Hitler remains not Hitler.

[Carlisle Blues]

True, but the novel is correct as far as that ODESSA did exist and aided war criminals to escape. It's also correct in saying that the West Germany authorities did little to catch war criminals. The rest of course, is fiction.


I think it's highly likely that Hitler had a lot of psychological problems, but I know people with Asperger's syndrome who are a lot more "normal" and less sadistic than Mr Hitler was. Whatever Hitler had was IMHO a lot more than just Asperger's.

All I will say is that novel by definition is an invented prose narrative that is usually long and complex and deals especially with human experience through a usually connected sequence of events. Clearly there may be elements of truth embedded in the story, but it is still fiction.

Asperger's is not a predicate to the monstrous behavior exhibited by Hitler. That information was cited as anecdotal material, at best.

 

[Lone_Ranger]

"He made it to Brazil.

No need to "breathe life into the old monster".

:deadhorse ______

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Hugo Rafael Chávez Frías, Kim Il-sung, there are plenty of new ones to go around.

 

[Miss Neecerie]

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Hugo Rafael Chávez Frías, Kim Il-sung, there are plenty of new ones to go around.

But history is interesting.

Historical figures are interesting.

If the moment they are no longer au currant....we stop talking or thinking of the things they did...its the first step to forgetting how to stop it again.....

 

[BellyTank]

.
One thing's for sure: he's dead now.
.

Yes.
That sounds like a believable truth.


B
T

 

[Carlisle Blues]

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Hugo Rafael Chávez Frías, Kim Il-sung, there are plenty of new ones to go around.

Different flavor same brand of unmitigated hell!!!!!!!! However, this is a WWII thread not current events.

So there really is no need to"breathe life into the old monster" . There always has been and always will be a monster to deal with. Although the US was made aware of Hitler's machinations the US chose to ignore that information and practice the doctrine of avoidance. In that perhaps some blame can be spread around.

That is a lesson in and of itself.

 

[Dixon Cannon]

Nothing like stating the obvious:

Adolf Hitler born, 20 April 1889. He was a terrible person why does anyone really care if he died in the bunker. He had done his damage to humanity and left his legacy long before the alleged suicide in the bunker. What historical value does that information have anyway? Even if he did escape he would have been totally ineffectual as a theorist, leader or even a person.

Adolf Hitler’s personality was investigated posthumously for the assessment of personality, clinical, and neuropsychological disorders. Five academic Hitler historians completed the tests. The highest mean scores were Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, Psychotic Thinking and Schizophrenia, Paranoid Personality Disorder, Antisocial Personality Disorder, Narcissistic Personality Disorder, and Sadistic Personality Disorder . (See Frederick L. Coolidge, Felicia L. Davis, & Daniel L. Segal, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs)

Others assert that Hitler had borderline personality disorder and met all the criteria of Asperger syndrome.

Hitler was a drug addict using amphetamine occasionally after 1937 and became addicted to amphetamine after the late summer of 1942.

His health included tremors and irregular heartbeat during the last years of his life could have been symptoms of tertiary (late stage) syphilis, which would mean he had had a syphilis infection for many years.

It has also been speculated Hitler had Parkinson's disease. Newsreels of Hitler show he had tremors in his hand and a shuffling walk (also a symptom of tertiary syphilis, see above) which began before the war and continued to worsen until the end of his life.[/QUOTE]


I actually have in my hand as we speak, from my father's library, the 1941 edition of 'I Was Hitler's Doctor' by Kurt Krueger, M.D. (Introduction by Upton Sinclair). I read it decades ago, but in perusing it now, it is fascinating. I can see that I'll be reading this one again! http://www.henrymakow.com/hitlers_psychiatrist_cites_imp.html

-dixon canon

 

[Miss Neecerie]

Different flavor same brand of unmitigated hell!!!!!!!! However, this is a WWII thread not current events.

So there really is no need to"breathe life into the old monster" . There always has been and always will be a monster to deal with. Although the US was made aware of Hitler's machinations the US chose to ignore that information and practice the doctrine of avoidance. In that perhaps some blame can be spread around.

That is a lesson in and of itself.

But again.....how is ALL history not breathing life into old things? Whether good or bad? That is the nature of history, the retelling and adding information found out, to the story over time.

I honestly boggle at the idea that we can only look back at the 'good'...and not the 'bad' as well in the context in which they occurred.


It's not as if anyone here is saying...'am so glad he might have lived'....


Or maybe we should all just go talk about fluffy butterflies and bunnies.

 

[dr greg]

Adolf liked children and small dogs...

I was always fascinated by the fact that the Nazis were opposed to cruelty to animals and I believe one of their first acts of legislation was to outlaw vivisection. They also passed many laws protecting the forests from logging....and he was a vegetarian as well...quite a hippie on the face of it.....

 

[Diamondback]

Doubtful on AS: trust me, I know Asperger's in a way few ever can, and he was some other combination of Damaged Goods conditions completely.

In the end, it doesn't really matter, no matter what his little corner of Hell went "No Vacancy" long ago.

 

[LizzieMaine]

But again.....how is ALL history not breathing life into old things? Whether good or bad? That is the nature of history, the retelling and adding information found out, to the story over time.

Agreed. I think there's a real danger in simply writing Hitler off as some kind of unique and inexplicable monster -- because by doing so, we deny the depths of evil that humanity itself is capable of. Like it or not, he was human, not some monstrous comic-book-villain abstraction -- and we have to come to terms with him and what he did on that basis. And part of that involves the question of his final fate.

 

[Geronimo]

I figure this was a simple case of "tell the boss what he wants to hear." Some poor sap was given the task of digging up decaying bodies, found a skull with a bullethole in it (might've shot one himself), sent it to SMERSH. SMERSH knew that Stalin wanted closure. It looked plausible enough, so they signed off. Nobody wants to correct SMERSH, so it becomes history.
Oh. And since we're tangentially discussing conspiracy theories, I'd like to be the first to suggest that this was definitely the skull of Anastasia Romanova.

 

[Miss Neecerie]

I figure this was a simple case of "tell the boss what he wants to hear." Some poor sap was given the task of digging up decaying bodies, found a skull with a bullethole in it (might've shot one himself), sent it to SMERSH. SMERSH knew that Stalin wanted closure. It looked plausible enough, so they signed off. Nobody wants to correct SMERSH, so it becomes history.
Oh. And since we're tangentially discussing conspiracy theories, I'd like to be the first to suggest that this was definitely the skull of Anastasia Romanova.

:arated: :arated: :arated: :arated:



*swoon* SMERSH and Anastasia in the same post....

 

[Viola]

Adolf Hitler born, 20 April 1889. He was a terrible person why does anyone really care if he died in the bunker. He had done his damage to humanity and left his legacy long before the alleged suicide in the bunker. What historical value does that information have anyway? Even if he did escape he would have been totally ineffectual as a theorist, leader or even a person.

Let me flip this for you; what does it matter if he would have been totally ineffectual? How is that relevant? Is the ONLY concern recidivism? Is there no justice? Imagine cops who's only concern is washing some blood off a parking lot and then saying of the killer, "well he probably won't do that again so we might as well all go out for beer instead."

Do you think all Simon Wiesenthal's work was pointless meandering? Well they certainly aren't generals any more and they all live quietly in Argentina so who cares? What historical value is there?

 

[HadleyH]

I was always fascinated by the fact that the Nazis were opposed to cruelty to animals and I believe one of their first acts of legislation was to outlaw vivisection. They also passed many laws protecting the forests from logging....and he was a vegetarian as well...quite a hippie on the face of it.....

Omg!... from Hitler, to cruelty to animals to forest logging to eating red meat to butterflies....???


Wow, what a stretch....


What can one say.......



Scotty, beam me up , please ~~~~~

 

[Edward]

I was always fascinated by the fact that the Nazis were opposed to cruelty to animals and I believe one of their first acts of legislation was to outlaw vivisection. They also passed many laws protecting the forests from logging....and he was a vegetarian as well...quite a hippie on the face of it.....

One of my favourite lines in Watchmen was Rorschach's "Hitler was vegetarian." lol

Life would be much easier if we could just write off the 'villains' as inhuman monsters, wouldn't it? Same reason a lot of folks so badly wante to believe that the Columbine High School killers did it because of Marilyn Manson - if not, we have to face up to how and why our society creates such people, and all the problems in our own culture which make such dreadful things possible. Much easier just to demonise and scapegoat.

Agreed. I think there's a real danger in simply writing Hitler off as some kind of unique and inexplicable monster -- because by doing so, we deny the depths of evil that humanity itself is capable of. Like it or not, he was human, not some monstrous comic-book-villain abstraction -- and we have to come to terms with him and what he did on that basis. And part of that involves the question of his final fate.

Absolutely. It is my firm believe that when we demonise - or, indeed, as has been done with Churchill (by many accounts far from a nice person himself), lionise - a person, we dehumanise them, paradoxically to the point where their evil, or achievements.... or both.... is greatly diminished, to the detriment of historical accuracy.

 

[Carlisle Blues]

Let me flip this for you; what does it matter if he would have been totally ineffectual? How is that relevant? Is the ONLY concern recidivism? Is there no justice? Imagine cops who's only concern is washing some blood off a parking lot and then saying of the killer, "well he probably won't do that again so we might as well all go out for beer instead."

Do you think all Simon Wiesenthal's work was pointless meandering? Well they certainly aren't generals any more and they all live quietly in Argentina so who cares? What historical value is there?

Not flip but flippant is more like it.

If he had the medical problems that he was alleged to have been afflicted with; my choice would be to let him suffer the natural consequences without medical treatment.

This is my experience: From as far back as I cam remember I have seen people with tattoos on their arms. Although it was many years after WWII these people lived, had businesses and thrived my community. Even as a young boy, I sensed an empty, sometimes painful look in the eyes in many of those people. I did not understand I was too young. As time went on I realized exactly what those tattoos meant.

If you read my earlier post you would know that I thought he should have faced the consequences and not committed suicide. Absent that, especially in 2009, I see no real value on this issue for the victims of his atrocities.

My position is borne out of empathy and compassion rather than indifference for those victims. Actually I have spent a great deal of my time involved with those who were victimized, effected or sympathetic to those who suffered as a result of Hitler’s programs. In fact my graduate studies were spent in an institution where they allowed me to attend, in part, because I was a nice “GOY”. I also had some skills they felt that would warrant an exception in gaining entrance into their institution.

As an Historian of course I see value in determining with exactitude a clearer identification of the skull.

As a human being I see that it will only bring terrible memories back to those who suffered the most. In some it will make then relive that hell, in others it will spark anger and the rest one can only speculate.

BTW I think the NAZI hunters have done very necessary and vital work. Not just Simon Wiesenthal, but, Tuviah Friedman, Serge and Beate Klarsfeld, Yaron Svoray, Elliot Welles, Michel Thomas, and Efraim Zuroff, as well.

 

[Lone_Ranger]

Agreed. I think there's a real danger in simply writing Hitler off as some kind of unique and inexplicable monster -- because by doing so, we deny the depths of evil that humanity itself is capable of. Like it or not, he was human, not some monstrous comic-book-villain abstraction -- and we have to come to terms with him and what he did on that basis. And part of that involves the question of his final fate.

Indeed! History does repeat itself. Why is it that we choose to learn the lessons it teaches us, over and over again? We ignore the failures and successes of the past, at our peril.

 

[Feraud]

Agreed. I think there's a real danger in simply writing Hitler off as some kind of unique and inexplicable monster -- because by doing so, we deny the depths of evil that humanity itself is capable of. Like it or not, he was human, not some monstrous comic-book-villain abstraction -- and we have to come to terms with him and what he did on that basis. And part of that involves the question of his final fate.

Agreed. Let us not forget the support of the masses that allow such people to flourish.

 

[Carlisle Blues]

Agreed. I think there's a real danger in simply writing Hitler off as some kind of unique and inexplicable monster -- because by doing so, we deny the depths of evil that humanity itself is capable of. Like it or not, he was human, not some monstrous comic-book-villain abstraction -- and we have to come to terms with him and what he did on that basis. And part of that involves the question of his final fate.

If that is what was done then I agree. Quite fortunately he has been cast in a multitude of lights. Illuminating both his positive achievements I.E. Autobahn and his negative acts I.E. The Final Solution.

Most of us already have come to terms with him in his many roles and not in the limited view of a comic-book-villain abstraction.

 

[Miss Neecerie]

As an Historian of course I see value in determining with exactitude a clearer identification of the skull.

As a human being I see that it will only bring terrible memories back to those who suffered the most. In some it will make then relive that hell, in others it will spark anger and the rest one can only speculate.

So everyone can do the research etc...and but reporting it as news is what is offensive to you? Or is it that we can discuss it here that is the issue, and it should be confined to history books and academia?


To be frankly and brutally honest, those I have met would prefer to keep telling people about it, even if that makes things personally painful for themselves...rather then let things slowly fade out of the news and the average 15 year having no idea what -really- happened.

And their doing so, and news articles...give far more credit to their character then it does glorify Hitler.