Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Most of Manson's cult zombies were *not* prosecuted.
Just Manson the hippie Fuherer himself, and the actual murderers like Patricia Krenwinkel, Charles "Tex" Watson, Susan Atkins, and Linda Kasabian.
The term "Nazi Hippie" may seem like an oxymoron, but it really does apply when we read Charles Manson's insane writings, right down to racial holocaust.
One Manson follower, Steve "Clem" Grogan, committed what was judged a lesser criminal act of murder and received a lesser sentence. Think of him as a retarded hippie Albert Speer if you will.
The rest of his followers? Let go, or at least let go until they did something criminal again, like Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme.
As I posted before, of course Nazis, like Manson followers, were evil, but the question of how far down the chain of command you can go must intelligently, and rationally, be asked.
You missed the entire point of Unsettomati's statement. CubsFan20 said "it would be like punishing the descendants of slave owners for slavery".
Unsettomati was quite correctly pointing out that the situations aren't comparable. One one hand we have people who were personally involved in committing these acts. On the other we have the descendants of people who committed acts.
So, like he said, it would be like charging Charles Manson's (or insert any notorious murderer here) grandchildren or great-grandchildren for those crimes.
Really? Because the people whom they are rounding up *now* that are making the news were very minor and very low level people. Among the ones to make headlines now, are a former clerk, a former radio operator, and a former bookeeper. All very old people about to pass away now.
The people being rounded up now are fugitives from justice for crimes that do not have a statutes of limitations. They are being apprehended to face trial for crimes that they have been accused of committing. If they are as innocent as you proclaim, they have little to fear from being tried in open court by jurist representing one of Europe's preeminent democracies.
Money is what corrupted the Nazis and everyone that worked for them
The pursuit of money led to piles of shriveled and used-up dead bodies
Learn the lesson. Was it a valuable lesson for you? What will you do if ever given Nazi orders
Sad thing about this entire issue is Germany is a lot more tolerant to people of all races and religious now than 99 percent of all countries in the world including the USA in my opinion. Nazi's still have to held accountable for their actions. If I killed your parents would you want somebody to hunt me down unit they found me no matter how long it takes.
My question is at what level do you stop holding a person accountable. The ones that actually killed the prisoners? Of course. The guards that never hurt anyone? Well, ok. What about the civilian farmer that brought food to the prison and new people were being killed but never saw anything. Do we hold them accountable as well for not trying to stop it?
I don't know how this figures into international law but under most criminal statutes in the U.S. playing in part of a criminal enterprise that results in death leaves one open to the charge of felony murder.
In my opinion, I cannot draw a distinction between the guard who unloaded the trains knowing full well the fate that awaited the trains cargo, and those who disposed of it. Perhaps there should be added penalties for those... strike that. I can't bifurcate levels of culpability between any of the personnel that operated the death camps.
Exactly. Not everyone could hide people who the Nazis were after. However, working as a guard is being complicit.
Keeping people confined in slave labor and death camps, at a very minimum, didn't hurt anyone?
Ensuring that trains holding thousand of passengers, making them stand in selection lines, one leading to immediate death another to forced labor, starvation and disease didn't hurt anyone?
Seriously?
Quote:
What about the civilian farmer that brought food to the prison and new people were being killed but never saw anything. Do we hold them accountable as well for not trying to stop it?
Let's put this in its proper context.
Your buddy goes out and kidnaps men women and children. He murders the old and children outright, places the remaining individuals in cages, barely feeds them, and from time to time shoots a few in the head. Now all you've "done" is "help" your buddy get the people out of the vehicle he brought them in, help to make sure that they made their way to their final destination, and make sure that none of your buddy's captives escaped. Now can you honestly argue that under any legal regime that you can imagine that you would be held culpable and your acts exempted from statutory limitations?
My question is at what level do you stop holding a person accountable. The ones that actually killed the prisoners? Of course. The guards that never hurt anyone? Well, ok. What about the civilian farmer that brought food to the prison and new people were being killed but never saw anything. Do we hold them accountable as well for not trying to stop it?
Simple lithmus test. If they had this on their uniform:
Keeping people confined in slave labor and death camps, at a very minimum, didn't hurt anyone?
Ensuring that trains holding thousand of passengers, making them stand in selection lines, one leading to immediate death another to forced labor, starvation and disease didn't hurt anyone?
Seriously?
Let's put this in its proper context.
Your buddy goes out and kidnaps men women and children. He murders the old and children outright, places the remaining individuals in cages, barely feeds them, and from time to time shoots a few in the head. Now all you've "done" is "help" your buddy get the people out of the vehicle he brought them in, help to make sure that they made their way to their final destination, and make sure that none of your buddy's captives escaped. Now can you honestly argue that under any legal regime that you can imagine that you would be held culpable and your acts exempted from statutory limitations?
Lets put this into better proper context.
Your buddy does the bolded above. You know that your buddy is doing all of this. You help out in his garden and bring the prisoners food.
Do you think you should be held accountable?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not everyone could hide people who the Nazis were after. However, working as a guard is being complicit.
