Nazis in Atlanta?

[DblBarrelJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Andy,

How many Americans would you feel comfortable extraditing to Vietnam?

[/ QUOTE ]

I know I am not Andy, but I will answer nonetheless!

All those Americans that overstepped the bounds of decency whilst serving in Vietnam, and specially their superiors!

[/ QUOTE ]

Everyone seems to be missing/ignoring my central point. There is absolutely zero concrete evidence that this man ever harmed anyone. Everyone is debating this issue as though it's an indisputable fact that he turned the gas on in the gas chamber 60 years ago, and all that's left for us to do now is decide his fate.

That's wrong. First and foremost, I would like to see some real evidence that he is a war criminal, before we go about this business of deportation. Nazi does not automatically = War criminal.

Just because the Nazi's were evil as a party does not mean that every man forced to serve under Hitler was evil. Many were just that: Forced to Serve.

I've been thinking about this argument in this fashion. Take the term "Nazi" and throw it away. Just consider him a soldier who served in the opposing army of any war America has faught in the last 100 years. Now do you see the difference?

I'm all for investigation, but no investigation has taken place. All they really know of this man is his name, what branch of the Nazi military he served in, and where he served. I'm sorry, but in my opinion, that is not enough to throw a man out of this country who has been living here legally and peacefully for over 50 years.


If an investigation takes place, and he's found guilty of a war crime, then he should be deported. BTW, contrary to popular belief, serving in the German military during WWII, is not, in a legal sense, a "War Crime".

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

All those Americans that overstepped the bounds of decency whilst serving in Vietnam, and specially their superiors!

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you consider training prison guard dogs as "overstepping the bounds of decency"?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is, of course, completely irrelevant, as this man is not being charged for his actions during the war. He's being deported for immigration violations.

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
First and foremost, I would like to see some real evidence that he is a war criminal, before we go about this business of deportation. Nazi does not automatically = War criminal.


[/ QUOTE ]

So? We should only deport war criminals? That's preposterous. This man participated in questionable and troubling activities. He lied about it to get into this country. Sure it would be great if we could probe more deeply into his history and figure out what exactly he did and how he deserves to be treated. But we can't. Why? Because when the evidence was fresh and such an investigation would have been feasible, HE LIED to conceal the truth. Are you really saying that because he did such an effective job of frustrating any effective investigation into his background, we should give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he was an unwilling participant?

[Goater]

The link I provided (innocent at Dachau) concerns a book regarding the possible problems associated with justice at the end of the war. However, the principle that was used by the system to judge the guilt of guards is what is relevant (and is not disputed in the linked page):

"The court in the main case had ruled "...that the mass atrocity operation was criminal in nature and that the participants therein, acting in pursuance of a common design, subjected persons to killings, beatings, tortures, etc., and that [the court] was warranted in inferring that those shown to have participated knew of the criminal nature thereof." What this meant was that anyone in the camp, whether Kapo or SS guard, knew of the atrocities in the camp and was therefore guilty of participating in a "common design" to violate the Laws and Usages of War under the 1929 Geneva Convention, by virtue of that knowledge. All that was necessary for the prosecution to prove was that the accused was present in the camp when the atrocities were committed."

Im not saying that he should necessarily be tried, but the deportion issue is clear cut, IMO.

[DblBarrelJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
First and foremost, I would like to see some real evidence that he is a war criminal, before we go about this business of deportation. Nazi does not automatically = War criminal.


[/ QUOTE ]

So? We should only deport war criminals? That's preposterous. This man participated in questionable and troubling activities. He lied about it to get into this country. Sure it would be great if we could probe more deeply into his history and figure out what exactly he did and how he deserves to be treated. But we can't. Why? Because when the evidence was fresh and such an investigation would have been feasible, HE LIED to conceal the truth. Are you really saying that because he did such an effective job of frustrating any effective investigation into his background, we should give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he was an unwilling participant?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sick of this argument. This is insane. The government needed to make a decision whether or not to enforce immigration laws or not. Apparently at some point, they decided not to. I'll be damned if I'm going to swallow that bs excuse as to why he's being deported now. He's being deported because of the fact that he was a nazi. End of discussion on that.

Lying on immigration forms means at least filling out immigration forms, which is more than can be said for most of the immigration problem we're faced with now.

He may have lied on it, but at least he cared enough to fill the paperwork out in the first place.

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
First and foremost, I would like to see some real evidence that he is a war criminal, before we go about this business of deportation. Nazi does not automatically = War criminal.


[/ QUOTE ]

So? We should only deport war criminals? That's preposterous. This man participated in questionable and troubling activities. He lied about it to get into this country. Sure it would be great if we could probe more deeply into his history and figure out what exactly he did and how he deserves to be treated. But we can't. Why? Because when the evidence was fresh and such an investigation would have been feasible, HE LIED to conceal the truth. Are you really saying that because he did such an effective job of frustrating any effective investigation into his background, we should give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he was an unwilling participant?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sick of this argument. This is insane. The government needed to make a decision whether or not to enforce immigration laws or not. Apparently at some point, they decided not to. I'll be damned if I'm going to swallow that bs excuse as to why he's being deported now. He's being deported because of the fact that he was a nazi. End of discussion on that.

Lying on immigration forms means at least filling out immigration forms, which is more than can be said for most of the immigration problem we're faced with now.

He may have lied on it, but at least he cared enough to fill the paperwork out in the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to trouble your world-view with unwelcome subtlety, but don't you think there might be some middle ground between deporting every single immigration violator and deporting no one for any reason?

[DblBarrelJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
First and foremost, I would like to see some real evidence that he is a war criminal, before we go about this business of deportation. Nazi does not automatically = War criminal.


[/ QUOTE ]

So? We should only deport war criminals? That's preposterous. This man participated in questionable and troubling activities. He lied about it to get into this country. Sure it would be great if we could probe more deeply into his history and figure out what exactly he did and how he deserves to be treated. But we can't. Why? Because when the evidence was fresh and such an investigation would have been feasible, HE LIED to conceal the truth. Are you really saying that because he did such an effective job of frustrating any effective investigation into his background, we should give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he was an unwilling participant?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sick of this argument. This is insane. The government needed to make a decision whether or not to enforce immigration laws or not. Apparently at some point, they decided not to. I'll be damned if I'm going to swallow that bs excuse as to why he's being deported now. He's being deported because of the fact that he was a nazi. End of discussion on that.

Lying on immigration forms means at least filling out immigration forms, which is more than can be said for most of the immigration problem we're faced with now.

He may have lied on it, but at least he cared enough to fill the paperwork out in the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to trouble your world-view with unwelcome subtlety, but don't you think there might be some middle ground between deporting every single immigration violator and deporting no one for any reason?

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be nice. However, we've landed firmly in "Deporting no one for any reason" land, except for this guy. That's my problem. I work in the Law Enforcement field. I understand better than anyone that you can't catch everyone who breaks the law. However, when you stop enforcing a law altogether, everyone begins behaving as though that law is no longer being enforced, then you decide to enforce it in a very particular circumstance, that bothers me.

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
First and foremost, I would like to see some real evidence that he is a war criminal, before we go about this business of deportation. Nazi does not automatically = War criminal.


[/ QUOTE ]

So? We should only deport war criminals? That's preposterous. This man participated in questionable and troubling activities. He lied about it to get into this country. Sure it would be great if we could probe more deeply into his history and figure out what exactly he did and how he deserves to be treated. But we can't. Why? Because when the evidence was fresh and such an investigation would have been feasible, HE LIED to conceal the truth. Are you really saying that because he did such an effective job of frustrating any effective investigation into his background, we should give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he was an unwilling participant?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sick of this argument. This is insane. The government needed to make a decision whether or not to enforce immigration laws or not. Apparently at some point, they decided not to. I'll be damned if I'm going to swallow that bs excuse as to why he's being deported now. He's being deported because of the fact that he was a nazi. End of discussion on that.

Lying on immigration forms means at least filling out immigration forms, which is more than can be said for most of the immigration problem we're faced with now.

He may have lied on it, but at least he cared enough to fill the paperwork out in the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to trouble your world-view with unwelcome subtlety, but don't you think there might be some middle ground between deporting every single immigration violator and deporting no one for any reason?

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be nice. However, we've landed firmly in "Deporting no one for any reason" land, except for this guy. That's my problem. I work in the Law Enforcement field. I understand better than anyone that you can't catch everyone who breaks the law. However, when you stop enforcing a law altogether, everyone begins behaving as though that law is no longer being enforced, then you decide to enforce it in a very particular circumstance, that bothers me.

[/ QUOTE ]

According to the DHS, in 2005, the most recent year for which statistics are available, over 200,000 immigrants were forcibly deported, and almost another million left "voluntarily" to avoid formal deportation.

So exactly how many Mexicans do we need to deport for every one Nazi? More than a million, apparently. 2 million? 5 million? All of them?

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
So -- the justice system should only seek redress from killers and rapists because things like murder and rape aren't practical, cause chaos in the 'system', and are detrimental to 'order'?

You're clearly in the very, very distinct minority if this is what you're claiming, so I highly doubt there are many who are going to concede the justice system "should not be engage in enforcing morality".

[/ QUOTE ]

I am on one end of the spectrum, that much is true. I view every use of force as a tragedy, and thus I always view the need for justice as regrettable. But that's not the issue...

[ QUOTE ]
Even putting that aside, I would posit that claiming things like "the need to get things done" and "maintaining a functioning society" as justifications for the existence of a justice system are patently moral; implicit in the argument is some kind of utilitarian notion that "order" and "things getting done" is good, and chaos and disorder are bad, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a big difference between "good and bad" versus "right and wrong." Of course, moral standards will always be applied in the administration of justice - this is unavoidable. That's a long, long way from saying that personal feelings of morality should determine how justice is meted out. The reason laws are important is so that there is a clear, objective standard that can be applied. Even if I grant that a justice system has an ultimately moral basis, that doesn't mean that individual decisions are moral decisions. No person should be "punished" just because a majority of people think his actions are immoral. Particularly if those actions are private and fully consensual.

But this is getting off the topic... My point is that no matter how angry people are about Henss, their outrage doesn't justify action against him on the part of the justice system. Furthermore, if no purpose is to be served through his deportation, then he shouldn't be deported. Taxpayer money should not be wasted to satisfy hatred. And that is a moral position on my part.

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
madnak - In my opinion, your posts contain more than a hint of apologism. "Just look at an American when the word 'terrorist' comes up, and you'll see exactly the disposition of the typical Nazi." I disagree with this point and am amazed more americans have not responded to this.

[/ QUOTE ]

See no evil, hear no evil...

[ QUOTE ]
Yep - we should just understand that he was in a tough spot and let him off.

[/ QUOTE ]

Context matters. There's such a thing as mitigating circumstances.

[ QUOTE ]
"Some"? It is inconceivable that he did not see very large numbers of the 40,000 people housed there. There would have been a huge amount of evidence of this if he was a guard. If wasnt like the guards who worked inside wouldnt have mentioned it - it wasnt a secret between them and anyway, he would almost certainly have been inside the camp itself. Again, to suggest that he had no idea what was going on is incredible.

[/ QUOTE ]

It was a secret, and you've given no credible support to the idea that guards weren't kept in the dark, just like the German public.

[ QUOTE ]
In 1955, skipping the part where he was a guard at Dachau and a member of the SS was not a small lie. And it should be not considered one now.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. Particularly given the trials themselves and the cultural climate in the US at the time. He didn't have much choice.

Re: the links you posted, did you read them? They include information about the miscarriage of justice involved in the Dachau trials.

I have seen nothing to indicate that Henss should be presumed guilty of any war crime.