Germany Steals Europes Best Violins
IWjmusa
What was I thinking when I wrote the title "Germany's Love Affair With
Classical Musik"?
mira
Eowine Eomundsdottir
IWjmusa <iwj...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010822104212...@mb-mp.aol.com...
> Perhaps this is a title you prefer....
Which begs the question:
Which violins? Art (like prominent violins) has a history which is usually
quit traceable. So far I have yet to see you name or indicate one specific
instance of violins being stolen in WWII and the germans refusing to return
the instrument to their rightfull owners (if and when both the instrument
and the rightfull owner have been identified to the satisfaction of a
qualified judge).
The kind of posts I see coming from you gives me the impression that you are
either
* rabidly anti-german (for whatever reason)
* a troll.
Eowine.
IWjmusa
>Which begs the question:
>
>Which violins? Art (like prominent violins) has a history which is usually
>quit traceable.
Below is the ENTIRE article. You be the judge.
Report: Nazis Seized Top Violins
CHICAGO (AP) - During the Holocaust, the Nazis seized top-quality violins in a
secret operation to collect the world's best musical instruments, according to
declassified U.S. military documents and other records.
The centuries-old violins include dozens of priceless Stradivari, Guarneri and
Amati, as well as lesser-known models prized by collectors, dealers, musicians
and investors.
In its Sunday editions, the Chicago Tribune reported its research into the
seizure through documents including declassified U.S. military records, German
documents and post-Holocaust claims at the National Archives.
The coveted violins taken by the Nazis could be the next area of inquiry by
those seeking reparations for Holocaust-era losses.
``This is right now in the earliest phase of our work, but it may be one of the
most fascinating areas of exploration,'' said Elan Steinberg, executive
director of the World Jewish Congress, a New York-based organization to protect
Jewish lives and property during the Holocaust. The group has been at the
forefront of negotiations regarding Holocaust-era lootings.
But attempts to recover the stolen instruments or their value will be
complicated by museums slow to acknowledge works procured under questionable
circumstances, the Tribune reported.
Violins are also more difficult to identify than works of art, which have
titles, dates and subjects. But in recent years art museums from Chicago to
Berlin have created Web sites detailing the history of works that may have been
looted during the Holocaust.
The details of the Nazis' thefts of antique violins were buried in classified
documents for decades. Adolf Hitler's chief ideologue, Alfred Rosenberg,
created a task force in 1940 to collect the best musical instruments and
scores. The campaign ran for five years.
Musicologists followed the Nazis as they invaded Europe, cataloging and
preparing the instruments for transport to the Music Office in Berlin.
``I used to play a wonderful Italian Gagliano violin,'' said Chicago Symphony
Orchestra violinist Francis Akos, who in 1939 won use of the instrument in a
competition.
With the outbreak of WWII, Akos, who is Jewish, was sent to a Nazi
concentration camp.
``When I came back ... I tried to find my friends,'' said Akos, 79, referring
to the benefactors who had provided him with the violin. ``None of them
survived the war. And their instruments disappeared somewhere, too. Everything
was gone.''
mira
Eowine Eomundsdottir
> Report: Nazis Seized Top Violins
Not very surprizing. This is a well known fact f history. Especially Goering
had a taste for stolen art. There is no doubt this happened, no one is
contesting it is wrong. But this is not about the 3rd reich, is it?
> In its Sunday editions, the Chicago Tribune reported its research
So, this is an investigation by a newspaper. You know, over here in europe a
qualified judge usually settles property disputes. I gather this is not the
case in the US where such disputes are settled by the Chicago Herald Tribune
according to IWjmusa.
> The coveted violins taken by the Nazis could be the next area of inquiry
by
> those seeking reparations for Holocaust-era losses.
They might, yes. I am sure the plaintiffs and the german courts will be able
to settle this.
> But attempts to recover the stolen instruments or their value will be
> complicated by museums slow to acknowledge works procured under
questionable
> circumstances, the Tribune reported.
This is not reported by "the tribune", it is an opinion held by the tribune.
A subtle yet essential difference. In any case it fails to provide details
of any museum involved, any violin involved or just how slow or why they are
slow to acknowledge them.
> Violins are also more difficult to identify than works of art,
Hence (just maybe) the difficulty of german museums to acknowledge anything?
> "And their instruments disappeared somewhere, too. Everything was gone.''
Sadly, this is the fate of all too many works of art during WWII.
At this point I would like to remark that:
a) violins (and other musical instruments) are _very_ vulnerable
b) germany was destroyed quite "grundlich".
So the disappearance and subsequent failure to resurface may not be a result
of those nasty germans not acknowledging the "Chicago Herald Tribune" as
their lord and master and ultimate source of justice, but to destruction due
to allied bombs or the chaos surrounding and following the collapse of the
3rd reich.
If instruments survive and were claimed (the article you present as the
basis for your accusations does not provide _any_ details of _any_ specific
claims), the slowness to acknowledge these claims may very well be the
result of difficulties in identifying them.
So IWjmusa is basing his accusations on a newspaper article (from yet
unknown sources) about a newspaper article. This does not exactly strike me
as balanced and indisputable, rather as opinionated, rash and lacking
substance.
Hence the tone of your posts does not exactly strike me as particularly
convincing. And if this is the sole basis for your accusations of _modern
day_ germans, you at least come very close to qualifying as a troll.
Eowine.
Andreas Thomsen
Hi Mira - you seem to be not only sloppy on orthography,
- so am I - but also on _tense_.
I do think that Nazi Germany _has stolen_ violins - and
a lot of other things -, I am not aware however that we
_do steal_ violins.
Well never mind: my opinion on the matter is quite simple:
give them back if found, pay a compensation if not, and keep
in mind that for war compensation, an overall agreement
is necessary because 10000 lawers & detectives working for
a 100 years would probably not be able to trace down all
cases of theft, looting, destruction, killing, corporal
damage etc - so without a general agreement, this would
never finish, and the victims would not live to the day
they get a recompensation. So even comparably small damage
compensations right now would be better than an afffair
settled after 10 years.
There are some points to add: some sort of a proof or at
least sufficient indication is necessary, as in all cases
of damage compensation. And German law says that someone
who has bought something in good faith cannot be forced
to give it back. So in some cases the German state will
have to pay out money instead of a restitution, or else
try to buy it back from the present owner to hand it over.
For there's no means to apply even a changed law backwards.
AFAIK, in all yet known cases of paintings etc, some sort
of agreement has been found up to now.
And then, it's high time to settle these things once
and for all, instead of digging out new cases after
settlements have been found. Maybe it would be good to
publish a limit date and an address in Germany were to
apply for these matters.
regards,
A.
--
Andreas Thomsen
email: tho...@uni-bonn.de
IWjmusa
>This is not reported by "the tribune", it is an opinion held by the tribune.
What! What are you talking about? I saw *no* commentary or opinion in that
article. It was a report. Period. Re-read it.....slowly
>A subtle yet essential difference. In any case it fails to provide details
>of any museum involved, any violin involved or just how slow or why they are
>slow to acknowledge them
I'm sure it will come out. As the article said, they are only in the beginning
stages of the entire subject.
>> Violins are also more difficult to identify than works of art,
>Hence (just maybe) the difficulty of german museums to acknowledge anything?
>
Ha! I bet Germany would be *real* able to identify a violin (or any other art)
they claim too be theirs if it was art in Saint Petersburg. Real able.
>So the disappearance and subsequent failure to resurface may not be a result
>of those nasty germans not acknowledging the "Chicago Herald Tribune" as
>their lord and master and ultimate source of justice
Weak cop-out. Very weak. Are you 15 years old? If so, then you have a strong
point.
>but to destruction due
>to allied bombs or the chaos surrounding and following the collapse of the
>3rd reich.
Right. It's the allies fault. I knew that but I was just testing ya'all.
LOL!
mira
IWjmusa
>> In its Sunday editions, the Chicago Tribune reported its research
>So, this is an investigation by a newspaper.
No. It was a report by Associated Press. That's waht the "AP" stands for. In
case you're not aware, AP is an international news service. It includes news
from Germany.
Didn't the German papers carry the story? And if not, why do you think that is?
I've often heard (on this ng) that news in America is not as international as
the news found in Germany and Europe itself, so how is it that Germany missed
the story IYHO?
mira
IWjmusa
>So IWjmusa is basing his accusations on a newspaper article (from yet
>unknown sources) about a newspaper article.
Again....AP (Associated Press)
>This does not exactly strike me
>as balanced and indisputable, rather as opinionated, rash and lacking
>substance.
Interesting! No denial here.
>Hence the tone of your posts does not exactly strike me as particularly
>convincing. And if this is the sole basis for your accusations of _modern
>day_ germans,
Who said anything about *modern day German's*?
But now that you brought it up, it appears that the denial found in this ng
represents modern day Germans. Go fiqure!
you at least come very close to qualifying as a troll.
Oh no.......I'll accept the title of being a full pledged troll by the
standards set in these recent posts, not just coming *very close) to
qualifying. Under that basis, I don't mind the full title at all.
mira
the troll
Richard Schaetzl
Andreas Thomsen wrote:
> There are some points to add: some sort of a proof or at
> least sufficient indication is necessary, as in all cases
> of damage compensation. And German law says that someone
> who has bought something in good faith cannot be forced
> to give it back.
Not correct, stolen goods can never become property of the new owner
(holder?), good faith or not. Good faith protects the new owner from
prosecution.
Exception is, when stolen goods might become property of the new
owner, when bought in public licensed auction. Another exception is
money and substitutes, of course.
Richard
--
Der Ton im Usenet ist häufig kürzer angebunden als im täglichen Leben,
denn Tippen geht langsamer als Reden. Daher fallen Höflichkeitsflos-
keln leichter unter den Tisch als anderswo. Deshalb sind die Aussagen
aber weder oberlehrerhaft noch böse gemeint. (Thomas Hochstein)
Wayne Brown
news:9m0h1o$2oo$1...@gazette.corp.medtronic.com...
>
> Which begs the question:
>
> Which violins? Art (like prominent violins) has a history which is usually
> quit traceable. So far I have yet to see you name or indicate one specific
> instance of violins being stolen in WWII and the germans refusing to
return
> the instrument to their rightfull owners (if and when both the instrument
> and the rightfull owner have been identified to the satisfaction of a
> qualified judge).
>
> The kind of posts I see coming from you gives me the impression that you
are
> either
>
> * rabidly anti-german (for whatever reason)
> * a troll.
>
> Eowine.
You're quite right. Famous violins are very traceable. But look at the
article again, this time carefully. It is one of the best examples of
incompetent journalism I have seen for quite a while. The AP journalist
would have received a failing mark on the piece in the better schools of
journalism in the US. In fact, a budding journalist writing like that would
have to fear not to be allowed to graduate!
The very first words are wrong, "During the Holocaust..." Why Holocaust?
That needs an explanation. Did all the stolen violins then belong to Jews?
If that is so, where are the references to the Jewish owners in the piece?
The Second World War began on September 1, 1939 when Germany attacked
Poland. Nazi officials began looting conquered country after conquered
country soon thereafter. The AP journalist obviously is not aware of any of
that, thus the holocaust introduction, without even the slightest backup or
justification for such a beginning.
Note the reference in the fourth paragraph, "...next area of inquiry..." Who
are the owners or their heirs who have claims? Just a vague reference to the
World Jewish Congress, which does not even raise a claim, saying the
organization's work is in its "earliest phase."
Then the sixth paragraph: "But attempts to recover..." Which museums are tho
se that are "slow to acknowledge"? And why from "Chicago to Berlin"? Is that
an innuendo that some of the violins are even in US museums? The journalist
is not going to tell us because the Associated Press knows it could be sued
back to the Stone Age by claims the news agency cannot back up. And the next
paragraph also begs for an explanation by the journalist: "Why should
museums have information even on their Web sites about stolen works of art
while declining to cooperate on violins?"
Next, why "declassified US military documents"? What was the secret? There
are even German records on looted property -- all available to journalists.
The journalist's remark begs for an explanation of the classification
reference. What about the "other records" in the lead. Not another reference
to them either, nowhere in the entire piece.
Finally, the journalist's star witness, Francis Akos, whom he quotes
verbatim, does not even claim his benefactors' violin was stolen. He said
the benefactors' musical instruments were gone. Destroyed in a bomb attack?
Burned in a fire caused by the fighting? How do Akos' remarks fit into the
story?
I am surprised that the Chicago Sun-Times carried such a thing, even on a
slow news day. The copy editor at the newspaper should have called the
Associated Press and said: "Look you, guys, sure it's slow news day. But did
you have to run a piece by your summer intern from the University of Iowa on
your wire? We're paying a lot of money for your news agency and we expect
you to supply us with quality reporting to help fill our pages. This
"holocaust" piece is going into the wastepaper basket!"
The Sun-Times, of course, has a readership for anything that starts out
"holocaust," but hopefully some of them can read. Unlike some of the trolls
on Usenet.
Regards, ----- WB.
CHICAGO (AP) - During the Holocaust, the Nazis seized top-quality violins in
a secret operation to collect the world's best musical instruments,
according to declassified U.S. military documents and other records.
The centuries-old violins include dozens of priceless Stradivari, Guarneri
and Amati, as well as lesser-known models prized by collectors, dealers,
musicians and investors.
In its Sunday editions, the Chicago Tribune reported its research into the
seizure through documents including declassified U.S. military records,
German documents and post-Holocaust claims at the National Archives.
The coveted violins taken by the Nazis could be the next area of inquiry by
those seeking reparations for Holocaust-era losses.
``This is right now in the earliest phase of our work, but it may be one of
the most fascinating areas of exploration,'' said Elan Steinberg, executive
director of the World Jewish Congress, a New York-based organization to
protect Jewish lives and property during the Holocaust. The group has been
at the forefront of negotiations regarding Holocaust-era lootings.
But attempts to recover the stolen instruments or their value will be
complicated by museums slow to acknowledge works procured under questionable
circumstances, the Tribune reported.
Violins are also more difficult to identify than works of art, which have
titles, dates and subjects. But in recent years art museums from Chicago to
Berlin have created Web sites detailing the history of works that may have
been looted during the Holocaust.
The details of the Nazis' thefts of antique violins were buried in
classified documents for decades. Adolf Hitler's chief ideologue, Alfred
Rosenberg, created a task force in 1940 to collect the best musical
instruments and scores. The campaign ran for five years.
Musicologists followed the Nazis as they invaded Europe, cataloging and
preparing the instruments for transport to the Music Office in Berlin.
``I used to play a wonderful Italian Gagliano violin,'' said Chicago
Symphony Orchestra violinist Francis Akos, who in 1939 won use of the
instrument in a competition.
With the outbreak of WWII, Akos, who is Jewish, was sent to a Nazi
concentration camp.
``When I came back ... I tried to find my friends,'' said Akos, 79,
referring to the benefactors who had provided him with the violin. ``None of
them survived the war. And their instruments disappeared somewhere, too.
Everything was gone.''
IWjmusa
>Not correct, stolen goods can never become property of the new owner
>(holder?), good faith or not. Good faith protects the new owner from
>prosecution.
In the states there has been the expression "Posession is nine tenths of the
law" however I think it's an outdated expression. One can face prosecution
for receiving stolen property.
The "good faith" measure may just convince the law not to throw you in jail.
mira
the troll
IWjmusa
>You're quite right. Famous violins are very traceable. But look at the
>article again, this time carefully. It is one of the best examples of
>incompetent journalism I have seen for quite a while.
Ha! LOL....Now it's AP's fault. I love it!
The AP journalist
>would have received a failing mark on the piece in the better schools of
>journalism in the US. In fact, a budding journalist writing like that would
>have to fear not to be allowed to graduate!
Ya think?
>
>The very first words are wrong, "During the Holocaust..." Why Holocaust?
>That needs an explanation. Did all the stolen violins then belong to Jews?
Did he say that? I don't see that sentence. Please point out *exactly* where
he said that all the violins were stollen from Jews.
>If that is so, where are the references to the Jewish owners in the piece?
Again, he never said that, Journalism Professor Wayne.
>The Second World War began on September 1, 1939 when Germany attacked
>Poland. Nazi officials began looting conquered country after conquered
>country soon thereafter. The AP journalist obviously is not aware of any of
>that, thus the holocaust introduction,
Perhaps the now unclassified documents show that the *orginized* plan to steal
this stuff came later.
without even the slightest backup or
>justification for such a beginning.
Yeah...yeah.....
>Note the reference in the fourth paragraph, "...next area of inquiry..." Who
>are the owners or their heirs who have claims? Just a vague reference to the
>World Jewish Congress, which does not even raise a claim, saying the
>organization's work is in its "earliest phase."
Which part is too hard for you to grasp? That they are still in the early
stages? Would you prefer that they state something that is not yet uncovered?
Professor of Journalism!
>Then the sixth paragraph: "But attempts to recover..." Which museums are tho
>se that are "slow to acknowledge"?
It appears that they *already* have experiences with those museums and they
know well that those museums tend to drag their feet on such issues. After
all, the article does speak of the World Jewish Congress and that they have
been doing this *recovery* on other items for a long time already. It's pretty
clear to me, Professor of Journalism.
And why from "Chicago to Berlin"? Is that
>an innuendo that some of the violins are even in US museums?
Yep. No *denial* here. Odd concept huh?
The journalist
>is not going to tell us because the Associated Press knows it could be sued
>back to the Stone Age by claims the news agency cannot back up.
I'd say that that's pretty good journalism. Not naming names *until* the
investigation is complete. Damn.....Glad you don't teach journalism,
Professor!
Are you suggesting that a good reporter writes what he/she does not yet know
too be true? What paper do you read, London's Mirror?
And the next
>paragraph also begs for an explanation by the journalist: "Why should
>museums have information even on their Web sites about stolen works of art
>while declining to cooperate on violins?"
It appears that some museums have been interested in assisting in getting items
returned so that later they have a chance to receive the property on loan, as
it should be. I guess, according to you, they are not too be trusted because
they have made some type of effort on some fronts. You're very weird Mein
Professor.
>Next, why "declassified US military documents"?
Never heard of declassification? O.K., it's like this. Most countries
declassify documents after several years. Sometimes 25 years, sometimes 50
years, sometimes longer. This generally gives the quilty a chance to die
before the truth goes public.
Example: The declassification of the files that the Stassi had on families.
You know, the ones that showed how German *family members*, brothers, sisters,
husbands, children and fathers were spying and reporting on eachother.
What was the secret? There
>are even German records on looted property --
No secret? Well, now that it is declassified, has the story appeared in any
German papers? Then I guess it's still a secret over there. I wonder why!
<snip, cause it's useless>
>Finally, the journalist's star witness, Francis Akos, whom he quotes
>verbatim, does not even claim his benefactors' violin was stolen. He said
>the benefactors' musical instruments were gone. Destroyed in a bomb attack?
What?! Where did he say that?! I don't see it Professor..... Here's his
*exact* quote. I don't see where he says or even suggests that the property
was in a bomb attack....you liar.
Here's what the man said.
``I used to play a wonderful Italian Gagliano violin,'' said Chicago
Symphony Orchestra violinist Francis Akos, who in 1939 won use of the
instrument in a competition.
With the outbreak of WWII, Akos, who is Jewish, was sent to a Nazi
concentration camp.
``When I came back ... I tried to find my friends,'' said Akos, 79,
referring to the benefactors who had provided him with the violin. ``None of
them survived the war. And their instruments disappeared somewhere, too.
Everything was gone.''
That suggests that his friends were loaded on a boxcar....not bombed by the
allies. Damn...Gotta watch you revisionists every minute!
>Burned in a fire caused by the fighting? How do Akos' remarks fit into the
>story?
He played the violin...It's gone. (BONG!) Professor.
>I am surprised that the Chicago Sun-Times carried such a thing, even on a
>slow news day.
Sunday....A slow newsday. Perhaps in Germany, not here Professor.
<snip> useless again. something about an intern from Iowa.
>The Sun-Times, of course, has a readership for anything that starts out
>"holocaust," but hopefully some of them can read.
Oh, I'm sure they read. In fact they reach a huge German-American readership
that live through-out that region.
Unlike some of the trolls
So Professor....Now please go back and clean up some of the crap you threw out.
I gave you *direct* misquotes made by *you*. Clean them up.....
mira
the troll
IWjmusa
>IWjmusa wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps this is a title you prefer....
>>
>> What was I thinking when I wrote the title "Germany's Love Affair With
>> Classical Musik"?
>Hi Mira - you seem to be not only sloppy on orthography,
>- so am I - but also on _tense_
Hi Andreas----
Thank you. Again with the semantics huh?
>I do think that Nazi Germany _has stolen_ violins - and
>a lot of other things -, I am not aware however that we
>_do steal_ violins.
Perhaps not. But then again attempting to cover up a crime is generally
considered an accessory to the crime. Even by way of denial. Example: Is it
*not* a crime in Germany to deny the the holocost even existed?
>Well never mind:
No, not never mind. It appears that so many of your comrads are bent of
employing semantics and minor details as some type of offensive goal. I find
that extreamly telling....
What a waste of time and goes again to the very heart of cowardness and lack of
character. The upshot is that it serves no purpose and gathers no respect.
Look at these posts. The time spent ducking the subject, thus supporting the
Nazi's actions is astounding. All because these good German's were totally
unable to discuss an action that they themselves claim that they never
supported.
Had I known that I was insulting so many *modern* German's I would *not* have
posted the article. Frankly I had no idea that so many German's would deny the
article was true.
It's a know fact around here that I'm not a supporter of the USA's repubican
party. Do you think for a second that I would jump all over someone if they
posted an article that was not favorable to the republican's? Of course not.
I'd applaud it if it seemed true.
My point is that the statements made here may have showed the true colors of
some of today's *modern* German. You can blame that on my delivery (of course)
if you wish....You can also dance around it via semantics....or you can require
bulletproof documentation from the victims themselves, but the truth will
float above such crap. Always does.
It makes one wonder if a serial number stamped in one's arm would be accepted
as a receipt!
You and your comrads beg for nothing short of such a statement being made from
your stonwalling alone and the *great* pride you (collective you) take in the
art of semantics....So go ahead, scream that I think all German's are Nazi's
now! Just another cop-out, and something that it appears you needed to hear
being said. Why is a mystery, frankly. Maybe something to do with being
masochistic. Who knows?
Kind of reminds me of a true story when an American (one of several) send
German war bonds to Germany too be cashed in. Nothing was ever returned
regardless that the bonds were Barer Bonds.
Finally a South Florida gentleman made the trip to Germany. Bonds in hand.
Went to the bank with them, handed them to the bank teller. She told him to
hold on while she went over to a cancelation machine and punched holes in *all*
his bonds.
She returned to the customer, handed him the canceled bonds (with no cash).
When he asked where his money was she informed him that the bonds were no
longer good because they had cancelation holes in them.
True story.....Miami Herald, a few years back. And no, I'm not going to look
it up and provide it as I've *already* learned that provided doumentation
and/or articles around here mean *nothing* more then a chance to practice
denial....As if you guys need the practice!
mira
the troll
Andreas Thomsen
I have no time to go into detail - but do you think it
would be a good idea to start a discussion about how to
stop violence in the families by asking the audience:
"Will you stop beating your wives?"
But the way: "semantics" is basically just a pompous word
for good old "_meaning_" - so no wonder some people do
care for it.
"You have stolen my violin" and
"You have played on your violin"
essentially differ by _semantics_
:-))
Now back to the discussion...
--
Andreas Thomsen
email: tho...@uni-bonn.de
Wayne Brown
pitiful, poorly written, that it is worthwhile presenting a slightly more
complete picture from reputable sources. The story is not new. There is much
more than to it than indicated in that lopsided AP piece; therefore, I
believe, it is worthwhile calling attention to writers who have done
research in the field.
More than two years ago a nationwide radio station in Germany
(Deutschlandfunk) aired a program on two books that had appeared on the
German book market in 1998 after being translated into German. They were
“The Twisted Muse: Musicians and Their Music in the Third Reich,” Oxford
University Press; ISBN: 0195096207, by the Canadian historian Michael H.
Kater and “Sonderstab Musik: Music Confiscations by the Einsatzstab
Reichsleiter Rosenberg Under the Nazi Occupation of Western Europe,”
Amsterdam Univ Pr; ISBN: 9053561757, by the Dutch musicologist Willem de
Vries. Here are some of the highlights of that program in 1999 on German
radio:
“’Music was important to the National Socialists in a very special way,’
writes Michael Kater. ‘Wagner once said – and Goebbels loved to quote it:
The master of music is a German. In other words that means that no one but a
German can make real music. That was absolutized; naturally this tendency
existed long before the National Socialists. Anything that was not German
music was actually crap, even, for example Italian and French music, not to
mention jazz. That was naturally poison.’
“The German people were to be protected from such poison. The National
Socialists did not miss an opportunity to get the German music scene into
line and to eliminate influence ‘foreign to the nation,’ as the Canadian
historian Michale Kater describes in such rich detail and more vividly than
anyone before him. [...]”
“After the war began, the persecution of the Jews was extended to the
occupied countries. Many had to flee helter-skelter from the German troops.
It was first and foremost the Nazi ideologist Alfred Rosenberg who was out
to get the belongings they had left behind. Reichsleiter Rosenberg,
‘Commissioner for Overseeing the Entire Spiritual and World-Outlook
Education of the NSDAP,’ saw the war as a chance for his planned Higher
School, a kind of monumental culture and education site of National
Socialism, to collect together all the works of art and culture in the
occupied countries that seemed appropriate to him. He set up the Rosenberg
Operational Staff, which in turn created special units for various areas of
culture, including a special unit for music under the direction of the
musicologist Herbert Gerigk.
“The Dutch musicologist Willem de Vries stumbled onto this previously little
known special unit when he was doing research on the French composer Darius
Milhaud, a Jew, who had fled with his wife to the US at the outbreak of the
war. When he came back, the Nazis had carted off all his household goods,
including a valuable music library, notes, music scores and records. The
Dutch researcher, becoming curious, discovered that Milhaud was not an
isolated case and that the special music unit had systematically sought out
all the music property of Jews in France, Holland and Belgium who had fled
and had carried it off to Germany. In 1942 this looting was extended within
the framework of the ‘final solution’ to all Jews in the occupied countries.
‘Then Hitler said to Rosenberg: Now you have every chance to sort out all
Jewish property in the occupied territories, to take it with you and to
distribute it,’ writes Willem de Vries. If one bears in mind that there were
70,000 Jewish households in Holland, Belgium and France, which were all
carted off to Germany, including music material, pianos, violins, music
books and records, then one can imagine what a huge amount of music from the
occupied territories was taken to Germany.
“The 70,000 households which were liquidated at that time filled 669 freight
trains and took up a loading area of over one million square meters. Only a
small portion was returned after the war. Much was destroyed in bomb attacks
on the warehouses; much was carted off after the war, for example to Russia;
and some of it was quietly embezzled by private persons. As Willem de Vries
learned during his research, the Nazi musicologists stole not only Jewish
property. They were of the opinion that anything which might be construed as
being part of German music history was to be become German property. De
Vries writes: ‘Documents show that the special music unit and its
collaborators sought out German manuscripts in all the libraries in
Brussels, Amsterdam and Paris and a great deal disappeared and has not come
back; moreover, it is not clear exactly what was taken. For example, there
was no catalog in the Bibliotheque du Convervatoire in Paris, thus no one
could say after the war: Yes, that was here before the war and that was
stolen. But Gerigk’s notes speak of an incredible amount of manuscripts by
Wagner, Marschner, Lorzing, Meyerbeer, Beethoven and Bach. Most of the
things were taken unofficially because France was a collaborating country.
There was the Vichy government, which worked together with the Germans, and
it wasn’t exactly friendly to make off with national treasures." [...]
Regards, ----- WB.
IWjmusa
>But the way: "semantics" is basically just a pompous word
>for good old "_meaning_" - so no wonder some people do
>care for it.
"good old _meaning_" ?
You're right, some people like toying with it but it appears that many German's
use it to hide behind. Dosen't work BTW!
mira
the troll
M. Steinkoenig
> >"Eowine Eomundsdottir"
>
>
> >Hence the tone of your posts does not exactly strike me as particularly
> >convincing. And if this is the sole basis for your accusations of _modern
> >day_ germans,
>
> Who said anything about *modern day German's*?
Then by your own admission, this issue has nothing to do with
modern-day Germans or their culture.
EOD.
> But now that you brought it up, it appears that the denial found in this ng
> represents modern day Germans. Go fiqure!
Erm, assuming that this _is_ denial, how so? Your trolling
certainly doesn't represent modern-day Americans...
> mira
> the troll
Uh huh. _YOU_ said it.
IWjmusa
>"IWjmusa" <iwj...@aol.com>
>>"Eowine Eomundsdottir"
>> >Hence the tone of your posts does not exactly strike me as particularly
>> >convincing. And if this is the sole basis for your accusations of _modern
>> >day_ germans,
>>
>> Who said anything about *modern day German's*?
>
>Then by your own admission, this issue has nothing to do with
>modern-day Germans or their culture.
No, that's not what I said Horst.....Now silly, did I say that modern day
German's are going around stealing violins? Silly Billy.....
About culture. Yep, has everything to do with the subject matter. Or don't
you find history and art too be part of culture?
>
>EOD.
>
>> But now that you brought it up, it appears that the denial found in this ng
>> represents modern day Germans. Go fiqure!
>
>Erm, assuming that this _is_ denial, how so? Your trolling
>certainly doesn't represent modern-day Americans...
>
>> mira
>> the troll
>
>Uh huh. _YOU_ said it
>Erm, assuming that this _is_ denial, how so? Your trolling
>certainly doesn't represent modern-day Americans...
>
What trolling? This stuff is factual. I can't help it if your country's
history is knee deep in shit and pops up in an AP report, can I? Nor can I
help that so many *modern day German's* seem too be supporting the Nazi's, in
this thread anyway......
mira
the troll
>Uh huh. _YOU_ said it.
Deep. Real deep!
mira
the troll
>
IWjmusa
So from what you have said, I gather that you know people who have said that
they themselves have not stollen a violin?
mira
the troll
IWjmusa
>IWjmusa wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps this is a title you prefer....
>>
>> What was I thinking when I wrote the title "Germany's Love Affair With
>> Classical Musik"?
>Hi Mira - you seem to be not only sloppy on orthography,
>- so am I - but also on _tense_.
>I do think that Nazi Germany _has stolen_ violins - and
>a lot of other things -, I am not aware however that we
>_do steal_ violins.
Right. But your memory seems too be lacking. As I remember it, I titled my
post with the following:
"Germany's Love Affair With Musik", however as you said shortly after my post,
you were unhappy with the title as it suggested a provoctive motive. I didn't
agree. In fact, I was mindfull to spell "musik" (with a_k_) as it is spelled
in Germany. That was out of respect......
However after your protest of the selected title, I changed it to what you
perhaps expected (and perhaps) preferred. This way you can scream
"anti_German" with a bit more weight behind the statement.
As they say; "Be carefull what you wish for!".
mira
the troll
IWjmusa
>But the way: "semantics" is basically just a pompous word
>for good old "_meaning_" - so no wonder some people do
>care for it.
>
>"You have stolen my violin" and
>"You have played on your violin"
>essentially differ by _semantics_
>
No. Those (above are two totally seperate sentences with two seperate
meanings).
This might provide you with a better example.
Q: Did you post the notice of the violins to insult the German people?
A: No. I did not think it would be insulting.
Response: So you *admit* that you thought about it and considered that it
*could* be insulting, but discounted that notion!
That's semantics. aka, lawyer talk!
mira
the troll
M. Steinkoenig
> Nor can I help that so many *modern day German's* seem too be supporting
> the Nazi's, in this thread anyway......
Can you specifically name these Germans?
IWjmusa
>"IWjmusa" <iwj...@aol.com>
>> Nor can I help that so many *modern day German's* seem too be supporting
>> the Nazi's, in this thread anyway......
>
>Can you specifically name these Germans?
Sure. Everyone who danced around the article, claimed that the article was a
fraud, claimed that the article was wrong, claimed that the messenger was
posting something against *modern* German's.
And everyone who avoided the subject itself and made the choice to duke it out
on semantics and/or denial.
Ring any bells?
Pauley
this dated issue (which is based on flimsy journalism, at best) begs the
question, "is therapy necessary?" And, insofar as compensation is
concerned, are the "victims" really going to be compensated or is this just
another wealth transfer to greedy U.S. law firms? I think we all know the
answer to that question!
"IWjmusa" <iwj...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010823203418...@mb-mp.aol.com...
Juergen Hubert
In other words, you didn't answer his question directly. Oh, well...
- Juergen Hubert
Eowine Eomundsdottir
Yeah. Godwins Bells.
Dave Blair
<Richard....@stud.uni-hannover.de> wrote:
>Andreas Thomsen wrote:
>
>> There are some points to add: some sort of a proof or at
>> least sufficient indication is necessary, as in all cases
>> of damage compensation. And German law says that someone
>> who has bought something in good faith cannot be forced
>> to give it back.
>
>Not correct, stolen goods can never become property of the new owner
>(holder?), good faith or not. Good faith protects the new owner from
>prosecution.
>
>Exception is, when stolen goods might become property of the new
>owner, when bought in public licensed auction. Another exception is
>money and substitutes, of course.
Interesting. What exactly are "substitutes"? How does this law apply
frx. to bootlegged intellectual property, frx software licenses?
Specifically, I'm curious as to how this applies to the customers
buying from computer consultants dealing in whole hardware and
software packages (at horrendous prices) but without the original
licensed software (the original CD-roms, EULA etc.), starting with the
operating system, let's say Windows 2000. Obviously, the consultant
would be up for prosecution, but could the buyer make a convincing
case that he bought on good faith, or would he be expected to know
that he's using an illegal copy if he hasn't bought the license?
Reason for asking is that this kind of deal seems quite common here.
One place (forgotten where) offered me this kind of deal around 8
years ago, when I was starting up business. Obviously, I refused; I'm
not that naive, but I know that some people are.
Dave
--
Dave Blair
Halle/Saale, EU
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
Check out our new Unlimited Server. No Download or Time Limits!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! ==-----
IWjmusa
>"IWjmusa" <iwj...@aol.com>
>> Sure. Everyone who danced around the article, claimed that the article
>was a
>> fraud, claimed that the article was wrong, claimed that the messenger was
>> posting something against *modern* German's.
>>
>> And everyone who avoided the subject itself and made the choice to duke it
>out
>> on semantics and/or denial.
>>
>> Ring any bells?
>
>In other words, you didn't answer his question directly. Oh, well...
>
LOL. I'm still waiting for *you* to *directly answer the question about your
negitive posts about the French. Not that I don't understand those feelings,
but I don't understand your silence on that *trolling* subject.
mira
the troll
IWjmusa
>Enough about these stupid violins! IWjmusa, your boorish ruminating about
>this dated issue
Ahhhh. I hear that "I screwed you but lets move on" statement in your post.
Reminds me of Bush... The *elections* are old, I screwed you.... so lets move
on, and stop questioning the results.
(which is based on flimsy journalism, at best)
AP? Perhaps another writer, in Germany for example, could have written a
better article. The only problem with that is that I've asked if anyone has
seen the subject picked up by any German newspapers. I've not received a
reply. I assume the story has not been carried in the German press and the
reason seems clear.
begs the
>question, "is therapy necessary?"
Weak. Very weak. That's a Newsgroup101 comment.
And, insofar as compensation is
>concerned, are the "victims" really going to be compensated
It appears that you had a hard time with *that* childish article. The major
point was getting various museums to give up the violins themselves. I saw
nothing about cash, did you? I would assume that if the vilions themselves
were collected they would go to the estate of the original owners.
or is this just
>another wealth transfer to greedy U.S. law firms?
So exactly how does a lawyer collect 33 1/3 % of a violin, which is the normal
attorney rate in recovery fee's?
I think we all know the
>answer to that question!
Are you suggesting that pristine Germany is without it's share of greedy
lawyers or *others*? Try to remember the subject of this thread first, then
answer the above question. You don't have to tell me what answer you come up
with, just swish it around in your head for a few days and get back to me....Or
not!
mira
the troll
Christa Brady
I guess that makes me culpable as well, since I never replied to that
particular thread.
Yup, * they* are everywhere!!!!!!!
C. Brady
IWjmusa
>I guess that makes me culpable as well, since I never replied to that
>particular thread.
>Yup, * they* are everywhere!!!!!!!
>
Nope. No mention of those who *never* responded. It read, "And everyone who
avoided the subject *and* made the choice to duke it out on semantics and/or
denial".
However if you choose to support the actions of the Nazi's and the theft of the
violins, knock yourself out!
mira
the troll
Patrick Walz-Damidaux
>"IWjmusa" <iwj...@aol.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:20010823022700...@mb-fx.aol.com...
> Had I known that I was insulting so many *modern* German's I would *not*
have
> posted the article. Frankly I had no idea that so many German's would
deny the
> article was true.
Name 3 German posters who have been denying the fact that violins were
stolen during the war.
> My point is that the statements made here may have showed the true colors
of
> some of today's *modern* German. You can blame that on my delivery (of
course)
> if you wish....You can also dance around it via semantics....or you can
require
> bulletproof documentation from the victims themselves, but the truth will
> float above such crap. Always does.
Name 3 German posters who were against giving these violins back.
> It makes one wonder if a serial number stamped in one's arm would be
accepted
> as a receipt!
What does a serial number in the arm have to do with stolen violins? Do you
think only violin owners were sent into the camps?
Let´s have a look on how I saw our first two postings on this thread thread
:
(I´ll leave the other ones out as they didn´t stay on-topic)
You posted:
>>> So true. Well at least the victims can't claim that the theives were
stupid
>>> being that they stole something that's worth something.
I answered:
>>Lol, my grandmother used to tell me how Allied soldiers stole her fake
>>jewelry (she had hidden away the real one).
You get into the defence and start leashing out:
>LOL. That's real funny. Too bad the Jews being loaded into the boxcars
could
>not be so cleaver as to give the Nazi pig a fake violin while they hid the
real
>one. Don't pad youself on the back too hard! Remember....you wern't
there.
You attacked me for this little story. Why? As far as I can tell I didn´t
attack you or your posting.
I claim that looting is not better than stealing and you attack me. Why?
I ask for some more details of this famous article:
>>Now that´s true. I don´t know about the article. Did it say on whose
behalf
>>the instruments were stolen? There were lots of Nazi officials who liked
to
>>"collect" precious items. So was it the (private) work of governmental
>>officials or were they stolen for something like the "Linzer Museum"?
You get aggressive:
>Hey! Who knows in Germany? The land of the famous ....point the fingr to
>someone else syndrom.
Why didn´t you answer my question who´s behind the stealing? You later
provided a link to the article in which the answer can be clearly read.
Why did you chose to insult?
I more or less tell you that your generalizations (all Germans love
classical music, all Germans did steal violins) are dubious at best.
[Wow. So 60 millions stole violins]
You get defensive once again. Why? Don´t you agree with me that stereotyping
isn´t the most productive way to lead a sensible discussion?
I mention that art was looted from the Allies as well - without them leaving
a receipt.
You get defensive. Why?
I mention that Goering did *steal* art and (sometimes) gave a *receipt* for
this.
You get defensive (and offensive). Why?
I point out that without a proof it´s unlikely that something will be given
back.
What´s wrong with that?
Regards
Patrick
IWjmusa
>Name 3 German posters who have been denying the fact that violins were
>stolen during the war.
>
patrick....american's (generally) are not the best at naming names. it's just
not something we consider to be in good form. you'll just have to try to
undestand that.
>> It makes one wonder if a serial number stamped in one's arm would be
>accepted
>> as a receipt!
>What does a serial number in the arm have to do with stolen violins? Do you
>think only violin owners were sent into the camps?
right. that's what i thought. actually i thought germany had several camps
based on what the victims played. If you played the violin for example, you
were sent to a the violin camp, if it was the flute, you we're off to the flute
camp, and so on.
>>>> So true. Well at least the victims can't claim that the theives were
>stupid
>>>> being that they stole something that's worth something.
>
>I answered:
>
>>>Lol, my grandmother used to tell me how Allied soldiers stole her fake
>>>jewelry (she had hidden away the real one).
>
>You get into the defence and start leashing out:
Perfect example and so true to form on this NG. Notice how the mere mention of
something about Germany that's not exactly favorable and you will almost
*always* get a....."well the american's did this" answer. I can set a clock to
how soon I'd see such a response and here, you outlined it perfectly. danke.
What's best is that you managed to highlight the so-called super cleverness of
the German who had the ability to switch her jewerly and give the *allies*
paste....Now how many violin owners do you think can come up with a fake while
being lined up at the train station? I think you were pretty insensitive to
the post, thus my response. But you already knew that!
My response:
>>LOL. That's real funny. Too bad the Jews being loaded into the boxcars
>could
>>not be so cleaver as to give the Nazi pig a fake violin while they hid the
>real
>>one. Don't pat youself on the back too hard! Remember....you wern't
>there.
>You attacked me for this little story. Why? As far as I can tell I didn´t
>attack you or your posting.
Trust me, I didn't attack you. We just kicked the dirt back and forth a
bit...I thought.
>I claim that looting is not better than stealing and you attack me. Why?
Perhaps it was your quick snap to the allies without even addressing the
subject...But I also agreed with you about that.
>I ask for some more details of this famous article:
>>>Now that´s true. I don´t know about the article. Did it say on whose
>behalf
>>>the instruments were stolen? There were lots of Nazi officials who liked
>to
>>>"collect" precious items. So was it the (private) work of governmental
>>>officials or were they stolen for something like the "Linzer Museum"?
I'm not someone who subscribes to the common (stock) answer that Nazi's were
somehow some *other* people and not German's. I know many German's like to play
that card, and usually do, but that *finger pointing* is a dead toad to me.
It's almost as if many German's want the world to believe that some other form
of life arrived from space, but on Nazi uniforms and tarnished the good name of
the German people. When that fails, they generally make sure you understand
that they themselves were not born at the time.
>You get aggressive:
Nope. I simply provide a reality check.
>>Hey! Who knows in Germany? The land of the famous ....point the fingr to
>>someone else syndrom.
Well? Is that a lie? And I don't consider that aggressive.
>
>Why didn´t you answer my question who´s behind the stealing? You later
>provided a link to the article in which the answer can be clearly read.
>Why did you chose to insult?
I don't consider my response to be an insult. You were clearly ready to switch
the stealing to the allies. I stopped you. Is that an insult? Although I
also acknoweldged that I'm sure the allies had their hands in thefts as well.
Remember?
>I more or less tell you that your generalizations (all Germans love
>classical music, all Germans did steal violins) are dubious at best.
I never said either.
>[Wow. So 60 millions stole violins]
You said that, again to attempt to dilute the subject at hand. I never said
that.
>You get defensive once again. Why? Don´t you agree with me that stereotyping
>isn´t the most productive way to lead a sensible discussion?
>
Yes. I also feel that when you stonewall this guy with tounge-in-cheek
semantics on important subjects, it's not going to work. That's what's really
upsetting you here IMHO.
>I mention that art was looted from the Allies as well - without them leaving
>a receipt.
>You get defensive. Why?
Beacause we all know that two wrongs don't make a right. Don't we?
>I mention that Goering did *steal* art and (sometimes) gave a *receipt* for
>this.
>You get defensive (and offensive). Why?
Defensive - Offensive - Schmensive! Whatever....I simply pointed out that I
doubt Goering was standing at the train station handing out receipts in Yiddish
or giving a receipt to some jew as he was kicking the gold out of their teeth.
You wanted to suggest that Mr. nice guy Goering was only acting like good
family friend and caring for their possessions while they were off to summer
camp. Did you really except me to accept that type of answer?
>I point out that without a proof it´s unlikely that something will be given
>back.
>What´s wrong with that?
Because it's so typical German to me. We know we took *everything* that you
owned. Burned your documents and left you with the shirt on your back....But,
if you want what we stole from you back, you must show us the paperwork that we
know you don't have, cause we took it already. Now are we not clever?
Just like the story of the guy with the German Bonds and the cancelation
machine.
Do you really expect that type of shit to fly? Who do you think you're talking
to?
Regards to you to Patrick....Don't take all this NG stuff too personally. In
the big picture, it's nothing but hot wind blowing around.
mira
the (low) troll
Patrick Walz-Damidaux
> >"Patrick Walz-Damidaux"
>
> >Name 3 German posters who have been denying the fact that violins were
> >stolen during the war.
> >
>
> patrick....american's (generally) are not the best at naming names. it's
just
> not something we consider to be in good form. you'll just have to try to
> undestand that.
The gist of this is: The thread turned pretty personal pretty fast and the
thread subject was lost. I think you´ll not find many persons in this NG
who´ll claim that the violins shouldn´t be returned. On the other you won´t
find many people who´ll support the return of violins without any proof.
[snip serial number a proof?]
Well, but you agree that having been in a camp is no proof of having owned a
violin? AFAIK you get a pension if you were an inmate. In that case a serial
number on your arm is a proof. But not in the case of a stolen violin.
> Perfect example and so true to form on this NG. Notice how the mere
mention of
> something about Germany that's not exactly favorable and you will almost
> *always* get a....."well the american's did this" answer. I can set a
clock to
> how soon I'd see such a response and here, you outlined it perfectly.
danke.
Well, sorry. Actually it was French soldiers who stole the jewelry (I asked
around in my family, there you see how such a thread can have side-effects!)
The Americans looted the castle *g*
[fake jewlery robbed by Allied soldiers]
> What's best is that you managed to highlight the so-called super
cleverness of
> the German who had the ability to switch her jewerly and give the *allies*
> paste....
I was referring to your paragraph about the thieves being clever and
stealing something precious. Why do you react so strongly at my grandmother
behaving "super clever"? Because she´s German? If someone had managed to
smuggle his violine out of occupied Europe you´d probably applaud his
cleverness - but when my grandmother is able to keep her jewelry you get
angry.Don´t you think this is a double-standard?
>Now how many violin owners do you think can come up with a fake while
> being lined up at the train station? I think you were pretty insensitive
to
> the post, thus my response. But you already knew that!
I didn´t suggest to anyone to fake his violin. This sort of
"super-cleverness" works in "Hogan´s Heroes".
> >I claim that looting is not better than stealing and you attack me. Why?
>
> Perhaps it was your quick snap to the allies without even addressing the
> subject...But I also agreed with you about that.
Well, that´s a good beginning :)
> I'm not someone who subscribes to the common (stock) answer that Nazi's
were
> somehow some *other* people and not German's. I know many German's like to
play
> that card, and usually do, but that *finger pointing* is a dead toad to
me.
How can my question "Where the violins robbed for some private Nazi official
or for some museum?" be interpreted in a way that would suggest your above
paragraph? It is - IMO - a legitmate question to ask who´s behind the
robbery.
> It's almost as if many German's want the world to believe that some other
form
> of life arrived from space, but on Nazi uniforms and tarnished the good
name of
> the German people. When that fails, they generally make sure you
understand
> that they themselves were not born at the time.
You are right - generally speaking. But my posting wasn´t pointing in this
direction, that´s why I feel "mistreated" by you.
> >You get aggressive:
>
> Nope. I simply provide a reality check.
S.a.
> >>Hey! Who knows in Germany? The land of the famous ....point the fingr
to
> >>someone else syndrom.
>
> Well? Is that a lie? And I don't consider that aggressive.
It was no answer to my question (Who robbed those damn violins?). I asked
you a simple and harmless question and get a tactless and insulting
response.
Do you understand why I thought you to be troll?
>
> >Why didn´t you answer my question who´s behind the stealing? You later
> >provided a link to the article in which the answer can be clearly read.
> >Why did you chose to insult?
>
> I don't consider my response to be an insult. You were clearly ready to
switch
> the stealing to the allies. I stopped you. Is that an insult? Although
I
> also acknoweldged that I'm sure the allies had their hands in thefts as
well.
> Remember?
I wasn´t the putting any blame on any Allies for robbing violins. That´s
*your* personal interpretation.
> >I more or less tell you that your generalizations (all Germans love
> >classical music, all Germans did steal violins) are dubious at best.
>
> I never said either.
You wrote:
"No doubt Germany loves and *respects* classical music so much that they had
an
orginized effort to *steal* it!"
Sounds like a generalization to me. Your mileage may vary.
> >I mention that art was looted from the Allies as well - without them
leaving
> >a receipt.
> >You get defensive. Why?
>
> Beacause we all know that two wrongs don't make a right. Don't we?
If we both know it, why do you think I would use it as an "excuse"?
> Defensive - Offensive - Schmensive! Whatever....I simply pointed out that
I
> doubt Goering was standing at the train station handing out receipts in
Yiddish
> or giving a receipt to some jew as he was kicking the gold out of their
teeth.
Not every violin was robbed at the train station. Lots of pieces of arts
were "bought" at ludicrously low prices in exchange for a permit to leave
the country (or to get enough money to leave the country). This is not
robbery but more or less blackmailing.
> You wanted to suggest that Mr. nice guy Goering was only acting like good
> family friend and caring for their possessions while they were off to
summer
> camp. Did you really except me to accept that type of answer?
It´s a fact. He was no "nice guy" :He bought art at cutthroat prices. You
got a receipt which proved that you were cheated. This paragraph was meant
as an answer to your claim that a mugger never leaves a receipt. Goering
did! But he still robbed you ...
Why do you get angry at this? I didn´t defend Goering and if you read my
article again and carefully I think you won´t find anything suggesting this.
> Because it's so typical German to me. We know we took *everything* that
you
> owned. Burned your documents and left you with the shirt on your
back....But,
> if you want what we stole from you back, you must show us the paperwork
that we
> know you don't have, cause we took it already. Now are we not clever?
You can´t always destroy *every* proof. As I said: There are often
photographs or old documents of insurance.
There´s the violin itself. As long as the museum records weren´t burned
there´s a good chance to find a clue to the last owner who "bequested that
gift to the museum".
But you need a proof. It might be that some people don´t have any proof
left. But it might be as well that someone makes up a story to get a prized
violin.
> Just like the story of the guy with the German Bonds and the cancelation
> machine.
I don´t know whether these bonds were worth anything after a lost war. I
really don´t know. I´ll ask around in my family to see if anybody got some
of his money back. Don´t forget: There was a monetary reform in 1948 and the
old Reichsmark lost its status as "money" rather fast. If I had 20.000
Reichsmark in my drawer I wouldn´t get a dime for it. If I had a war bond in
reichsmark denomination I wouldn´t get a dime.
> Do you really expect that type of shit to fly? Who do you think you're
talking
> to?
I think you misinterpreted the tone of my posting. In my second posting I
wrote:
<>I am basically agreeing with you - the violines
<>must be returned.
But not without proof. You really can´t expect this, can you?
> Regards to you to Patrick....Don't take all this NG stuff too personally.
In
> the big picture, it's nothing but hot wind blowing around.
Yes, but there´s a difference whether some professional troll writes drivel
or whether a rather decent persons does it.
> mira
> the (low) troll
Regards
Patrick
M. Steinkoenig
> > "Christa Brady"
>
> >I guess that makes me culpable as well, since I never replied to that
> >particular thread.
> >Yup, * they* are everywhere!!!!!!!
> >
>
> Nope. No mention of those who *never* responded. It read, "And everyone who
> avoided the subject *and* made the choice to duke it out on semantics and/or
> denial".
I assume this means that you're willing to spare people who'll look
the other way and not contradict your insane proclimations. You
overestimate the cogency of your ethno-political scare tactics
at this point.
> However if you choose to support the actions of the Nazi's and the theft of
> the violins, knock yourself out!
Unfortunately, you still haven't answered the question...
To refresh your memory:
Mira>> Nor can I help that so many *modern day German's* seem too be
Mira>> supporting the Nazi's, in this thread anyway......
Me> Can you specifically name these Germans?
So what'll it be, Mr. J. Edgar Hoover? Are you going to cough up
some names here?
IWjmusa
>So what'll it be, Mr. J. Edgar Hoover? Are you going to cough up
>some names here?
>
LOL. You *need* names and your calling *me* J. Edgar Hoover?
Listen up little guy. I don't do names....Never have...Never will. It's just
not something that American's do well.
And exactly *what* is this burning need for names all about anyway? What is it
with you people on that note? You need names of people who have commented on
this thread? Is that what you want, then read the fucking thread post by post
and stop bothering me with stupid requests.
the (low) troll
(I'm not giving you my name)
IWjmusa
>>"IWjmusa" <iwj...@aol.com>
>> What's best is that you managed to highlight the so-called super
>cleverness of
>> the German who had the ability to switch her jewerly and give the *allies*
>> paste....
>
>I was referring to your paragraph about the thieves being clever and
>stealing something precious. Why do you react so strongly at my grandmother
>behaving "super clever"? Because she´s German? If someone had managed to
>smuggle his violine out of occupied Europe you´d probably applaud his
>cleverness - but when my grandmother is able to keep her jewelry you get
>angry.Don´t you think this is a double-standard?
Perhaps it was a double standard. I think it was the 'LOL" that you used that
suggested (to me) that the violin victims were *not* as clever as your
grandmother. Actually I didn't trust that your grandmother actually had that
experience but that you were employing her name for the sake of the debate.
Regardless, I'm glad your grandmother made it through such rough times and was
able to do so with something tangable so that she can restart her life and
build her family.
>>Now how many violin owners do you think can come up with a fake while
>> being lined up at the train station? I think you were pretty insensitive
>to
>> the post, thus my response. But you already knew that!
>
>I didn´t suggest to anyone to fake his violin. This sort of
>"super-cleverness" works in "Hogan´s Heroes".
LOL. Good show! Stupid but good. I personally always liked Schultz......But
again, your post, to me, did in fact suggest that the victims should have been
smart enough to switch the products....fast! It did Patrick and I think *deep*
down, you know that to be the case.
>> I'm not someone who subscribes to the common (stock) answer that Nazi's
>were
>> somehow some *other* people and not German's. I know many German's like to
>play
>> that card, and usually do, but that *finger pointing* is a dead toad to
>me.
>
>How can my question "Where the violins robbed for some private Nazi official
>or for some museum?" be interpreted in a way that would suggest your above
>paragraph? It is - IMO - a legitmate question to ask who´s behind the
>robbery.
Because it's the beginning of a *long* road that I traveled before and I hate
paying for the same real estate twice. Here we go again.....As you suggested,
'for some private Nazi or for some museum, or for Fred, or for Fred's wife. The
possibilities are endless and seemingly employed in any debate over
who-done-it!
It's always very boring you know. That burning desire (German) to boil it all
down to the *exact* spot, or it never existed. It's not only boring but it
yeilds very little trust for the German people as a whole.
>
> > It's almost as if many German's want the world to believe that some other
>form
>> of life arrived from space, but on Nazi uniforms and tarnished the good
>name of
>> the German people. When that fails, they generally make sure you
>understand
>> that they themselves were not born at the time.
>
>You are right - generally speaking. But my posting wasn´t pointing in this
>direction, that´s why I feel "mistreated" by you.
Well I don't want you to feel mistreated. It was not my intention.
>> >You get aggressive:
>>
>> Nope. I simply provide a reality check.
>
> S.a.
I don't know what 'S.a.' means. Stupid answer?
>
>> >>Hey! Who knows in Germany? The land of the famous ....point the fingr
>to
>> >>someone else syndrom.
>>
>> Well? Is that a lie? And I don't consider that aggressive.
>
>It was no answer to my question (Who robbed those damn violins?). I asked
>you a simple and harmless question and get a tactless and insulting
>response.
> Do you understand why I thought you to be troll?
If you've never read any other posts from me, then yes, I can understand how
you could have seen me as a troll. If you have read other posts, then no, I
can't see it. Not many trolls talk of the good times they had in Germany or
have defended Germany although I have no doubt what-so-ever, that their are a
few in this NG who are going to claim that any of my favorable posts regarding
Germany is meerly a ploy to be a better troll. That's because that's the way
they think.
>> >Why didn´t you answer my question who´s behind the stealing? You later
>> >provided a link to the article in which the answer can be clearly read.
>> >Why did you chose to insult?
I think the link was provided early in the game. You also have to understand
that being an AP story, I pretty much assumed that this was a story known to
the German people. I should have realized that the German press did *not* pick
up the story and run it to any great degree or at all for that matter. I'm
always told that Europe covers more news then the states on international
issues.
>>
>> I don't consider my response to be an insult. You were clearly ready to
>switch
>> the stealing to the allies. I stopped you. Is that an insult? Although
>I
>> also acknoweldged that I'm sure the allies had their hands in thefts as
>well.
>> Remember?
>
>I wasn´t the putting any blame on any Allies for robbing violins. That´s
>*your* personal interpretation.
You see, that's *exactly* what I mean.....I never suggested that you suggested
that I thought that you were trying to blame the allies for stealing the
violins......Never happened.
The jump to the allies and your grandmothers jewlery *without even discussing
the post at hand* was what I objected to. Again, setting my clock to such a
response.
>
>> >I more or less tell you that your generalizations (all Germans love
>> >classical music, all Germans did steal violins) are dubious at best.
>>
>> I never said either.
>
>You wrote:
>
>"No doubt Germany loves and *respects* classical music so much that they had
>an
>orginized effort to *steal* it!"
>
>Sounds like a generalization to me. Your mileage may vary.
Again.....I *never* said that *all* German's stole violins yet read a few line
above. You're suggesting that I said that. You're saying that my saying that
is 'dubious at best', but I never said it.
STOP doing that!
>> Defensive - Offensive - Schmensive! Whatever....I simply pointed out that
>I
>> doubt Goering was standing at the train station handing out receipts in
>Yiddish
>> or giving a receipt to some jew as he was kicking the gold out of their
>teeth.
>
>Not every violin was robbed at the train station.
Agrraaaaaa. Stop taking everything so literal please. It's too much work to
make straight again.
Lots of pieces of arts
>were "bought" at ludicrously low prices in exchange for a permit to leave
>the country (or to get enough money to leave the country). This is not
>robbery but more or less blackmailing.
This is not what the article was speaking to although I'm sure that such events
also occured.
>
>> You wanted to suggest that Mr. nice guy Goering was only acting like good
>> family friend and caring for their possessions while they were off to
>summer
>> camp. Did you really except me to accept that type of answer?
>
>It´s a fact. He was no "nice guy" :He bought art at cutthroat prices. You
>got a receipt which proved that you were cheated. This paragraph was meant
>as an answer to your claim that a mugger never leaves a receipt. Goering
>did! But he still robbed you ...
I see.
>
>Why do you get angry at this? I didn´t defend Goering and if you read my
>article again and carefully I think you won´t find anything suggesting this.
>
>> Because it's so typical German to me. We know we took *everything* that
>you
>> owned. Burned your documents and left you with the shirt on your
>back....But,
>> if you want what we stole from you back, you must show us the paperwork
>that we
>> know you don't have, cause we took it already. Now are we not clever?
>
>You can´t always destroy *every* proof. As I said: There are often
>photographs or old documents of insurance.
>There´s the violin itself. As long as the museum records weren´t burned
>there´s a good chance to find a clue to the last owner who "bequested that
>gift to the museum".
Perhaps but I can't help seeing a picture in my mind where an old Jewish lady
appears, receipt in hand, and is grilled as to *exactly* how many strings were
on the violin at the time it was stollen. If she gets it wrong of course,
she's sent away empty handed.
That's really not a hard jump for me to make, sorry to say. Perhaps it's the
German need to be so literal and to use semantics and precision as a tool to
stonewall. I don't think it works any longer.
>But you need a proof. It might be that some people don´t have any proof
>left. But it might be as well that someone makes up a story to get a prized
>violin.
No doubt. And sometimes ya just have to go with it from your gut and from
knowing right from wrong. Fly by the seat of your pants. Know what I mean
Vern?
>
>> Just like the story of the guy with the German Bonds and the cancelation
>> machine.
>
>I don´t know whether these bonds were worth anything after a lost war. I
>really don´t know. I´ll ask around in my family to see if anybody got some
>of his money back. Don´t forget: There was a monetary reform in 1948 and the
>old Reichsmark lost its status as "money" rather fast. If I had 20.000
>Reichsmark in my drawer I wouldn´t get a dime for it. If I had a war bond in
>reichsmark denomination I wouldn´t get a dime.
They are German Barer Bonds from the German Gov. Regardless of your currency,
if the country still exists they are to be honored on the spot by whom ever
presents them. No I.D. is required.
>> Do you really expect that type of shit to fly? Who do you think you're
>talking
>> to?
>
>I think you misinterpreted the tone of my posting.
Perhaps I did.
>>> Regards to you to Patrick....Don't take all this NG stuff too personally.
>In
>> the big picture, it's nothing but hot wind blowing around.
>
>Yes, but there´s a difference whether some professional troll writes drivel
>or whether a rather decent persons does it.
I'll take it then that I'm the decent one. :)
mira
the (decent) troll
>Regards
>
>Patrick
>
>
>
>
>
Wayne Brown
> >"Patrick Walz-Damidaux"
>
> >Name 3 German posters who have been denying the fact that violins were
> >stolen during the war.
> >
>
> patrick....american's (generally) are not the best at naming names. it's
just
> not something we consider to be in good form. you'll just have to try to
> undestand that.
LOL. We consider? We consider? We consider? Now you think you speak for the
American people! How pathetic!
Your friend, ----- Wayne.
IWjmusa
>"IWjmusa" <iwj...@aol.com>
>> >Name 3 German posters who have been denying the fact that violins were
>> >stolen during the war.
>> >
>>
>> patrick....american's (generally) are not the best at naming names. it's
>just
>> not something we consider to be in good form. you'll just have to try to
>> undestand that.
>
>LOL. We consider? We consider? We consider? Now you think you speak for the
>American people! How pathetic!
Now let's see professor. Was it not you who stated how German's regard over
emotions in public. We're you speaking for all German's, as in "we consider'?
But about being pathetic. I understand that may actually be half American and
that you suffered some type of trumatic experience from that half of your
world, which may account for your constant insulting of American's.
Is that true? Were you a child victim? If so, I understand your foulness
although I myself never had suh an experience.
Were you a U.S. servicemen child?
mira
the (low) troll
>
>Your friend, ----- Wayne.
>
>
>
M. Steinkoenig
> >"M. Steinkoenig"
>
> >So what'll it be, Mr. J. Edgar Hoover? Are you going to cough up
> >some names here?
> >
>
> not something that American's do well.
This is the pathetic excuse of someone who hides behind
obscurities like a coward.
I will refresh your obviously faulty memory YET AGAIN:
Mira>> Nor can I help that so many *modern day German's* seem too be
Mira>> supporting the Nazi's, in this thread anyway......
Me> Can you specifically name these Germans?
So far, you haven't answered my question.
> You need names of people who have commented on this
> thread? Is that what you want, then read the fucking
> thread post by post and stop bothering me with stupid
> requests.
Am I to take it that you implicate ALL of your
respondents as people who "seem to be supporting
the Nazi's" (sic)?
IWjmusa
>Am I to take it that you implicate ALL of your
>respondents as people who "seem to be supporting
>the Nazi's" (sic)?
>
Take it any way you want to.
mira
the (low) troll
Juergen Hubert
I've answered those already by the time you posted this. Now I have answered
them twice. How often _do_ you want to hear my answer?
- Juergen Hubert
Sheldon Simms
<iwj...@aol.com>:
>> "Wayne Brown"
>
>>"IWjmusa" <iwj...@aol.com>
>
>>> >Name 3 German posters who have been denying the fact that violins
>>> >were stolen during the war.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> patrick....american's (generally) are not the best at naming names.
>>> it's
>>just
>>> not something we consider to be in good form. you'll just have to try
>>> to undestand that.
>>
>>LOL. We consider? We consider? We consider? Now you think you speak for
>>the American people! How pathetic!
What's more it's just wrong. It's obvious that mira has no leg to stand
on and doesn't want to own up to the fact that no poster in this thread
"supported the Nazis".
Americans actually tend to be quite good at naming names, both to promote
themselves by talking about all of the popular/cool/powerful people they
have as friends and to single out people for abuse or condemnation.
--
Sheldon Simms / she...@semanticedge.com
IWjmusa
>What's more it's just wrong. It's obvious that mira has no leg to stand
>on and doesn't want to own up to the fact that no poster in this thread
>"supported the Nazis".
If you read the posts, schmuck, you'll notice that it states 'supporting the
nazi position by stonewalling, denial and semantics' (or something to that
direct effect), so get it right for a change!
>
>Americans actually tend to be quite good at naming names, both to promote
>themselves by talking about all of the popular/cool/powerful people they
>have as friends and to single out people for abuse or condemnation.
It's clear that you lack the ability to keep a point within it's context.
Weak...Very weak.
mira
the (low) troll
>
IWjmusa
>I've answered those already by the time you posted this. Now I have answered
>them twice. How often _do_ you want to hear my answer?
>
Again would be just fine, but this time please tweak it with the truth.
mira
the (low) troll
Sheldon Simms
<iwj...@aol.com>:
>> "Sheldon Simms"
>
>>What's more it's just wrong. It's obvious that mira has no leg to stand
>>on and doesn't want to own up to the fact that no poster in this thread
>>"supported the Nazis".
>
> If you read the posts, schmuck, you'll notice that it states 'supporting
> the nazi position by stonewalling, denial and semantics' (or something
> to that direct effect), so get it right for a change!
I didn't see any of that. I did see you trying to make people
angry by embellishing a somewhat less than informative newspaper
article with wild, ungrounded accusations and claims about what
Germans are like that represented nothing more than your own
ignorant stereotyping and hollywood-induced fantasies.
>>Americans actually tend to be quite good at naming names, both to
>>promote themselves by talking about all of the popular/cool/powerful
>>people they have as friends and to single out people for abuse or
>>condemnation.
>
> It's clear that you lack the ability to keep a point within it's
> context. Weak...Very weak.
I'm pointing out the facts. You're the one hiding behind an incredibly
weak excuse in the attempt to not have to come right out and admit
that 95% of what you said was wrong.
IWjmusa
>>>What's more it's just wrong. It's obvious that mira has no leg to stand
>>>on and doesn't want to own up to the fact that no poster in this thread
>>>"supported the Nazis".
>>
>> If you read the posts, schmuck, you'll notice that it states 'supporting
>> the nazi position by stonewalling, denial and semantics' (or something
>> to that direct effect), so get it right for a change!
>
>I didn't see any of that. I did see you trying to make people
>angry by embellishing a somewhat less than informative newspaper
>article with wild, ungrounded accusations and claims about what
>Germans are like that represented nothing more than your own
>ignorant stereotyping and hollywood-induced fantasies.
What's wrong with the re-call ability of you guys over there? Is it the diet
perhaps? How could you *not* have seen that? It's *all* there in living color
so before you start beating a dead horse try to understand what you're talking
about.
>
>>>Americans actually tend to be quite good at naming names, both to
>>>promote themselves by talking about all of the popular/cool/powerful
>>>people they have as friends and to single out people for abuse or
>>>condemnation.
>>
>> It's clear that you lack the ability to keep a point within it's
>> context. Weak...Very weak.
>
>I'm pointing out the facts. You're the one hiding behind an incredibly
>weak excuse in the attempt to not have to come right out and admit
>that 95% of what you said was wrong.
It was an AP article silly billy. Instead of anyone commenting on it, they
made the choice to come after me as the messenger and refused to comment on
it's content.
That's called denial in the first world or in any doctors office.
Jeeeeezzzz. No shortage of stupidity over there I see.
mira
the (low) troll
Juergen Hubert
"I have never said on this newsgroup, or elsewhere, that I hate the French."
And again, just so that you get it:
"I have never said on this newsgroup, or elsewhere, that I hate the French."
And again:
"I have never said on this newsgroup, or elsewhere, that I hate the French."
Is that enough, or do you want to hear it a few dozen times more?
- Juergen Hubert
M. Steinkoenig
> That's called denial in the first world or in any doctors office.
>
> Jeeeeezzzz. No shortage of stupidity over there I see.
More complete B.S., as usual. However, now that you've suggested
that your opponents on this thread "seem to be supporting the Nazi's",
and have applied it as a blanketing statement against everyone who
responded against you*, they can all safely invoke the Godwin's Law
against you.
* to remind you and everyone else of what transpired:
>>> I don't do names....Never have...Never will. It's just
>>> not something that American's do well.
>>
>> This is the pathetic excuse of someone who hides behind
>> obscurities like a coward.
>>
>> I will refresh your obviously faulty memory YET AGAIN:
>>
>> Mira: Nor can I help that so many *modern day German's* seem too be
>> Mira: supporting the Nazi's, in this thread anyway......
>>
>> Me: Can you specifically name these Germans?
>>
>> So far, you haven't answered my question.
>>
>>> You need names of people who have commented on this
>>> thread? Is that what you want, then read the fucking
>>> thread post by post and stop bothering me with stupid
>>> requests.
>>
>> Am I to take it that you implicate ALL of your
>> respondents as people who "seem to be supporting
>> the Nazi's" (sic)?
To which you replied:
M. Steinkoenig
> >M. Steinkoenig"
>
> >Am I to take it that you implicate ALL of your
> >respondents as people who "seem to be supporting
> >the Nazi's" (sic)?
> >
>
> Take it any way you want to.
Okay, YOU LOSE.
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/legends/godwin/
"o If someone brings up Nazis in general conversation when it
wasn't necessary or germane without it necessarily being an
insult, it's probably about time for the thread to end.
o If someone brings up Nazis in general conversation when it
was vaguely related but is basically being used as an insult,
the speaker can be considered to be flaming and not debating.
o If someone brings up Nazis in any conversation that has been
going on too long for one of the parties, it can be used as
a fair excuse to end the thread and declare victory for the
other side."
The practicality extension of Godwin's Law, put forth in simple
terms. If you've never read it or heard of it before, now is a
wonderful time. Comparing your opponents to or suggesting they
support the actions of "the Nazi's" (sic) is no way to win an
argument; particularly if you use it as a tool to suppress
discussion or as some underhanded ploy to gain leverage over
a convincing argument that you can't defeat by normal means.
As far as I'm concerned, you've breached Godwin's Law in the
case of everyone you've implicated on this thread with your
little assertion, which means they all win.
IWjmusa
>"I have never said on this newsgroup, or elsewhere, that I hate the French."
>
Here we go again with the famous German two step.
O.K.. I'll play.
Have you ever said on this NG That you don't like, don't get along with, get
annoyed at or in *any* other way suggest that you are *not* a fan of the
French?
mira
Juergen Hubert
Well, I think I went a bit ironic once when I mentioned that French nuclear
missiles were aimed at Western Germany during the Cold War...
- Juergen Hubert
Michael Khan
Juergen Hubert wrote:
> Well, I think I went a bit ironic once when I mentioned that French nuclear
> missiles were aimed at Western Germany during the Cold War...
Hast du nicht mal gesagt, dass die Franzosen den Amerikaner recht
ähnlich sind?
*Das* haben sie nun wirklich nicht verdient. :-)
Andreas Thomsen
mira,
for god's sake - you too have turned to use 'samantics' ?
:-)))))))))))))
A.
--
Andreas Thomsen
email: tho...@uni-bonn.de
Sheldon Simms
<Michae...@t-online.de>:
Naja, das wurde der OP keineswegs als Beleidigung betracten, mindestens
nicht eine Beleidigung der Franzosen...
Sheldon Simms
<iwj...@aol.com>:
He did! He did! I found it at groups.google.com:
Amateur.
Obviously, this crash was the work of the Killer Penguin Collective -
penguins that were bathed in mana-active radiation during secret nuclear
weapons testing conducted in Antarctica during the fifties. This mutated
them and gave them sentinence, magical powers, a hive mind, and
opposable thumbs.
Additional nuclear testings elsewhere disturbed Earth's manasphere even
further, but the Penguins couldn't agree on a course of action. The
final straw broke when the last French nuclear weapons testings created
several Mutant Giant Lizards, which promptly moved out into the wider
world. One indeed reached New York, but was promply either ignored by
the inhabitants or mistaken for local color (Emmerich's faux documentary
really got that wrong - but what else do you expect from Hollywood?).
Several these MGLs reached Tokyo Harbor, where they were promptly
capured and displyed in Theme Parks. But several of them also reached
Antarctica, where they inflicted huge casualities on the penguin
population.
Now they have recovered, and boy are they pissed off at the French. That
crash was only the first step - for this they fired up a magical
gestalt, caused the engine failure, and steered the plane into the hotel
where a senior official involved with the nuclear weapons tenstings was
having an illicit encounter at the time. Soon the whole of France will
burn.
And we'd all better hope that they won't stoop to using Elder Things
Technology and creations like the shoggoths that they found in
Antarctica, or we are all in BIG trouble...
- Juergen Hubert
IWjmusa
>for god's sake - you too have turned to use 'samantics' ?
>:-)))))))))))))
>
LOL. Guilty. I guess I've picked up a few things from the German culture.
Not bad I might say. It seems to always leave *everything* wide open if used
firmly.
The trick seems too be not to bend at any time, just throw in more
possabilities and require *bulletproof) proof and one can remaim suspended in
air forever.
mira
the (low) troll
Mike Muth
Well, of course the French had nuclear missiles aimed at Western
Germany. So did the Americans, the British and the Soviets. The
Americans and British have re-targeted theirs. I don't know about the
Soviets and French, though...
Mike