) who did as she was told by a totalitarian regime, where saying "no" was tantamount to suicide.
Babel_17
(5,400 posts)If it was before the age of twelve then it's hard imagine how she could grow up to avoid the command to go to a camp and operate a radio. IIRC the Hitler Youth received lots of kids starting around 1932 and was pretty mandatory by 1936.
I was told, and I pretty much believe, that a guy who retired from a construction company just before I started working there was one of those 15 year old kids who got into the Wehrmacht near the end. He was a flamethrower operator and supposedly he saw some hair raising action. He had no problem, afaik, emigrating to the USA.
So, a guy who as a kid presumably gleefully fried the Fatherland's enemies vs. a girl 5 years older who operated a radio in a hell on earth death camp. I don't know, truly I don't. If she has remorse for that whole era then I just don't see the justice in prosecuting her. Confronting her over her presence there, OK, if that will serve a higher purpose.
If she's still some sort of closet fascist who thinks Hitler was just misunderstood, that's a totally different story.
Pre-edit: Just googled it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler_Youth
The Hitler Youth (German: About this sound Hitlerjugend (help·info), often abbreviated as HJ in German) was the youth organization of the Nazi Party in Germany. Its origins dated back to 1922. From 1933 until 1945, it was the sole official youth organization in Germany and was partially a paramilitary organization; it was constituted of the Hitlerjugend proper for male youth aged 14 to 18, the Deutsches Jungvolk (German Youth) for younger boys, and the League of German Girls.
By December 1936, Hitler Youth membership had reached over five million. That same month, membership became mandatory for Aryans, under the Gesetz über die Hitlerjugend law.[13] By 1938, the Hitler Youth had over 7.7 million members. This legal obligation was reaffirmed in March 1939 with the Jugenddienstpflicht, which conscripted all German youths into the Hitler Youtheven if the parents objected. Those parents who refused to allow their children to join were told that the state would take their children away.[12] Massaquoi claims,[13] though, that the war did not allow the law to go very far. From then on, most of Germany's teenagers belonged to the Hitler Youth. By 1940, it had eight million members. Later war figures are difficult to calculate, since massive conscription efforts and a general call-up of boys as young as 10 years old meant that virtually every young male in Germany was, in some way, connected to the Hitler Youth. Only about 10 to 20% avoided joining.[14]
Lychee2
(405 posts)And yes, I'm prepared to universalize this.
branford
(4,462 posts)I see no reason to reward someone for escaping justice, and certain crimes, particularly those relating to Holocaust genocidal atrocities, deserve that the perpetrators should die in prison. In fact, they deserve far worse.
Skittles
(153,252 posts)DavidDvorkin
(19,500 posts)BigDemVoter
(4,157 posts)Many, many of the really "guilty" parties lived out their lives in tranquility until their quiet deaths.
In this woman's case, I doubt she will serve time. I still haven't made up my mind how I feel about it. If she were a Klaus Barbie or even a John Demnjanjuk, I wouldn't hesitate, and it's NOT because she's female.
In any case, my opinion is of little matter now that the German wheels of justice have started rolling. What is really a shame is that the Germans didn't take ANY of these cases seriously until relatively recently, and now the worst perpetrators are dead.
As for the Americans? Well. . . . We aren't innocent either. If a Nazi, even a murderous one, had scientific and commercial use, he/she would be allowed to come to the USA, work and have a normal life.
None of us can know how their poor victims suffered. Some of us may have family members who know from personal experience. This case is beyond me, and I'm glad I'm not responsible for making any decisions regarding this miserable old woman's fate.
branford
(4,462 posts)I still recall the identifying brand on my great-grandmother's arm.
Anyone who knowingly volunteered for duty at the concentration camps deserve nothing less than to be hanged until dead.
Dying in prison, no matter their age or how long they escaped justice, is an undeserved mercy.
Moreover, American tolerance for Nazi scientists or pervasive antisemitism in the USA in the mid-20th century, while a blight on our country's history, does not absolve a single Nazi of their crimes.
appalachiablue
(41,184 posts)BigDemVoter
(4,157 posts)I sincerely agree that this miserable person should be put on trial. As a radio operator, she was probably responsible for announcing arrivals of "transports."
I'm not sure how she should be punished. . . . . I think they ALL should have been tried and punished, no doubt. I just don't know what kind of punishment can be done to her at this point that will ever bring justice. She's already had a full life, a full life that was denied to millions of other people. . . Sure, they can put her in prison; I don't have a problem with that either. I guess the important thing to keep in mind is, what would her victims want for her? And they ARE her victims. The German Government has already made that clear; anybody who participated in the workings of a death camp was/IS responsible.
This will probably be almost the last trial of this type that we ever see, as even the very, very young perpetrators are in their eighties now, at the youngest.
If she's a senile old woman, it wouldn't really be fitting to put her in prison, as she wouldn't even know it. Hopefully she's still of sound mind and can at least feel {hopefully} some shame for her actions.