Jorg Haider is Dead

Jorg Haider is Dead

Any possibility that he was murdered by Strache's guys? It sounds crazy, but it seems like they are trying to re-enact a miniature Nazi accension, I wouldn't expect them to leave out the Night of the Long Knives.

Baseless rumor that I just came up with putting two and two together. Spread it around.

If I were the police, I would investigate this further. Haider was the more moderate voice of the Freedom party and recently ousted as leader by Strache. If I were a closet Nazi I would totally kill the recent competition once I got to the top.

accidents happen.











sometimes......

First of all, these parties are hardly far-right. This is far right. This is not - and neither is this.

This is an important (and very sad, of course) event, and it will certainly be politically interesting. We shall see how it plays out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

First of all, these parties are hardly far-right. This is far right. This is not - and neither is this.

This is an important (and very sad, of course) event, and it will certainly be politically interesting. We shall see how it plays out.

---

I liked what I heard about Haider. I'm not as keen on Strache from what I understand of him. I am not Austrian or German, so my opinion isn't authoritative.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

I liked what I heard about Haider. I'm not as keen on Strache from what I understand of him. I am not Austrian or German, so my opinion isn't authoritative.

---

I probably would have voted for one of those two parties if I was in Austria. I'm still unsure who to vote for here. I would love to have an FP or BZ here, but unfortunately we do not.

A sad day, indeed. RIP :shame:

.
So long Jörg, say hi to Adolf. :balloon:
.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mouzafphaerre

.
So long Jörg, say hi to Adolf. :balloon:
.

---

:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mouzafphaerre

.
So long Jörg, say hi to Adolf. :balloon:
.

---

Nice. Haider must be in hell, eh?

The FPÖ and BZÖ are painted as right-wing extremists, but in reality...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austria...onnaires,_2008

Quote:

---

Any possibility that he was murdered by Strache's guys? It sounds crazy, but it seems like they are trying to re-enact a miniature Nazi accension, I wouldn't expect them to leave out the Night of the Long Knives.

Baseless rumor that I just came up with putting two and two together. Spread it around.

If I were the police, I would investigate this further. Haider was the more moderate voice of the Freedom party and recently ousted as leader by Strache. If I were a closet Nazi I would totally kill the recent competition once I got to the top.

---

Frankly if you paint both as miniature Nazis than Mr. Bush would be with no shade of doubt a fascist agressor - and I have ever been an adamant opponent of their political agenda. That people come up with "nazi" every time a right-winged politician in the german-speaking world has success is indeed or a sign of stark lack in education and knowledge or of bad taste. Said that I really hope that Strache won't be able to collect the voters of Haider in the future - a vain hope I presume.

come to think of it, no.

What's a Jorg Haider? :)

On a political level, I'm very happy that he's gone.

Of course, retirement would've been a much better way....

Org policy requests us not to make political statements about the recently deceased. I shall therefore simply give centre stage to our Austrian Freedom politician himself:

'WWII concentration camps are only punishment camps'
'The SS is a part of the German army that should be honoured'
'The 'expulsion' of the Jews by the Nazis is comparable to the expulsion of the Germans from Sudetenland'


Auf Wiedersehen, Jörg. ~:wave:

And indeed, by the standards of the Austrian far right Haider was still only a moderate, and a great hero to the hard-right, anti-EU, nationalist sentiment across Europe.

Hmmmm.

Quote:

---

What's a Jorg Haider ?

---

Its what you get when you breed from an S.A.stormtrooper and a female Hitler youth leader .

I don't yet find word of the man's funeral, so let us observe a 72-hour moratorium on criticising his career, out of respect for his survivors.

Open season, therefore Tuesday, 14 October, 1200 GMT. :bow:

it is a shame he is gone from politics, because parties like his that effected the will of the electorate did more than anything to shine a spotlight on the poisonous conformist and PC nature of european politics.

I did not vote for him in the last election, but he has my respect. At least he always told the truth as it was. I am sad he is gone, as he really made this country more aware of political issues.

RIP

:austria:

If what Luigi posted actually came from his mouth then we really don't need it, political correctness disgusts me but glorifying nazi's disgust me a whole lot more. Racism is an ugly thing that should never get in the way of the discussion we should be having.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

If what Luigi posted actually came from his mouth then we really don't need it, political correctness disgusts me but glorifying nazi's disgust me a whole lot more. Racism is an ugly thing that should never get in the way of the discussion we should be having.

---

I am unsure about whether to leave his politics for a few days or not. Then again, each man chooses his own actions and words. And we remember them at his death:

Quote:

---

Born in the Upper Austrian town of Bad Goisern in 1950, Joerg Haider's parents were very early members of the Nazi party, who moved to Germany where they became party officials. Critics say Haider's views were shaped by this background, although he said his family seldom discussed the past.

Around the same time he became party leader, Haider inherited a controversial $16m estate in the southern province of Carinthia where he became governor in 1989. Barental, or Bear Valley, was bought during World War II by his great uncle from an Italian Jew who fled in 1940. Critics say the sale was illegitimately forced upon the Jewish owner by the Nazis, but Haider consistently denied this.

He amassed a formidable power base in Carinthia, but his first stint as governor in 1989 ended abruptly when he praised the employment policies of Nazi Germany and was forced to resign. He was re-elected, however, in 1999 and 2003.


Haider gained notoriety for his pro-Nazi comments. He described World War II concentration camps as "punishment camps" and said the Nazi SS was "a part of the German army which should be honoured".
He also compared the deportation of Jews by the Nazis to the expulsion of Sudeten Germans from Czechoslovakia after the war.

---

No leftist blog. Just the obituary on the BBC.

Louis has said what needs saying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the OP article

n 2000, the EU imposed sanctions against Austria in a protest over his party's role in government.

---

?!?!

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Org policy requests us not to make political statements about the recently deceased. I shall therefore simply give centre stage to our Austrian Freedom politician himself:

'WWII concentration camps are only punishment camps'
'The SS is a part of the German army that should be honoured'
'The 'expulsion' of the Jews by the Nazis is comparable to the expulsion of the Germans from Sudetenland'

---

Or perhaps you could look at his actual policies instead of words, some of which were said almost twenty years ago? Sorry Louis, but the man is no neo-Nazi, no matter how hard you try to paint him as one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

'WWII concentration camps are only punishment camps'

---

This is true. They certainly weren't sent there as a reward.

Quote:

---

'The SS is a part of the German army that should be honoured'

---

This is true. The line drawn by the allies between the German Army and the SS is false. They were all German fighting men. There were honorable soldiers in both the Wehrmacht and the SS, as well as dishonorable ones.

Quote:

---

'The 'expulsion' of the Jews by the Nazis is comparable to the expulsion of the Germans from Sudetenland'.

---

While the scale is much smaller, this is also fairly accurate. Thousands of Germans died in vicious state sponsored murders and concentration camps and it is hard to say the expulsion was not an ethnic cleansing.


Now then, were those three quotes smart things to say for a public figure? Of course not. I believe he apologized.

However, Louis, you must know that having family directly involved in a conflict can make it easier for one to see both sides. I certainly can see the German side of WW2. Most people - rightly or wrongly - refuse to look at the war from both perspectives. When your parents, or grandparents in my case, fought in it, you kind of have to.

Another example: Living in the South, most people understand where the leaders and soldiers of the Confederacy were coming from. Living in America, most people understand why Truman dropped the atomic bomb. However, I'm sure if you were to interview the family of former slaves or a resident of Nagasaki, their perspectives would be different.

My point is that Haider was in a unique position and I can understand why his perspective on the war was also unique. Condemning the man for three comments made over the course of several decades is probably not the best idea, especially considering that the political parties he headed were far from national socialist in nature.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

This is true. They certainly weren't sent there as a reward.

---

"Punishment camps" seem to be more of an understatement, however.

Quote:

---

This is true. The line drawn by the allies between the German Army and the SS is false. They were all German fighting men. There were honorable soldiers in both the Wehrmacht and the SS, as well as dishonorable ones.

---

The SS was responsible for many of the atrocities committed, and I hope you don't deny that. SS-Totenkopfverbände. The Einsatzgruppen, the death squads, that went out exclusively to kill undesirables. The SS was more of the political arm of the Wermacht, it's recruits, if I recall, had to be of Aryan descent, and pledge loyalty to the Nazi Party. Many of it's officers were well known Nazis.

Quote:

---

While the scale is much smaller, this is also fairly accurate. Thousands of Germans died in vicious state sponsored murders and concentration camps and it is hard to say the expulsion was not an ethnic cleansing.

---

More of a revenge by the Soviets. And I cannot blame them. But trying to compare the Holocaust to this is plain silly.

Quote:

---

However, Louis, you must know that having family directly involved in a conflict can make it easier for one to see both sides. I certainly can see the German side of WW2. Most people - rightly or wrongly - refuse to look at the war from both perspectives. When your parents, or grandparents in my case, fought in it, you kind of have to.

---

I also had grandparents who fought, both against the Soviets and Germans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

This is true. They certainly weren't sent there as a reward.

---

No, it's false. He said they were only punishment camps.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwedishFish

The SS was responsible for many of the atrocities committed, and I hope you don't deny that. SS-Totenkopfverbände. The Einsatzgruppen, the death squads, that went out exclusively to kill undesirables. The SS was more of the political arm of the Wermacht, it's recruits, if I recall, had to be of Aryan descent, and pledge loyalty to the Nazi Party. Many of it's officers were well known Nazis.

---

If you understood the SS-Totenkopfverbande you would know that it had a totally separate hierarchy from the Waffen-SS. The Oberkommando der Wehrmacht controlled the Waffen-SS, while the Nazi-party controlled the Totenkopfverband and Einsatzgruppen. The Waffen-SS was like the Marines and rarely engaged in the actual purges as the wehrmacht was against such things. Regular wehrmacht troops also engaged in purges to an extent, yet they are honored for their heroism. Waffen-SS sacrifice and heroism was amazing during world war two and, while they were part of an unacceptably de-humanizing war machine which deserves it's infamous title, they are often mis-judged by what the SS-Totenkopfverbande, Allgemiene-SS and Einsatzgruppen were directly responsible for - three authoritatively separate branches of the government that were directly answerable to the NSDAP rather than the O.d.W.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

No, it's false. He said they were only punishment camps.

CR

---

What is false about that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

If you understood the SS-Totenkopfverbande you would know that it had a totally separate hierarchy from the Waffen-SS. The Oberkommando der Wehrmacht controlled the Waffen-SS, while the Nazi-party controlled the Totenkopfverband and Einsatzgruppen. The Waffen-SS was like the Marines and rarelly engaged in the actual purges as the wehrmacht was against such things. Regular wehrmacht troops also engaged in purges to an extent, yet they are honored for their heroism. Waffen-SS heroism was amazing during world war two and, while they were part of an unacceptably de-humanizing war machine which deserves it's infamous title, they are often mis-judged by what the SS-Totenkopfverbande, Allgemiene-SS and Einsatzgruppen were directly responsible for - three authoritatively separate branches of the government.

---

The Waffen-SS were involved with war crimes. EVen under Wermacht control. 29th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS RONA, a Waffen-SS unit killed 150 Canadian prisoners, 36th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (It's ranks were filled with common criminals).

http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar.../h-einz-42.htm

Were all Waffen-SS members war criminals? No, some were even conscripts. The Allies decision to name the SS a criminal organization was right, because much of it was. Honor divisions like Wiking, not Totenkopfverbande.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwedishFish

Honor divisions like Wiking, not Totenkopfverbande.

---

Oh absolutely - I agree. The Totenkopfverbande and Allgemaine SS should be humiliated for their horrors forever. Waffen-SS groups who never had anything to do with purges and most likely had no idea they were going on should be honored like we honor U.S. Marines today for their sacrifice and heroism. They gave their lives to defend a Germany that they believed was right and good, even though at that point it wasn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwedishFish

"Punishment camps" seem to be more of an understatement, however.

---

It wasn't the best way to put it, but it is technically true and not automatically pro-nazi.

Quote:

---

The SS was responsible for many of the atrocities committed, and I hope you don't deny that. SS-Totenkopfverbände. The Einsatzgruppen, the death squads, that went out exclusively to kill undesirables. The SS was more of the political arm of the Wermacht, it's recruits, if I recall, had to be of Aryan descent, and pledge loyalty to the Nazi Party. Many of it's officers were well known Nazis.

---

Tuff made good points. There were many honorable SS soldiers.

Quote:

---

More of a revenge by the Soviets. And I cannot blame them. But trying to compare the Holocaust to this is plain silly.

---

Not sure how that is silly. It was a state sponsored ethnic cleansing like any other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

Not sure how that is silly. It was a state sponsored ethnic cleansing like any other.

---

So the Holocaust didn't kill about 6 million undesirables? Or is it OK, because those damned Commies got the superior Germans?

I am in awe of the waffen-SS combat abilities...

And as others have pointed out, they have a very underserved bad name. The allies were severely afraid of the SS combat abilities, and rightfully so, since they often won against overwhelming odds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

What is false about that?

---

They were death camps. Or are you saying death was simply a 'punishment'?

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwedishFish

So the Holocaust didn't kill about 6 million undesirables? Or is it OK, because those damned Commies got the superior Germans?

---

How did you get that out of his post? They were both state sponsored ethnic cleansings. Saying that the expulsion of the Germans was ethnic cleansing doesn't mean that you're a Holocaust denier. :dizzy2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

How did you get that out of his post? They were both state sponsored ethnic cleansings. Saying that the expulsion of the Germans was ethnic cleansing doesn't mean that you're a Holocaust denier. :dizzy2:

---

It doesn't mean they're comparable. Or justifiable. Somehow, I take it from Good Ol' Jorg's statement that the Holocaust is somehow alright because them Reds killed Germans. Nevermind the fact the Germans also killed Russians, French, Italians, Jews, Gypsies, Brits, Norwegians, Hungarians, Greeks, Romanians, Finns, Danes, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwedishFish

So the Holocaust didn't kill about 6 million undesirables? Or is it OK, because those damned Commies got the superior Germans?

---

No I think you misunderstand me. I'm saying that both were instances of ethnic cleansing. The scale of the Holocaust was larger, but both involved state sanctioned murder and concentration camps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CR

They were death camps. Or are you saying death was simply a 'punishment'?

---

Death is a punishment in the US, how would it be anything else in Nazi Germany?

In any event, concentration camps were not the same as death camps - according to Jewish scholars anyway.

I'm also having trouble finding where Haider said the camps were "only" punishment camps. Neither wiki nor its source includes "only".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

In any event, concentration camps were not the same as death camps - according to Jewish scholars anyway.

---

Yep. 'Dem Jews alright.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

No I think you misunderstand me. I'm saying that both were instances of ethnic cleansing. The scale of the Holocaust was larger, but both involved state sanctioned murder and concentration camps.

Death is a punishment in the US, how would it be anything else in Nazi Germany?

In any event, concentration camps were not the same as death camps - according to Jewish scholars anyway.

---

Right. Not all camps were death camps. Many were just de-humanising work camps without the ovens or gas chambers.

I don't believe that Haider was saying the Holocaust was somehow diminished because of the german purges after the war - I think he was saying that, although the holocaust was massively more devastating that the ethnic cleansing of germans, the murderous ethnic cleansing of Germans was de-humanising and unjustifiable itself.

Quote:

---

'The 'expulsion' of the Jews by the Nazis is comparable to the expulsion of the Germans from Sudetenland'.

---

Lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwedishFish

Lol.

---

Are psychotically genocidal campaigns comparable? Yes. Are they comparable in scope? No.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

I don't believe that Haider was saying the Holocaust was somehow diminished because of the german purges after the war - I think he was saying that, although the holocaust was massively more devastating that the ethnic cleansing of germans, the murderous ethnic cleansing of Germans was de-humanising and unjustifiable itself.

---

Yes. There's still a lot of resentment on both sides about the expulsions, and of course it is easy to make comparisons like that. That doesn't mean Haider was diminishing the Holocaust.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

This is true. They certainly weren't sent there as a reward.

---

Quote:

---

[...]That doesn't mean Haider was diminishing the Holocaust.

---

LOL?

"Oh, it's true that the consentration camps were horrible, but they were only punishment camps. Why I am saying this? Well...it's true!"

:2thumbsup:

I guess, he was some sort of Captain Obvious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Viking

LOL?

"Oh, it's true that the consentration camps were horrible, but they were only punishment camps. Why I am saying this? Well...it's true!"

:2thumbsup:

I guess, he was some sort of Captain Obvious.

---

No, c'mon. Read the previous few posts, man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Viking

LOL?

"Oh, it's true that the consentration camps were horrible, but they were only punishment camps. Why I am saying this? Well...it's true!"

:2thumbsup:

I guess, he was some sort of Captain Obvious.

---

The exact quote, made in a debate in the Austrian parliament on bomb attacks on Romanies, was:

Quote:

---

'the punishment camps of National Socialism'

---

To which he later said that he meant to say "concentration camps".

As usual, a big fuss made over something as small as a passing reference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

The exact quote, made in a debate in the Austrian parliament on bomb attacks on Romanies, was:

Quote:

---

'the punishment camps of National Socialism'

---

To which he later said that he meant to say "concentration camps".

As usual, a big fuss made over something as small as a passing reference.

---

That puts it in a different light; though his selection of words more than hints at an underlying attitude.

EDIT: No wait..what the hell am I saying? The concentration camps were certainly not punishment camps. A punishment is what you get when you've done something "wrong"; and what the Jews did wrong was being Jews. There is of course the thing with relativity; but in the modern Western sense, a punishment camp is somewhere criminals are sent; not someone with the "wrong" ethnic background; which was what these camps were largely used for anyway. It so incredibly clearly hints toward the real opinions of this guy.

Neither the Waffen-SS nor the Whermacht should be honored at all. Both committed atrocities - naturally so as they were institutions in a regime that condone and conducted atrocities on a horrific scale.

That the Waffen-SS fought harder is slightly more damning in my mind - their fanaticism in defense of a truly evil system is inexcusable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alexander the Pretty Good

Neither the Waffen-SS nor the Whermacht should be honored at all. Both committed atrocities - naturally so as they were institutions in a regime that condone and conducted atrocities on a horrific scale.

---

The RAF and USAAF also committed atrocities, as well as the Red Army. We shouldn't honour them either, by this logic.

I don't necessarily disagree with that. All served primarily to defend the interests of their respective states.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

The RAF and USAAF also committed atrocities, as well as the Red Army. We shouldn't honour them either, by this logic.

---

They did not do them in service of a greater evil against mankind.

Quote:

---

Death is a punishment in the US, how would it be anything else in Nazi Germany?

---

You'll have to point out where the government has killed people for being Jewish.

CR

I don't think Americans should honor the Waffen-SS or Wehrmacht, but Germans and Austrians should be able to. It was their fathers and grandfathers who gave up their lives for their country.

So? That doesn't make it right.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

So? That doesn't make it right.

CR

---

What is wrong with honouring our ancestors, who fought and, in many cases, died in the war? They didn't fight for the Nazi government, they fought for the country, or because they were conscripted. You cannot paint the Wehrmacht as an organization of war criminals any more than you can paint the USAAF as one.

We have the same right to honour our veterans as you have to honour yours, even though our veterans were on the "wrong" side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

So? That doesn't make it right.

CR

---

What do you mean? Hypothetical: If my brother gave up his life to defend my father who was an abusive drunk murderer, I would honor my brothers sacrifice. I would blame my father even more for causing his death, but the one who sacrificed was doing what he thought was right out of honor.

It would be even more sad that my brother died to protect a scumbag.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

What is wrong with honouring our ancestors, who fought and, in many cases, died in the war? They didn't fight for the Nazi government, they fought for the country, or because they were conscripted. You cannot paint the Wehrmacht as an organization of war criminals any more than you can paint the USAAF as one.

We have the same right to honour our veterans as you have to honour yours, even though our veterans were on the "wrong" side.

---

Wermacht should be honored as the force it was. The SS, however, as I stated again, the divisions (Such as Wiking) that's sole duty was to fight should be honored for their committment and fighting ability, however, those who were involved with the war crimes need to no further mention for their atrocities. Alexander- the pilot who bombed Dresden was following orders, as was the Panzer Grenadier who was at the Seelow Heights. Both need to be remembered and honored for their fighting ability and bravery. To paint them due to their superiors actions is stupid.

All that matters is America won. If the Germans or French or Brits want to be proud let them. The Americans Russians and Chinese are busy fighting over the world :2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwedishFish

Wermacht should be honored as the force it was. The SS, however, as I stated again, the divisions (Such as Wiking) that's sole duty was to fight should be honored for their committment and fighting ability, however, those who were involved with the war crimes need to no further mention for their atrocities. Alexander- the pilot who bombed Dresden was following orders, as was the Panzer Grenadier who was at the Seelow Heights. Both need to be remembered and honored for their fighting ability and bravery. To paint them due to their superiors actions is stupid.

---

I would largely agree with this post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EMFM

What is wrong with honouring our ancestors, who fought and, in many cases, died in the war? They didn't fight for the Nazi government, they fought for the country, or because they were conscripted. You cannot paint the Wehrmacht as an organization of war criminals any more than you can paint the USAAF as one.

---

When your country is run by Nazis, serving your country is tantamount to serving them. If no one volunteered to invade Poland...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TSM

What do you mean? Hypothetical: If my brother gave up his life to defend my father who was an abusive drunk murderer, I would honor my brothers sacrifice. I would blame my father even more for causing his death, but the one who sacrificed was doing what he thought was right out of honor.

---

That's not a very clear scenario to me, but if your brother was protecting your father while he was out murdering, he would have been convicted as an accessory if he lived.

Quote:

---

It would be even more sad that my brother died to protect a scumbag.

---

Amen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwedishFish

Wermacht should be honored as the force it was. The SS, however, as I stated again, the divisions (Such as Wiking) that's sole duty was to fight should be honored for their committment and fighting ability, however, those who were involved with the war crimes need to no further mention for their atrocities. Alexander- the pilot who bombed Dresden was following orders, as was the Panzer Grenadier who was at the Seelow Heights. Both need to be remembered and honored for their fighting ability and bravery. To paint them due to their superiors actions is stupid.

---

The Whermacht was a force not only with specific war crimes and atrocities on its record, but also one supporting an even ghastlier system. The pilot who bombed Dresden might not have connected the dots between his orders and the thousands of civilian causalties, but still should have rejected them.

We know that there is no such thing as "following orders" - that's one of the rationales at work at Neuremburg!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

What is wrong with honouring our ancestors, who fought and, in many cases, died in the war? They didn't fight for the Nazi government, they fought for the country, or because they were conscripted. You cannot paint the Wehrmacht as an organization of war criminals any more than you can paint the USAAF as one.

We have the same right to honour our veterans as you have to honour yours, even though our veterans were on the "wrong" side.

---

Honoring those ancestors is different from honoring the Wehrmact. The Wehrmact fought to defend Nazi Germany, and every minute they held their ground was one more minute the concentration camps were killing people.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Viking

That puts it in a different light; though his selection of words more than hints at an underlying attitude.

EDIT: No wait..what the hell am I saying? The concentration camps were certainly not punishment camps. A punishment is what you get when you've done something "wrong"; and what the Jews did wrong was being Jews. There is of course the thing with relativity; but in the modern Western sense, a punishment camp is somewhere criminals are sent; not someone with the "wrong" ethnic background; which was what these camps were largely used for anyway. It so incredibly clearly hints toward the real opinions of this guy.

---

Punishment does not impart guilt. I could punish you for something you did not do. Describing the camps as "punishment camps" is accurate.

Besides, as I highlighted, this was simply a passing reference during a debate. It is not as if the man gave a speech about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CR

You'll have to point out where the government has killed people for being Jewish.

---

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

The Jews were sent to the camps to be punished. One of those punishments was death. Therefore, Haider was not factually incorrect. You were.

Aside from that, I'm still having a hard time finding where he used the phrase "only punishment camps". "Only" would give some credence to the argument that he was in fact trying to downplay what happened there, although that would still be a weak argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Honoring those ancestors is different from honoring the Wehrmact. The Wehrmact fought to defend Nazi Germany, and every minute they held their ground was one more minute the concentration camps were killing people.

CR

---

I wonder if you would apply that same rationale to the US military, which has certainly enabled many attrocities to be committed by the US government.

It's important to realize that none of the major armed forces were completely honorable during the war. That doesn't mean we cannot honor the individuals that were. Among them were SS soldiers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

The Jews were sent to the camps to be punished. One of those punishments was death. Therefore, Haider was not factually incorrect. You were.

---

Oh, I'm sorry, I live in some alternate reality where an actual legal system of just punishment for crimes is not compared to death camps for ethnic cleansing.

Quote:

---

I wonder if you would apply that same rationale to the US military, which has certainly enabled many attrocities to be committed by the US government.

---

No, because the US government is not an evil entity, a force against humanity. The Nazis were an abomination, and I hate them.

CR

Quote:

---

I wonder if you would apply that same rationale to the US military, which has certainly enabled many attrocities to be committed by the US government.

---

Agreed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Oh, I'm sorry, I live in some alternate reality where an actual legal system of just punishment for crimes is not compared to death camps for ethnic cleansing.

---

You're deflecting.

I said that describing the camps as punishment camps was a true statement.

You said that the statement was false because they were also death camps.

I explained that death was one punishment Jews were forced to endure. Therefore, the description was accurate.

Whether the Jews deserved to be punished has no bearing on the description, and no one is making that argument - or comparing legal systems. To describe the camps as "punishment camps" in no way discounts what the Jews experienced; and is, in fact, more severe than the term "concentration".

Quote:

---

No, because the US government is not an evil entity, a force against humanity.

---

Ask a Native American about that.. or the citizenry of any number of South American nations.

To apply descriptors such as "good" and "evil" to entire governments is fundamentally immature and almost always indefensible when taken apart. Governments, by nature, are amoral constructs. The US government and the Nazi government were alike in that they were both concerned first and foremost with furthering their own interests.

"Evil" is more appropriately used to describe individuals, and there were many Nazis that would fit that description. No one thinks otherwise.

Quote:

---

The Nazis were an abomination, and I hate them.

---

Good to know, but don't let your emotions cloud your ability to come to logical conclusions.

I would like to point out that many Nazis nowadays also hide their nazism behind less drastic speeches and policies so that they are not touchable by any bans and can avoid prosecution since nazi parties aren't really allowed here(and possibly not in Austria either).

That he called concentration camps punishment camps can be one of two things IMO:

1. He made an honest mistake, used a wrong word to avoid a pause

2. He incidentally said what he really thinks and later corrected it to a more PC version to avoid further problems

The problem I have with calling them punishment camps is that punishment to me means that you did something wrong before you get punished, being born hardly qualifies for me. Basically all of the criteria that made someone "deserve" punishment according to the nazi party were and are only shared by nazis which disqualifies these camps from being called punishment camps in my opinion because they weren't about punishment by any sane standard.

Quote:

---

Ask a Native American about that.. or the citizenry of any number of South American nations.

To apply descriptors such as "good" and "evil" to entire governments is fundamentally immature and almost always indefensible when taken apart. Governments, by nature, are amoral constructs. The US government and the Nazi government were alike in that they were both concerned first and foremost with furthering their own interests.

"Evil" is more appropriately used to describe individuals, and there were many Nazis that would fit that description. No one thinks otherwise.

---

Holy... crap. I find myself agreeing with something Panzer is saying. It figures it would take something so wildly out there as honoring Nazi soldiers' service for this fate to come to pass!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koga No Goshi

Holy... crap. I find myself agreeing with something Panzer is saying. It figures it would take something so wildly out there as honoring Nazi soldiers' service for this fate to come to pass!

---

Good.

People have been making too much of PJ's posts lately. I understand where he is coming from. Usually it is a misunderstanding of the Third Reich that leads people to believe that hell opened up on earth and demons took over the bodies of the entire German populace. They forget that honorable German men, women and Children died in the war - ones who didn't live near death camps and honestly had no idea that their government was slaughtering "undesirables" en masse. Who would believe that about their government especially when the governments main policy was to lie to the German people and keep any racial decisions tightly classified?

In order to understand humanity better we would be well served to learn the right lessons from WW2.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

Good.

People have been making too much of PJ's posts lately. I understand where he is coming from. Usually it is a misunderstanding of the Third Reich that leads people to believe that hell opened up on earth and demons took over the bodies of the entire German populace. They forget that honorable German men, women and Children died in the war - ones who didn't live near death camps and honestly had no idea that their government was slaughtering "undesirables" en masse. Who would believe that about their government especially when the governments main policy was to lie to the German people and keep any racial decisions tightly classified?

In order to understand humanity better we would be well served to learn the right lessons from WW2.

---

People have learned nothing. People think the lesson from WWII is speak in awed terms about the horrors of the Holocaust and support Israel.

I've been saying for years, that a lot of the mindsets floating around since 9/11.... my country, right or wrong.... this irrational throwing away of critical thought to support anything that is construed as for the good of country, and against enemies.... if that's the definition of patriotism, not a single one of those people should have ANY issue with anyone who participated in the Third Reich. Because I'm sure all those people were saying exactly the same thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

You're deflecting.

I said that describing the camps as punishment camps was a true statement.

You said that the statement was false because they were also death camps.

I explained that death was one punishment Jews were forced to endure. Therefore, the description was accurate.

Whether the Jews deserved to be punished has no bearing on the description, and no one is making that argument - or comparing legal systems. To describe the camps as "punishment camps" in no way discounts what the Jews experienced; and is, in fact, more severe than the term "concentration".

---

They were death camps. Deserving has everything to do with it because punishment is viewed as actions taken for justice after a crime. Punishment is viewed as a penalty for wrongdoing.

It is not a more severe term than "concentration camps", because everyone knows what concentration camps means. Calling them anything other than that or death camps is an attempt to hide what they really are. An attempt to gloss over evil.

Quote:

---

Ask a Native American about that.. or the citizenry of any number of South American nations.

---

I never said the government hasn't done evil. But it's the exception to the rule.

Quote:

---

To apply descriptors such as "good" and "evil" to entire governments is fundamentally immature and almost always indefensible when taken apart. Governments, by nature, are amoral constructs. The US government and the Nazi government were alike in that they were both concerned first and foremost with furthering their own interests.

"Evil" is more appropriately used to describe individuals, and there were many Nazis that would fit that description. No one thinks otherwise.

---

Immature? :laugh4:

The Nazi government was headed by Hitler, an evil man. It was filled with evil people and carried out evil purposes. It is not an amoral construct, but a construct to further inflict evil on people. It is nearly alone among governments in history in that regard.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

They were death camps. Deserving has everything to do with it because punishment is viewed as actions taken for justice after a crime. Punishment is viewed as a penalty for wrongdoing.

---

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Punishment

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dictionary.com

4. severe handling or treatment.

---

Yeah, you notice how you have to go down to the fourth definition to get that, and the first three are these:

Quote:

---

1. the act of punishing.
2. the fact of being punished, as for an offense or fault.
3. a penalty inflicted for an offense, fault, etc.

---

Those are the definitions of punishment people think of.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Yeah, you notice how you have to go down to the fourth definition to get that, and the first three are these:

---

It is still the definition, so he is literally correct...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

They were death camps. Deserving has everything to do with it because punishment is viewed as actions taken for justice after a crime. Punishment is viewed as a penalty for wrongdoing.

It is not a more severe term than "concentration camps", because everyone knows what concentration camps means. Calling them anything other than that or death camps is an attempt to hide what they really are. An attempt to gloss over evil.

---

That doesn't make any sense. Its very obvious that the Jews were sent to the camps to punish them. Punishment can be delivered undeservedly.

Also, you should look up where the term "concentration camp" comes from if you are interested in the use of semantics to gloss over evil.

Quote:

---

I never said the government hasn't done evil. But it's the exception to the rule.

---

I could make a convincing argument to the contrary, but thats not the point.. a point you seem to be missing entirely.

Quote:

---

The Nazi government was headed by Hitler, an evil man. It was filled with evil people and carried out evil purposes. It is not an amoral construct, but a construct to further inflict evil on people. It is nearly alone among governments in history in that regard.

---

Really? :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

The _________ government was headed by _________, an evil man. It was filled with evil people and carried out evil purposes. It is not an amoral construct, but a construct to further inflict evil on people.

---

How many different ways could those blanks be filled?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

It is still the definition, so he is literally correct...

---

The whole use of the term punishment was meant to deceive and deflect knowledge of what the concentration camps really were. That's the problem with that phrase.

Haider tried to equate a term that is fundamentally understood to meant a penalty for wrongdoing with the Nazi death camps. With that he tried to distort the reality of the concentration camps.

Quote:

---

Really?

---

Oh yes. This is not some case of competing national interests, of people and leaders at odds because they're serving their countries.

Nazi Germany was evil. They were not serving their own interests, even in a wrong way. They were a tool of evil.

CR

For Louis and CR: http://www.time.com/time/europe/maga...derquotes.html

The entire point of this argument is the answer to the question "Was Haider a Neo-Nazi or a Nazi sympathizer." The answer to this question is no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

For Louis and CR: http://www.time.com/time/europe/maga...derquotes.html

The entire point of this argument is the answer to the question "Was Haider a Neo-Nazi or a Nazi sympathizer." The answer to this question is no.

---

Quote:

---

February, 1995
In a debate in the Austrian parliament on bomb attacks on Romanies, Haider referred to Nazi concentration camps as "prison camps," though he later said that he meant "concentration camps."

---

Sorry, that's about the same thing.

And with these other actions:

Quote:

---

February, 1985
When then Austrian Defense Minister and Freedom Party member Friedhelm Frischenschlager went to meet Walter Reder, a former SS officer return-ing from imprisonment in Italy for war crimes, Haider defended him, saying: "He did not receive a criminal but a soldier who did his duty for his fatherland during the war ... If you are going to speak about war crimes, you should admit such crimes were com-mitted by all sides and not pick on a few German soldiers."

---

Quote:

---

June, 1991
During a debate in the provincial parliament of Carinthia, where he was Governor: "An orderly employment policy was carried out in the Third Reich, which the government in Vienna cannot manage."

---

Quote:

---

May, 1992
Amid the furor created by the Carinthian government's decision to honor a gathering of Waffen SS veterans, Haider accused Interior Minister Franz Loeschnak of making "primitive attacks" on "respectable" war veterans, while letting crime by immigrants go unchecked.

---

Someone who receives a war criminal who was in the SS, praises the Third Reich in any capacity, or honors Waffen SS veterans is a neo-Nazi, who cloaks his feelings in the way Haider did.

Are you really going to say someone who said and did those things doesn't have Nazi sympathies? Oh, wait, he didn't explicitly say he loved the Nazis, which means he's not a Nazi sympathizer because all those people always come right out and say it straight up and never try to disguise their feelings to gain power. :rolleyes:

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

The whole use of the term punishment was meant to deceive and deflect knowledge of what the concentration camps really were. That's the problem with that phrase.

Haider tried to equate a term that is fundamentally understood to meant a penalty for wrongdoing with the Nazi death camps. With that he tried to distort the reality of the concentration camps.

---

Do you honestly believe anyone at that debate didn't know what he meant when he said "the punishment camps of National Socialism"?

Quote:

---

Oh yes. This is not some case of competing national interests, of people and leaders at odds because they're serving their countries.

Nazi Germany was evil. They were not serving their own interests, even in a wrong way. They were a tool of evil.

CR

---

~:rolleyes:

A tool of evil, huh? You give them too much credit. There were plenty of governments that utilized genocide before them, and there have been plenty since. The Nazis can't even claim the top body count, not by far.

Someone get this man an Indian to talk to...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Someone who receives a war criminal who was in the SS, praises the Third Reich in any capacity, or honors Waffen SS veterans is a neo-Nazi, who cloaks his feelings in the way Haider did.

Are you really going to say someone who said and did those things doesn't have Nazi sympathies? Oh, wait, he didn't explicitly say he loved the Nazis, which means he's not a Nazi sympathizer because all those people always come right out and say it straight up and never try to disguise their feelings to gain power. :rolleyes:

CR

---

I understand why the US government has installed and supported dictators throughout the world that murdered millions of innocent people. I also understand that not everyone who worked at CIA at the time supported the murder of millions of people. Many were probably idealistic, patriotic men and women who wanted to come to the aid of their nation.

That doesn't mean I don't recognize that it was wrong. Its called perspective. A guy from Austria whose parents were Nazis is obviously going to have a different one than you do. That doesn't mean he's a Nazi.

Edit: Perfect example of what I'm talking about, from the ADL no less. The man saw things from a German perspective, but was not a Nazi.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adl

Haider spoke out against the Austrian government's plans to compensate 30,000 Austrian victims of Nazi rule, including Jews, Communists and homosexuals, claiming that Austrian victims of the allies, such as civilians who fled Austria's occupation by US, Soviet, French and British troops, should also be compensated. As he told an elderly Austrian audience in April 1995, "It is not fair if all the money from the tax coffers goes to Israel." However, when the Parliament voted in June to set up a $50 million compensation fund, Haider voted in its favor. Still insisting on the need for compensation for victims of the allies, Haider explained, "But we do not intend to be petty. Even though you will not join us to widen the scope of the fund we will not vote against the bill. We too want to draw a line under a chapter we are also responsible for."

---

Of course there were honorable SS troops, but we ought to place Haiders(?) remarks in the realm of what we know today not what was known back then. If you are going to defend the nazi's you are either one hell of a major idiot or a clever politician capitalising on the existance of major idiots.