Bookkeeper of Auschwitz was made to pay for murdering 300,000 Jews
 

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/...6891966375.jpghttp://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/...6947854197.jpg

• 94-year-old former death camp officer sentenced to four years behind bars
• Found guilty of being accessory to murder of 300,000 Jews in Auschwitz
• He had accepted moral responsibility but denied committing any crime
• Sentence will likely mean Groening, who is in poor health, will die in jail

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz3fwyL0Zxv

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But the question is

As a 21 year old German soldier, what could he have done differently?

He could have refused and then he would probably have been shot.

I'm not going to pass too much comment because I don't know the ins and outs of this specific case (maybe he went above and beyond the call of duty), but in general, my opinion is that the only people who should be considered guilty of war crimes are those giving the orders, not those following them.

Otherwise every soldier that is or ever has been to war is a criminal.

He would have been sent to the Russian front or later in the war, shot

One of those top comments puts it well saying he was 'Convicted for the crime of outliving those who actually committed the crimes'

4 Years

He may get out alive

I don't think it particularly matters, he's 94 and has lived his life. Whether he's guilty or not this is a bit of a charade... Not about justice, more of a stunt really.

Strong, thought provoking post, this is exactly what my Grandfather said as to these trials too.
Good post again TS.

Terrible, if he was actually giving the orders then I can understand but he was just a monkey, why punish the monkey for the organ grinder's crimes?

Will every still living German soldier that served during WW2 also be made to be punished for simply following orders? It's dumb, illogical and it isn't justice, it's emotionally driven spite. It's just punishing someone for following orders because the truly evil people are already dead.

He had a good, long life, a family, love, a home... all the things the people he helped murder would never have. Now he's going to die peacefully in a warm secure place.

Let's not forget who made the Nazi Party in control in Germany.

I can't believe there is sympathy for this man on here.

There are survivors of the Holocaust who might disagree with you.

Where does it end? Should we round up all the still living Germans from that era and try them for allowing the Nazis to get into power too? We can't get the people in charge so let's get the people who lived in that era instead, they couldn't do anything to change what was happening but their inaction is obviously an admission of complicity.

He was basically admin, he was a glorified receptionist by the sounds of things. Blame the people who gave the orders, put them on trial. Going after people who likely didn't have a choice in the matter is just pointless and a waste.

I don't think it's really about sympathy, I for one don't have "sympathy" for him and couldn't give a stuff what happens to him. It doesn't matter. He's old. Most people don't reach the age of 94 at all so whether they kill him, let him die in jail, whatever, it's all sort of redundant... for better or worse, he's already had his life. So no, it's not about sympathy, more about pointing out the futility of it.

You're contradicting your own post there, though. "He had a good, long life, a family, love, a home... all the things the people he helped murder would never have. Now he's going to die peacefully in a warm secure place."

So, by your own thinking, does this feel like justice? Or even vengeance? He can go to jail and sit in a room for a couple of years until he dies. Or he could stay out of jail and... err... sit in a room for a couple of years until he dies. Because he's 94. So I stand by what I said: it's not about justice or about this man, it's a stunt, a charade, perhaps to make some sort of point, or as the article itself says; "The historic significance of the trial of Oskar Groening, and the opportunity it provides for to educate a generation that is all too distant from the horrors of the Holocaust."

In a couple of decades, WW2 and the Holocaust will be entirely outwith living memory. It sort of feels like anything that happens now is little more than an attempt to bookend history... a cry of "Lest we forget", perhaps, or more likely, purely for appearences.

"In a couple of decades, WW2 and the Holocaust will be entirely outwith living memory. "

Maybe,
but not the two Atomic Bombs dropped Fast on Japan
in August 1945
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic...a_and_Nagasaki


Thats a benchmark for the Next Nuke War

Punished yes he should have been. Sentenced to prison aged 94, I don't agree with.

By "outwith living memory" I simply mean that anyone who was alive and old enough to remember the time will be dead. This applies to the nuking of Japan, too, as with all things. In a few decades, no one will remember it. We will know it happened, we will have history books, we will remember our grandparents talking about it, but no one will be alive who can say; "Yes, I remember it, I remember the news breaking, I remember the headlines the next day."

Also, off topic but, the Japan A-bombs are hardly a benchmark for the "Next" nuclear war (i.e. the end of the world). See the spoiler below. To scale, the tiny puff of smoke at the bottom is a 15KT nuclear blast, the same size as the Hiroshima A-bomb. The main image is the size of the blast of the largest tested United States warhead.

am i the only one wondering why he's being jailed, if he was just a librarian? like he wasn't exactly the brains behind it...

Admin... he counted the money taken from Jews before they were gassed. You don't know that he didn't have a choice, that's just what you've chosen to believe. I don't think it's pointless, but maybe I have more invested in it that you?

And no, we shouldn't track down people and prosecute them for being Nazis, but if they were complicit in the annihilation of 6 million people because they were Jews, and not just Jews, gays, the disabled, gypsies... then yes, I want to see them punished.

A librarian? He was the "bookkeeper". He was the one who collated and counted the money taken from people arriving at the concentration camp, before they were murdered.

My grandmother is very much alive and came to this country after being liberated from a concentration camp. My grandfather - Alev Hashalom - was also liberated and came to Britain. She still bears the tattoo on her arm. She still keeps the bag packed under her bed with her jewellery and money in case they ever come again.

This isn't a thread about Japan.

On paper, it does look futile jailing this old man, however, I think only the people that have suffered the horrors of the concentrating camps can really say if it is justice or not.:shrug:

omg D: he deserves it a little bit then.. although, we don't know the full story, at the time, I guess :worry:

He's just had a legitimate legal trial and he's been jailed. I think the full story came out.

Yes the Conclusion of the 2nd World War.
But the Soon Start of WW3

Sorry Livia
thats my fault

Don't apologise arista I know it's something you feel strongly about, even though I don't agree x

D:

In no way deserved.

Bizarre decision, especially 70 years on.

I am totally with Livia on this one. If people like Susan Pollack or Livia's grandparents think that Oskar Groning should go to prison then who the hell are we to disagree? These people are living victims of men like him. Livia's grandmother still keeps a packed case under her bed; she is still a victim and victims deserve closure.

With war crime there is no statutes of limitation and he is clearly a war criminal.

The emotionally invested shouldn't be the ones deciding fair unbiased justice

It's rare you'll find me agreeing with you.. but in this case, I think you are right. This man has clearly failed to prevent or even oppose the genocide of the Jewish people, and for that he deserves punishment regardless of how long ago it was or how old he is.

...as someone who isn't emotionally invested, my thoughts are that so much has been placed on 4 years of imprisonment for an old man, when the thing of it is over 70 yrs of freedom for him when he wasn't a 94yr old man, he wasn't actually instrumental in killing anyone himself so 4yrs seems a very lenient but just term...I can't imagine what it would feel like to be a Holocaust survivor or victim's relative... would it bring any sense of 'satisfaction'..?...I doubt it, nothing could do that I would say but at least it's the knowledge that he hasn't lived his whole entire life as a free man and never had to answer to anyone for his part....

He had a fair trial in a German court of law, with a prosecution and a defence.

I'm just going on what's written in the story but it sounded, like a lot of people in WW2 Germany, he was just following orders. If there's proof to say otherwise than fair enough but if not then I don't think he should be punished as, like TS said, it's futile and it's not justice.

The court found him guilty, so I would assume there is sufficient evidence. They are professionals and would consider things like that. Unless there was a vested interest, and all of the people in the court would more than likely be checked for that, there would be very little room for bias.

I don't think the imprisonment matters, its the fact that he's been brought into the public eye and found guilty.

People who opposed the Nazi regime had a tendency of being killed and their families would most likely meet a similar fate. What could he (or anyone) have done?

I don't disagree that he should have gone to jail, like I said I'm not a sympathiser and I don't really care if he dies in a chair in a cell or dies in a chair in a house. Or in a chair at all for that matter. He's almost certainly going to die within the next few years and I doubt he's out clubbing or climbing mountains at the moment which is what makes it all seem - to me - sort of irrelevant. Is it harsh of me to say that I sort of consider anyone over 90 to be, basically, already dead? Probably sort of is, but I probably sort of do... Which I guess informs a lot of my opinion on this.

Then again, if it does give people who have suffered some sort of closure, even if it's only a little, then that at least is a positive side effect of it all. I'm just very (very, very) skeptical that that has anything at all to do with the reasons for his trial and conviction, which smacks of "making some sort of point for some reason". A bit of showmanship rather than actual justice.

It's that old cognitive dissonance rearing it's head again; people like to think that if they were in the same situation they would retain their morals, THEY would refuse, THEY would resist, THEY could never do something so terrible no matter what the consequences of standing up and saying "no".

It's a lie. They would keep their mouths shut, put on a uniform like everyone else, and kill whoever they were told to kill.

People can't or won't believe that and so we have monsters.

It was directed at those arguing that if imprisonment is what the victims and their families want then who is to say otherwise.

what would you have had him do?