Priebke
John B. Morgan
Perhaps I just haven't been paying as much attention to the news as I should
lately, but it seems to me that the American press has virtually ignored the
trial of former SS officer Erich Priebke, who was involved in a massacre of
Italian civilians near Rome during the war. The trial began last year. Does
anyone know what the verdict on Priebke was, or whether the trial is
still going on?
John Morgan "Very possibly I shall have you slaughtered
The University of Michigan and skewered in my stables and enjoy a slice
jbmo...@umich.edu of you with crisp crackling from the baking
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jbmorgan/ tin basted and baked like sucking
pig with rice and lemon or currant sauce.
It will hurt you."-Bello, in Joyce's ULYSSES
George F. Hardy
In article <Dw3rEu.76t.4...@ecsvax.uncecs.edu>,
R.C.M...@bradford.ac.uk (Russell Murray) says:
>
>"John B. Morgan" <jbmo...@umich.edu> wrote:
>>Does anyone know what the verdict on Priebke was, or whether the
>>trial is still going on?
>
>He was found not guilty on the grounds that he was only following
>orders! (Where have we heard that one before?)
I think that far more to the point is that subsequent Geneva
conventions have failed to establish in International Law
the Nuremberg Pricniple that "following orders" is not a
valid defense. In the immediate post war years one might be
able to claim that International Law had not yet caught up
with realities, but in light of 50 years of refusal of the
victorious Allies to confirm this principle in an international
agreement one is hard pressed to apply it to Priebke "for old
times sake".
GFH
Russell Murray
"John B. Morgan" <jbmo...@umich.edu> wrote:
>Perhaps I just haven't been paying as much attention to the news as I should
>lately, but it seems to me that the American press has virtually ignored the
>trial of former SS officer Erich Priebke, who was involved in a massacre of
>Italian civilians near Rome during the war. The trial began last year. Does
>anyone know what the verdict on Priebke was, or whether the trial is
>still going on?
He was found not guilty on the grounds that he was only following
orders! (Where have we heard that one before?) The problem seems to be
that the Italians after the war didn't really want to face up to the
whole can of worms that would have been involved in setting up a
proper system of war crimes legislation, so under Italian law
"following orders" still counts as an adequate defence.
ejno...@xs4all.nl
R.C.M...@bradford.ac.uk (Russell Murray) writes:
As I understand it, he was acquited of war crimes because he was following
orders, but he was found guilty of murder. Because murder falls under a
statute of limitations in Italy and the massacre took place in 1944, he
was not punished. Germany, which has no statute of limitations for murder
and can prosecute Germans who have committed crimes abroad, has now asked
for Priebke's extradition. Priebke was rearrested a few hours after his
release.
Eric-Jan
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric-Jan Noomen Visit the 2nd Page of the Dead
ejno...@xs4all.nl http://www.xs4all.nl/~ejnoomen
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
M.Tr...@agora.stm.it
Russel Murray wrote:
RC> He was found not guilty on the grounds that he was only
RC> following orders! (Where have we heard that one before?) The
RC> problem seems to be that the Italians after the war didn't really
RC> want to face up to the whole can of worms that would have been
RC> involved in setting up a proper system of war crimes legislation,
RC> so under Italian law "following orders" still counts as an
RC> adequate defence.
Pribke was fouund guilty of homicide, but the military trial that
judged him decided that his crime was invalidated by prescription
because too much time has passed since those years.
He is still in jail. The attorney has appealed against the sentence
that decided Priebke had to be judged by a military trial. Italian
goverment has been very critic with this sentence, and the destiny
of Priebke doesn't seems so pinky yet.
Marco Trinei.
asek...@v9000.ntu.ac.sg
In article <Dw3rEu.76t.4...@ecsvax.uncecs.edu>, R.C.M...@bradford.ac.uk (Russell Murray) writes:
> He was found not guilty on the grounds that he was only following
> orders! (Where have we heard that one before?) The problem seems to be
> that the Italians after the war didn't really want to face up to the
> whole can of worms that would have been involved in setting up a
> proper system of war crimes legislation, so under Italian law
> "following orders" still counts as an adequate defence.
you seem to have some rather serious misconceptions regarding
his acquital.
"Following LEGAL orders" was the rationale, not just
"following orders". The German reprisals against the killing
of their soldiers by the partisans was considered "legal".
Today, for instance, the action of the partisans would
normally be considered an act of terrorism.
Judging from my own country (Greece) where sometimes the partisans
deliberately attacked the Germans without any military objective
but only in order to provoke reprisals (hence more civilians would
flee to the mountains to join them), I'd say that in real life
things aren't black and white as your "following orders" suggests.
Euthymios Kappos
Gareth Rowlands
In message <4urlr6$i...@nntp5.u.washington.edu> Eric-Janwrote:
> Germany, which has no statute of limitations for murder ....
> has now asked for Priebke's extradition.
There is apparently a problem with this extradition in that the
Italians promised Argentina (where Priebke was living) that he
wouldn't be sent off to another country.
Cheers,
Gareth.
Luca Signorelli
[moderator note - this thread is becoming a discussion of current events.
Please limit replies to the world war ii historical issues brought out by
the trial. Dave]
R.C.M...@bradford.ac.uk (Russell Murray) wrote:
>"John B. Morgan" <jbmo...@umich.edu> wrote:
>>Perhaps I just haven't been paying as much attention to the news as I should
>>lately, but it seems to me that the American press has virtually ignored the
>>trial of former SS officer Erich Priebke, who was involved in a massacre of
>>Italian civilians near Rome during the war. The trial began last year. Does
>>anyone know what the verdict on Priebke was, or whether the trial is
>>still going on?
>He was found not guilty on the grounds that he was only following
>orders! (Where have we heard that one before?) The problem seems to be
>that the Italians after the war didn't really want to face up to the
>whole can of worms that would have been involved in setting up a
>proper system of war crimes legislation, so under Italian law
>"following orders" still counts as an adequate defence.
NO! NO! NO! IT'S WORSE! Priebke was NOT fount "not guilty". He was
found GUILTY! Then the court ordered him out of jail on the ground of
several technicalities (the dreaded "attenuanti generiche", I don't
have the correct english word for these). To add insult to the injury,
the court stupidly decided to emanate the verdict just in front of the
press, forbidding the entrance in the courtroom to the Ardeatine
victim's relatives.
Immediately, all hell broke loose. It was quite clear from the
beginning that the judge (a MILITARY judge) wanted to have Priebke out
of jail at every cost. So a lot of people (including relaitves of the
Ardeatine's victims, very upset punks or just normal people that was
disgusted of the entire charade) tried to brek into the courtroom and
(evidently) lynch Priebke (who reportedly had a funny attack of fear)
and/or the judge (who lunatically continued to ask "what was wrong!")
The siege lasted the whole night, until the Ministry Of Justice
(Giovanni Flick) arrived and, uncerimoniously, arrested Priebke again.
Actually, I think he did it on another technicality, but nationwide
outrage at this point was so strong that had he done it on a "insult
to good Italian pronounce", "forbidden parking" or "illegal
breakdancing" charge he would have been plauded.
The result of this sorry mess are:
1) Priebke will stay for twenty days in our Regina Coeli prison
(actually, the one where his victim resided), before his fate will be
decided
2) Argentina has already said that they don't want Erich boy back
anymore (he has become "unwelcomed")
3) Karl Hass, the strange guys (and ex SS) who came to Rome to
testimony AGAINST Priebke, tried to escape and then actually justified
his ex comrade once in front of the judge, he's been arrested.
4) There's a generalized epidemy of "discovery of the hot water", for
example:
A) That hundreds of Germans (and Italians) who murdered, raped,
pillaged and generally behaved incorrectly between '43 and '45 were
release or comdemned (and immediately released) after the war because
they sold they services to the Allies. And that the same Allies made
their best to avoid the above mentioned guys any possible problem.
B) That the Italian military structure has himself several skeletons
in the closet (in Yugoslavia, for example, but also in Italy)
C) That there were powerful political pressures in the last 50 years
to keep the whole issue quiet. And that the Vatican was involved in
these pressures
D) That there are HUNDREDS of pending investigations on so called
"micro massacres" (countless slaughters of 10-20 civilians made by
Nazi security forces or by the Wehrmacht in the 43-45 period, with
often Italian forces involved) were locked into the military justice
archives under the caption "temporarirly suspended" (a legal
monstrosity allowed only by italian law!)
E) That if you release someone after recognize him guilty to have
killed 350 people there's absolutely NO reason to jail mafia headmen
like Giovanni Brusca (who killed "only" 10-20 peoples, including a 11
year old kid who was tortured, strangled and melted in the acid.) BTW:
I don't know if anyone remember the epic scene of Brusca arrestation
(he had the cover on Time!). After he was translated in jail (between
two wings of feasting, gun weaving masked SWAT forces), the same
feasting, gun weaving masked SWAT forces proceeded to beat the hell
out of fat Brusca, who appeared the next day understandably shaken.
The whole nation approved.
5) An immediate consequence of Priebke's fiasco is that at the very
last we're going to eliminate peacetime military tribunals (it was
about time!)
6) Priebke is probably going to be transferred in Germany, and here
condemned. So the foreign image of Italy is going to sink to new,
unbelievable depth of shame. What a sorry nation we are...
PS: Don't feel too sorry for poor Erich Priebke: how many people do
you know who, after few years of handsomely payed undiluted fun in
Rome, spent fifty years of golden retirement in San Carlos De
Bariloche, a luxury mountain resort I would dream to see and I'll
never? I suspect the old geezer is having a good laugh at us right
now...
Luca Signorelli
MF006
I agree with you that the orders to kill the people at the Ardeatine Caves
were a travesty of human behavior. However, they were quite legal.
The German Army was an arm of the German government (whose leader, Adolf
Hitler was originally elected in a multi-party election), recognized by
the world and without a government-in-exile or any formal opposition, and
any orders through those channels were quite legal.
Unfortunately, those orders were morally wrong in a way that I cannot
express in words. It was sheer unjustified murder. However, the orders
were legal. And that's the sad fact of life: legality and morality are not
necessarily the same thing.
Mark
Dirk Lorek
I would like to add the following about Erich Priebke.
He did not only check the hostages' names on the list,
but also shot two of them by himself. He participated
also in the shooting of a further 5 men, who were not
on the list but who would have become unpleasant
witnesses to the massacre.
Priebke was also a well known master of torture in
the SD HQ in Rome. His chief, Kappler, once said that
'Priebke's professional hands broke every resistance'.
Following orders? Nah.
Dirk
_______________________________________________________________________
What am I, Life ? A thing of watery salt, held in cohesion by unresting
cells, which work they know not why, which never halt, myself unwitting
where their Master dwells. - John Masefield -
Osmo Ronkanen
In article <Dw6yDE.12u.4...@ecsvax.uncecs.edu>,
<asek...@v9000.ntu.ac.sg> wrote:
>
> you seem to have some rather serious misconceptions regarding
> his acquital.
> "Following LEGAL orders" was the rationale, not just
> "following orders". The German reprisals against the killing
> of their soldiers by the partisans was considered "legal".
> Today, for instance, the action of the partisans would
Lets see what Priebke did:
On March 23, 1944, an Italian Resistance command exploded a bomb,
which had been hidden in a garbage cart on Via Rasella, a street in
downtown Rome. This measure killed 33 soldiers from the "Bozen"
battalion, an SS company that passed through Via Rasella daily. As
soon as news of the attack was heard, an order came out of Berlin to
carry out a retaliatory massacre. Colonel Herbert Kappler, head of the
SS in the Italian capital, decided that for each German soldier killed
in the attack, 10 Italians would be executed. There were 330 people in
total on the list: 150 under police investigation, 23 awaiting trial,
3 sentenced to death and awaiting their sentence, 16 with sentences
varying from 1 to 15 years, 75 Jews, 40 detained for political
reasons, 10 detained for reasons of public safety, 10 arrested after
the attack on Via Rasella and 3 unidentified.
In the early afternoon of March 24, 1944, the trucks carrying the
prisoners arrived at the Fosse Ardeatine, caves located in the
outskirts of Rome near several Christian catacombs. The condemned had
their hands tied behind their backs. In groups of five they were led
to the entrance of the caves where Captain Erich Priebke checked that
the names matched those on the list. Inside the cave each prisoner was
made to kneel down and then was shot once in the back of neck. A
medical official was assigned to check the deceased. According to the
account of a German soldier that testified at the Kappler trial, the
victims that were about to be killed were waiting at the entrance
listening to the gunshots and screams of terror of those that had
preceded them. Inside the corpses were piled up one upon the other.
http://www.planetitaly.com/NS/Priebke/massacre.html
That is by any standard a disgusting war crime. Only a most hard-core
Nazi could ever justify them. Those people had done nothing to deserve
death, they were just arbitrarily picked and murdered. There is no
excuse for it, none whatsoever. Maybe the orders were legal under some
Nazi law but according to any civilized law they were not. The fact
that it was a terrorist attack is irrelevant.
So do you still think the orders were legal?
Osmo
AnkerStein
<<So do you still think the orders were legal?>>
Your recital of the facts is essentially correct. I believe a couple
of extra people were executed, which was a major part of the tiral --
these deaths exceeded the orders.
Were the orders legal? Yes, absolutely. Reprisals were (and are
today) accepted as legitimate methods of repressing the very type of
terrorist attacks which the Germans faced in Rome.
Whatever you (personally) may think of the morality, the legalities
are clear -- hence the emphasis on the three (I think) extras.
And following orders is a valid defence, at least for all but the
Nuremberg Process.
Again I suggest that the trial of Priebke using rules never confirmed
by a Geneva Convention was "for old times sake", and not for any
possible concept of justice under the law.
GFH
Stefan Patejak
My understand is that the German army did technically recognize the
concept of an illegal order, but that his was ignored.
Paolo Pizzi
Osmo Ronkanen wrote:
> On March 23, 1944, an Italian Resistance command exploded a bomb,
> which had been hidden in a garbage cart on Via Rasella, a street in
> downtown Rome. This measure killed 33 soldiers from the "Bozen"
> battalion, an SS company that passed through Via Rasella daily.
First of all the Bozen battallion wasn't SS, they were Feldpolizei, that is
MP's. Secondly that platoon was made up mostly of aged non combatants relegated
to paper work. The bombers were not the "Italian resistance" but a communist
faction inside it and either the Allied command or the other factions of the
resistance strongly disagreed with the plan as the Germans had announced
they would retaliate and kill 10 Italian prisoners for each dead German
soldier. The bombing was TOTALLY useless, what the communist faction wanted was
the outrage after the inevitable German retaliation to have something to
exploit politically before General Clarck's troops entered Rome after a couple
of months. 7 innocent civilians perished in the blast and the bombers knew very
well someone other than the Germans would die (but obviously didn't care) as
the garbage can where they hid the bomb was surrounded by inhabuited homes and
the street was very narrow. A truly barbaric act performed by ruthless
communists who weren't any better than the nazis (look at what they did AFTER
the war to any people they didn't like, including priests and any political
opponent they wanted to get rid of.) Lastly the German asked the bombers to
turn themselves in to spare 330 lives but the cowards didn't show.
> That is by any standard a disgusting war crime. Only a most hard-core
> Nazi could ever justify them. Those people had done nothing to deserve
> death, they were just arbitrarily picked and murdered. There is no
> excuse for it, none whatsoever. Maybe the orders were legal under some
> Nazi law but according to any civilized law they were not. The fact
> that it was a terrorist attack is irrelevant.
What you call "nazi law" is the Naval convention of 1906, recognized also by
Allied governments. Fact is Herbert Kappler was found NOT GUILTY of executing
the retaliation and he was incarcerated on grounds that he had killed 5 people
MORE than he was allow to.
I'm NOT a nazi nor I have ANY simpathy for the nazis but I can't tollerate
such blatant distorsions of history, mostly spread by communists who, BTW,
are currently in the coalition ruling Italy.
The nazis were beasts but the communists partisans weren't any better: they
killed those Germans in order to provoke retaliation and have hundreds of dead
people to help them with their political agenda.
Paolo Pizzi
Cypress, CA
PS One of the bombers was even elected in the communist party after the war
and cheered as a hero for decades.
Donald Phillipson
"Mark" (mf...@aol.com) writes:
> I agree with you that the orders to kill the people at the Ardeatine Caves
> were a travesty of human behavior. However, they were quite legal.
> The German Army was an arm of the German government (whose leader, Adolf
> Hitler was originally elected in a multi-party election), recognized by
> the world and without a government-in-exile or any formal opposition, and
> any orders through those channels were quite legal.
This seems simply confused. The legality of Hitler's German government in
1933 has nothing to do with the legal basis of German army's killing
Italian civilians in Italy 11 years later.
--
| Donald Phillipson, 4180 Boundary Road, Carlsbad Springs, |
| Ontario, Canada, K0A 1K0, tel. 613 822 0734 |
Osmo Ronkanen
In article <timeelapsed-19...@dpm1-113.flash.net>,
Paolo Pizzi <timee...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Osmo Ronkanen wrote:
>
>> On March 23, 1944, an Italian Resistance command exploded a bomb,
>> which had been hidden in a garbage cart on Via Rasella, a street in
>> downtown Rome. This measure killed 33 soldiers from the "Bozen"
>> battalion, an SS company that passed through Via Rasella daily.
>
Please do not forge. Those were not my words, but they came from a
web-site that I quoted.
>First of all the Bozen battallion wasn't SS, they were Feldpolizei, that is
>MP's.
[stores how ruthless the bombing was deleted]
I am in no way defending the bombers on how moral, legal or good for the
war effort the bombing was. I do not find that question relevant. The
issue is what Nazis did in retaliation.
>> Maybe the orders were legal under some
>> Nazi law but according to any civilized law they were not. The fact
>> that it was a terrorist attack is irrelevant.
>
>What you call "nazi law" is the Naval convention of 1906, recognized also by
>Allied governments. Fact is Herbert Kappler was found NOT GUILTY of executing
>the retaliation and he was incarcerated on grounds that he had killed 5 people
>MORE than he was allow to.
>
Do you mean the Geneva convention for treatment of sick and wounded in
battlefield from 1906 or its adaption to Naval warfare from 1907? Btw
what does the Naval convention to do what happens on land. In Whatever
you mean could you provide a quote. Extraordinary claims require
extraordinary evidence.
" CONVENTION (IV) RESPECTING THE LAWS AND CUSTOMS
OF WAR ON LAND
Signed at The Hague, 18 October 1907.
Art. 43. The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into
the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his
power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety,
while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the
country.
Art. 46. Family honour and rights, the lives of persons, and private
property, as well as religious convictions and practice, must be
respected.
Art. 50. No general penalty, pecuniary or otherwise, shall be inflicted
upon the population on account of the acts of individuals for which they
cannot be regarded as jointly and severally responsible."
http://www.tufts.edu/departments/fletcher/multi/texts/BH036.txt
If the occupying army executes people because of their religion or
because they just happened to be in the wrong place, one cannot talk of
ensuring safety or respecting the lives of persons.
>I'm NOT a nazi nor I have ANY simpathy for the nazis but I can't tollerate
>such blatant distorsions of history, mostly spread by communists who, BTW,
>are currently in the coalition ruling Italy.
>
Mistaking MPs for SS is a blatant distortion of history. Give me a
break.
It is interesting that when I talked on how US mistreated POWs, I was
hearing excuses that Nazis did worse things and how I was ignoring their
crimes. Now when I am talking about the crimes that Nazis did, I get
excuses that blame communists. I wonder what will happen if I ever write
on crimes that communists did.
Maybe you now see why retaliation is banned. If one allows it, any
convention could useless. Nothing is easier than blaming others for your
own actions.
Have you read the commando-order? It is one of the few war crimes that
can be directly pinpointed to Hitler. In it Hitler ordered that any
attempt to surrender from commandos should not be accepted but they
should shot down on the spot. He used the fact that commandos themselves
had done the same on German soldiers as an excuse. That is it was a
clear retaliation. Also as commandos were to my knowledge volunteers and
as they well knew what was expecting them when they took the missions,
one could say that they chose the risk, unlike the Jews and other people
murdered by Priebke. Yet, the commando order is generally regarded as
war crime.
Osmo
Ed Walton
In article <4v6ftv$r...@nntp5.u.washington.edu>, ronk...@cc.helsinki.fi
(Osmo Ronkanen) wrote:
> This measure killed 33 soldiers from the "Bozen"
> battalion, an SS company that passed through Via Rasella daily.
Actually, barracked order police, specifically Company 11, 3rd Battalion
of the "Bozen" Police Regiment.
> As
> soon as news of the attack was heard, an order came out of Berlin to
> carry out a retaliatory massacre. Colonel Herbert Kappler, head of the
> SS in the Italian capital, decided that for each German soldier killed
> in the attack, 10 Italians would be executed.
Wrong. The order came from Schikelgruber personally (who was at the Wolf's
Lair, not Berlin) to execute a minimum of 30 and no more than 50 Italians
for every police officer killed. Von Mackensen, commander of the 14th Army
decided this was excessive and reduced the ratio to 10 Italians per
German. Kesselring, CinC in Italy, confirmed this order and set a 24 hr
deadline.
> There were 330 people in
> total on the list: 150 under police investigation, 23 awaiting trial,
> 3 sentenced to death and awaiting their sentence, 16 with sentences
> varying from 1 to 15 years, 75 Jews, 40 detained for political
> reasons, 10 detained for reasons of public safety, 10 arrested after
> the attack on Via Rasella and 3 unidentified.
Actually, 335 were executed, but Malzer, Commandant of Rome, had only
authorized 320. Kappler, head of the Rome SD and actually leader of the
massacre, had added 10 on his own initiative at the death of the 33rd cop.
A couple of months later the Americans entered the city and the process of
identifying the bodies was begun by Dr. Attilio Ascarelli, forensics
professor at the University of Rome, who lost two nephews in the massacre.
He succeeded in indentifying 332 of the victims.
> That is by any standard a disgusting war crime. Only a most hard-core
> Nazi could ever justify them.
Kappler was handed over to the Italians by the British. The post-war
Italian govt. tried him with 6 subordinate SD officers who were involved
in 1947. The Italian court ruled that the reprisal massacre of 10 per was
completely legal under international rules of war and Kappler was found
not guilty of the first 330 Italians killed. However, he was found guilty
of murder for killing the extra five and sentenced to life. The
subordinates were all found not guilty. This ruling was by an Italian
court and upheld by the Supreme Court in 1953. I doubt these jurists were
Nazis.
Kappler escaped to Germany in 1977. Italy requested he be extradited back
to them, but Germany refused. Kappler died, safe in Germany, of cancer.
> Those people had done nothing to deserve
> death, they were just arbitrarily picked and murdered. There is no
> excuse for it, none whatsoever. Maybe the orders were legal under some
> Nazi law but according to any civilized law they were not. The fact
> that it was a terrorist attack is irrelevant.
Actually, Malzer's initial response was to blow up the whole street, a
residential area, and kill every man, woman, and child who lived there.
Engineers were wiring the street for this when Dollmann arrived.
Incidentally, one SD captain, named Wetzen, refused to participate even
though Kappler had kicked off the massacre with a speech explaining that
those who didn't follow orders would join the victims in the catacombs.
Kappler drove out from Rome to confront Wetzen, had a heart to heart talk
with him explaining the rules, then took Wetzen into the cave where each
shot a victim.
> So do you still think the orders were legal?
"Legal" is what the law says (as interpreted by members of the legal
industry), not what you think the law should say. Laws may change, but
it's generally considered to be bad form to prosecute someone for doing
something that was legal at the time it was committed. Immoral is another
question..
--
Ed Walton
Visit the "Lost Battalions" homepage
Original & Reproduction WW2 Uniforms
http://web2.airmail.net/recon36/
E.F.Schelby
Signo...@alma.it (Luca Signorelli) wrote:
> That if you release someone after recognize him guilty to have
>killed 350 people there's absolutely NO reason to jail mafia headmen
Excuse me, Luca: Priebke shot two people, didn't he? Is he now
guilty of killing 350?
Regards,
ES
James Kemp
Osmo Ronkanen allegedly added the followiing to the fount of human
knowledge that is soc.history.war.world-war-ii on Wed, 21 Aug 1996 at 17:50:55
<great big argument snipped>
>Do you mean the Geneva convention for treatment of sick and wounded in
>battlefield from 1906 or its adaption to Naval warfare from 1907? Btw
>what does the Naval convention to do what happens on land. In Whatever
>you mean could you provide a quote. Extraordinary claims require
>extraordinary evidence.
<yet more snipped after this too>
Before you guys get into great big arguments about Geneva Conventions,
remember that there are 4 of these and they were all reviseed in the
late forties in the light of WW2.
I may be wrong with the numbers, but the third Geneva convention (as
revised) deals with the treatment of Prisoners of War on land, the first
two are as mentioned in the quote above, the fourth I think has to do
with acceptable weapons but I'm not sure. (My Military Law lectures
skipped over these very lightly as they tend not to concern platton
commanders much.)
James Kemp <ja...@jmkemp.demon.co.uk>
"kitchen hygiene is unneccesary when you've got a fully
functioning immune system"
Ed Walton
In article <timeelapsed-19...@dpm1-113.flash.net>,
timee...@earthlink.net (Paolo Pizzi) wrote:
> First of all the Bozen battallion wasn't SS...
Congratulations on an excellent post which cuts thru the current BS.
Dirk Lorek
Some facts about Herbert Kappler.
On 26 Sept 43, Kappler claimed 50 kg gold of the Jewish community
in Rome otherwise he would shoot 200 Jewish hostages. He got it with
the help of the Vatican and the Roman population. Nevertheless, in the
night between 15/16 Oct 43 Kappler with the help of the 15th, 12th and
20th Polizeiregiment and the 2nd FJ Regiment (this detail is only
aimed for Ed and Paolo who seem very interested in such things)
arrested 1 007 Jews, who were sent right to Auschwitz.
Legal ? Nah.
Osmo Ronkanen
In article <4vi2ke$h...@nntp5.u.washington.edu>,
Ed Walton <rec...@iadfw.net> wrote:
>Kappler was handed over to the Italians by the British. The post-war
>Italian govt. tried him with 6 subordinate SD officers who were involved
>in 1947. The Italian court ruled that the reprisal massacre of 10 per was
>completely legal under international rules of war and Kappler was found
>not guilty of the first 330 Italians killed.
Then those judges were Nazis. It is that simple. There is nothing in
Hague or Geneva convention that would or could legalize such murders. It
is not the only time courts make stupid decisions. The whole idea that
such murder would be legal is just absurd. It would make the
conventions absolutely useless in regard of protecting civilian
population. It would also go against the western sense of justice that
everyone is individually responsible for his acts. He is not guilty
just because he is a Jew or because he happened to be in a place where
the Nazis picked their victims.
>However, he was found guilty
>of murder for killing the extra five and sentenced to life. The
>subordinates were all found not guilty. This ruling was by an Italian
>court and upheld by the Supreme Court in 1953. I doubt these jurists were
>Nazis.
Why do you doubt that? Do you think fascism disappeared from Italy in a
moment?
>"Legal" is what the law says (as interpreted by members of the legal
>industry), not what you think the law should say. Laws may change, but
>it's generally considered to be bad form to prosecute someone for doing
>something that was legal at the time it was committed. Immoral is another
>question..
The ex-post facto nature of the war crimes is well recognized. Maybe it
was a wrong thing to do, but that was still done. So that should not
raise any questions anymore. Also murder was and is still illegal.
Dragging unarmed people in caves and shooting them is murder plain and
simple.
Osmo
Dirk Lorek
In article <4vi2ke$h...@nntp5.u.washington.edu>,
Ed Walton <rec...@iadfw.net> wrote:
>Kappler was handed over to the Italians by the British. The post-war
>Italian govt. tried him with 6 subordinate SD officers who were involved
>in 1947. The Italian court ruled that the reprisal massacre of 10 per
>was completely legal under international rules of war and Kappler was
>found not guilty of the first 330 Italians killed.
>However, he was found guilty of murder for killing the extra five and
>sentenced to life. The subordinates were all found not guilty. This
>ruling was by an Italian court and upheld by the Supreme Court in 1953.
>I doubt these jurists were Nazis.
I imagine these 'jurists' were of the same kind as military judge Quistelli
(the Priebke judge). Harsh against the prosecution, allowing only 9 of 70
witnesses, mild to the defense. He said already before the trial that
Priebke was innocent.
>"Legal" is what the law says (as interpreted by members of the legal
>industry), not what you think the law should say. Laws may change, but
>it's generally considered to be bad form to prosecute someone for doing
>something that was legal at the time it was committed. Immoral is
>another question..
Well Ed, and 'illegal' are not only acts tried. On 26 Sept 43, Kappler
required 50 kg gold from the Roman Jewish community, otherwise he would
take 200 Jewish hostages. With the help of the Roman citizens, he got as
much as 80 kg.
But the gold did not help. In the night of the 15/16 Oct, the round-up
began. With the help of several Polizeiregiments (15th, 20th, and 12th
- old men doing paperwork, Paolo ?) and the 2nd FJ regiment, Kappler
arrested 1 259 Roman Jews and 1 007 of these were sent to Auschwitz
2 days later. Further 800 were arrested in the end of the month and
78 of these became victims in the Ardeatinic Caves.
But all this is of course communist propaganda.
Osmo Ronkanen
In article <4vnt4q$r...@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu>,
AnkerStein <anker...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>Were the orders legal? Yes, absolutely. Reprisals were (and are
>today) accepted as legitimate methods of repressing the very type of
>terrorist attacks which the Germans faced in Rome.
You are dead wrong here at least when it comes to the situation today.
What you say that FBI could have executed 1600 people as a reprisal for
the OK city bombing? (The civilians in an occupied territory are just as
much in the protection of the occupying forces than the citizens of a
country are in the protection of their state). Remember that the people
executed were not in anyway connected to the terrorists who exploded the
bomb. With your logic holocaust at least in the occupied countries would
have become legal had it been justified with such an act (I doubt there
was any occupied country where there was no resistance attacking
Germans). Or do you think there is some law that says that one can
execute only 10 people for each of your comrades but not more?
When Heydrich was murdered, Germans destroyed entire village where it
happened killing the men and putting all men and women in concentration
camps. Maybe to you that was also legal?
[rest of the excuses deleted]
Osmo
Roberto Lionello
Message has been automatically signed by PGPsendmail 1.4,
available from ftp.atnf.csiro.au:pub/people/rgooch
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Ed Walton <rec...@iadfw.net> wrote:
|> Kappler was handed over to the Italians by the British. The post-war
|> Italian govt. tried him with 6 subordinate SD officers who were involved
|> in 1947. The Italian court ruled that the reprisal massacre of 10 per was
|> completely legal under international rules of war and Kappler was found
|> not guilty of the first 330 Italians killed. However, he was found guilty
|> of murder for killing the extra five and sentenced to life. The
|> subordinates were all found not guilty. This ruling was by an Italian
|> court and upheld by the Supreme Court in 1953. I doubt these jurists were
|> Nazis.
The sentence can be found at
http://www.comune.roma.it/COMUNE/sperimentali/novitch/fosse/fosse.html
but it is in Italian legalese (a hard nut to crack even for a native)...
- From what I understood:
320 were killed as ordered by Gen. Maeltzer
10 more after an order issued by Kappler becasue another soldier had died
5 by mistake
The court ruled that the execution of the last 15 was illegal by any
means.
Even if the execution of the first 320, could be considered a
legitimate reprisal in principle
(i.e. the partisans were representatives of the Italian state at war
with Germany and had commited an illegal act), it was
disproportionate (10 Italians to 1 German), thus illegal.
But the court considered also that the killing of the 320
might be considered collective repression (you never now).
Again this was ruled out as illegal (Art. 50 Hague Convention of 1907,
see the thread "Hague Convention and Ardeatine massacre"), because
it could not be established a firm link of "joint and severe
responsability" between the Ardeatine cave victims and the attack.
Kappler got a life sentence.
Regards,
Roberto
- --
Roberto Lionello <lio...@arcetri.astro.it> |/ * A Elbereth Gilthoniel,
http://www.arcetri.astro.it/~lionel |\ * J.R.R. Tolkien
Dipartimento di Astronomia e Scienza dello Spazio, ****************************
Largo Fermi 5, I-50125 Firenze, ITALY; Tel: +39 55 2752 268; Fax: +39 55 224193
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBMh1f4rOP7QbB8RLtAQEjKQP/WKAZLbh3BaA56A4JM5mTxrkiXH1SLt+7
jFSXkMCKPVXzHvZlpWzDpu9npnx3+wDf8Hg4RzHADR/G9LMp/E1m2m/eE3dGC/KK
GPDifsM0NlHKYh7eApO6w4OXxNdt/Dtxl/s/nfajS8NLOPilMbycPcktFJZYONvf
OvCp3/yGnoQ=
=Emk/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Carl Alex Friis Nielsen
Ja...@jmkemp.demon.co.uk (James Kemp) writes:
>I may be wrong with the numbers, but the third Geneva convention (as
>revised) deals with the treatment of Prisoners of War on land, the first
>two are as mentioned in the quote above, the fourth I think has to do
>with acceptable weapons but I'm not sure.
The four Geneva conventions are (I will use direct translations of
the popular names in Danish)
- the land warfare convention
(defines who are protected by the conventions (carying weapons openly etc.)
who/what can be legally attacked, treatment of wounded etc.)
- the sea convention
(covers operations at sea)
- the POW convention
(covers the treatment of POW's)
- the civilian convention
(describes how to treat civilians in occupied areas)
And then there is the Hague convention that defines which weapons can
be employed legally (those causing unneccesary suffering are NA)