Posted on 01/20/2004 7:24:59 AM PST by Maximilian
Precisely my point. We are incessantly harped upon to remember the 6 million Jews. But nary a Catholic could say how many of his own religious compatriots were slaughtered in this same fratricide that he might offer a prayer for their eternal rest.
Charity starts at home, and radiates outward from there.
Great compassion can and should be shown for the Jewish victims of Hitler from Catholics as soon as Catholics recover a horror and compassion for the fate of their own brothers in the same conflict and a realization that their butchers may be the WWII vet living right down the street from them who "just took orders" to firebomb a city or cut-off distribution of food to civilians or to shoot up a village of harmless farmers grazing their cows.
The "heroic" WWII vet bombers used the spires of Christendom as their method of spotting and directing a rain of fire from the sky on Germany, Italy, France, etc. The better of them, like my great-uncle, have hung their heads in shame for sixty years over what they did, not prattled on about how just and worthy they were.
Precisely. That's why they were ghettoized.
We didn't kill them all, did we?
Only because Germany had outright criminal trash like Odlio Globocnik running things on the ground in Poland, while the US did not. It wasn't for some people's lack of trying in the US, if you go back and read the propaganda of the times, esp. in California.
Hermann, do you have a problem with Jews?
No.
Sometime, you should find and read Joseph Roddy's article "How the Jews Changed the Catholic Church", published in 1966 in Look Magazine in the aftermath of Vatican II. Its online and its about the above.
Are you angry that the Allies stopped the Holocaust?
You are suffering from a myth. We didn't stop the holocaust. We let it go churning right on till it was almost all over and nearly every Jew in Hitlers grasp was dead. Did you forget already - the US, Britain, etc. all refused to let Hitler release Jews to them for resettlement or to let them go to Palestine.
We didn't fight WWII because of the Holocaust. We fought to prevent Germany from becoming a fellow superpower, conveniently (for the US), sacrificing Britain's superpower status along the way.
Again, go back and look at the propaganda of the times. It was all about Hitler taking over the world, not about saving Jews. The US and Britain didn't give a damn about the Jews and their fate, nor did the generality of the US and British populace. It would nto have motivated them to fight. It was tough enough motivating Americans to fight with threats of Hitler conquering the world with no real direct threat to their lives from Hitler (unlike in blitzed Britain).
"The Holocaust" as a historical phenomena etched in people's consciousness is a creation of the 1970's. Prior to that time, if you pick up a WWII history (like Eisenhower's or Churchill's), or an old Encyclopedia, it will mention in about a paragraph (if it mentions it at all) that Hitler persecuted and killed Jews (not using the term "Holocaust" since it was not yet appllied to the historical event). The movement of it to center stage of the period's history is something from only the past 25 years.
They invented it on an unparalleled scale, since they had from 1942-1944 to sit on their hands doing nothing in Britain, followed by 1945-1947 sitting on their hands in Germany doing nothing. It is the first time in history a massive Army is raised and sent abroad with nothing to do but fornicate for three years, fight for one, and fornicate for another three years. Most armies are raised to fight from the start.
Its one thing that during war, it may be expected that some troops will take occasional sexual liberties in between fighting. Occasional sins can be repented and struggled agaisnt. Its another to leave them for years with that as the only thing to do. Such activity over a long term coarsens and destroys the mind and soul, as demonstrated by the utter collapse of civility and decency since 1945.
You are missing my point. You have a state run by a bunch of gangsters up from the gutters. What would you expect them to do to their self-proclaimed enemy number one?
I'm not apologizing for it, but pointing out that little else could have been expected from them. If it is thus a supposed concern of another party (like the US and Britain), they should take into acount the character of who they are dealing with an act accordingly to protect this perceived interest.
"Over paid, over sexed, and over here"?
No a Church that allies itself with Soviet Russia to expunge the Nazis is one that has lost is moral compass.
You seem to be suffering from the "Hitler the only Mosnter" syndrome. Many of us think that he should have been left to a slugfest with Stalin, with the good guys coming in to mop up the remains of both.
Heck, you don't even say Hitler should have been excommunicated, unless he was a "spiritual problem," whatever the hell that means.
No, I'm not trying to reinterpret what Pius XII was thinking by using temporal weapons he didn't have in place of spiritual weapons he did. Me personally, I think Hitler should have been excommunicated before the war for his assaults on the Church in 1937-1938, along with an interdict of all of Germany to foment social unrest. That is what a real Pope, like a St. Gregory VII, would have done.
"Over paid, over sexed, and over here"?
Oooo! Oooo! Oooo! Me! Pick me! I know!
Its an eminently American point of view, first brought to my attention by my WWII Army Air Force (Bomber) vet great-uncle, and seconded by several conversations with Joe Sobran on this historical subject.
It is not a "rah, rah, rah, Roosevelt is great" point of view.
Did anyone recently hear what ex-SecDef Robert MacNamara said of his role in planning the WWII bombing campaigns in "The Fog of War":
"We killed 90,000 Japanese civilians in one night. Women and children. Is that moral? Do we have a law against that? ... LeMay told me that he thought, if we lost this war, we would both be tried as war criminals. But we didn't lose, we won. But how is it that if you lose, it's a crime against humanity, but if you win, it's moral?"
http://esoteria.typepad.com/tuxedo/2004/01/errol_morris_ha.html
Another striking lesson for me on this topic was reading of the reaction of horror of Fr. Feeney (yes, the Fr. Feeney) in 1945 to the news that Hiroshima and Nagasaki had been nuked, especially since they were centers of Catholicism and the Jesuits in Japan. The horror he expressed is simply absent from most Americans on this topic.
No, I don't care what you think, because I already know who you are and what your agenda is.
As I said to you about 1 year ago - 225 years ago, my ancestors with other Americans of like mind fought a war to kick people like you out of this country and back to Britain. Its too bad you've returned with your obnoxious ideas. Don't expect to sell them to me though.
The gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
A phrase on the minds and lips of many Englishmen during WWII regarding US servicemen
Truthful facts are objective and knowable by all.
It is a fact that the Jews were subversive to the Nazis because the Nazis were utterly opposed to the Jews remaining as they were.
The alternatives are obviously false. The Nazis and Jews were neither allies nor neutral towards each other. Therefore, it must be expected the Nazis would go for the throat, as Hitler violently warned the world on 1/30/39 in a Reichstag speech:
"If the international finance-Jewry inside and outside Europe should succeed in plunging the nations into a world war yet again, then the outcome will not be the victory of Jewry, but rather the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe!"
http://www.holocaust-history.org/der-ewige-jude/hitler-19390130.shtml
The world's total lack of meaningful concern for the known fate of the Jews under Hitler shows clearly that this was not any motive in our actions in WWII. It is a gloss applied later to make a quest for superpower status by three opposing factions (America, Soviets, Nazis) look glorious and morally appealing on our part.
To use a later gloss to justify prior actions is ridiculous and a sham. If the prior explanations of the day no longer carry water, the original quest has to be rejected as poorly grounded in right motives.
The orignial context was a consideration of motives for war:
Were they wrong to stop him from exterminating the Jews and likely Catholics next?They didn't stop it, did they? And this wasn't the reason we went to war, was it? And America had the same sort of exclusion of Jews from society as Germany did into the 1950's, didn't it? And the Jews weren't being exterminated until the rest of the world refused to let them migrate out, post 1941, were they? Nobody wanted them! What was Nazi Germany supposed to do with a subversive element? Mollycoddle them? Did we Mollycoddle the Japanese in the US and Latin America (yes, we went and rounded them up in Peru and Mexico and elsewhere too)? Save yourself from the modern propaganda!
Again, stopping the slaughter of Jews was not a motive of our going to war (1) because it wasn't happening when we did go to war, but afterwards 1942-1944, (2) we never made stopping the slaughter a priority, although we were begged by the Jews to do so (i.e. bomb Auscwitz, bomb the railways leading to there, etc. - we bombed the Buna Synthetic Rubber factory at Birkenau, but not the gas chambers and crematoria right next door), (3) we really didn't want all those Jews anyway, although we could have taken them in, (4) the actual outcome of mass slaughter was the known and expected outcome by all parties involved - nobody was surprised, and it was in the news throughout WWII, as a review of newspapers from the time readily shows.
The actions of all involved do not show a motive of saving Jewish lives as being operative at the time. Bluntly, Germany considered them subversive, and we didn't care. Therefore, positing the stopping of the slaughter as our motive and justification for war is historically false (aside from its numeric difficulties - it is hardly "worth" the lives of 40 million to attempt to save the lives 10 million Jews - no matter how you balance the scales - expectations of attaining the result and proportionality of means are two of the tests for just cause in war - if all lives are equally valuable one cannot justify the known and unavoidable deaths of four people to save the life of just one other - but of course, such reasoning was not what as used to justify the war).
Which is what I meant by saying it is a non-American p.o.v.Even those who find Roosevelt odious hold to it. It is American dogma. Joseph Sobran is a good example of one who is vilified as anti-semitic and anti-American for uttering these kind of heresies.
"We as head of the Church refused to call Christians to a crusade to free the Russian people. ... National Socialism has had a more ominous effect on the German people than has Marxism on the Russians, so that only a total reversal of German policies, particularly of those relating to the Jews, could make any move on the part of the Holy See possible." (Pius XII, Consistorial Allocution, 1946, quoted in "Undermining the Catholic Church" by Mary Ball Martinez)
In his mind at least, stopping the deaths of Jews was more important than the overwhelming slaughter and destruction of Catholics and Protestants and Orthodox necessary to achieve it, or the freedom and liberty of the Church in Russia and Eastern Europe.
Again, familiarity with Fatima makes us realize that this is the Pope fighting spiritual wars with ineffective temporal weapons - and against the wrong enemy. Mary did not warn us that "Germany will spread her errors" but "Russia will spread her errors". Yet the Pope picked Russia and her errors over Germany and her errors as the primary threat to the Church and mankind. The wisdom or foolishness of this history is for you to decide.
That takes real nerve to bash a good Pope like Pius XII. Don't ever accuse traditionalists of being their own Pope. Your latest comments prove that in yourself.
Cut the "we" cr**. No one hates America like you do except for a European. I don't believe for one second you are an American.
What "anti-Semitism",
You, Hermann. It's you.
Yawn. Again, Pius XII gave us Bugnini and Antonelli and their Concilium who gave us the New Mass. Credit shoudl go where it belongs.
Don't ever accuse traditionalists of being their own Pope. Your latest comments prove that in yourself.
The comparison between criticizing political forays of a Pope to matters of spiritual obedience is nonsensical. I'm not under an obligation to follow the political opinions of the Pope. You are obliged not to be a schismatic.
Cut the "we" cr**. No one hates America like you do except for a European. I don't believe for one second you are an American.
Last I checked, I was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and living in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, son of parents whose ancestors had been in America since the 1600-1700's.
Hate America? Be serious woman.
You, Hermann. It's you.
Your lack of examples gives simply another demonstration of your willingness to fling slurs without evidence, as with your beloved pejorative "Neo-Catholic".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.