How late is too late… for a Nazi?

The headline reads: “90-year-old man charged over Nazi massacre.” Ok, you have my attention. Here is the article if you’d like to read it in its entirety, but here’s the synopsis. German officials have charged a 90-year-old man in the execution of 57 Jewish slave laborers just weeks before the end of the WWII. Claims are this man was part of the SS stationed in what is now Austria.

So, I got to thinking: How late is too late to pay for a crime? Here in the United States we have statute of limitations on many crimes; these basically restrict the amount of time after a crime is committed in which charges may be filed against the defendant. If time has expired it doesn’t matter if the person is guilty or not, they cannot be imprisoned for the crime. Of course, there are always exclusions, but you get the idea. That said, however, there is no statute of limitation on murder. This seems to be the crux of our social contract, you don’t kill me and I won’t kill you. Everything else comes after that first agreement. If you violate this primary agreement though, you can’t escape justice for a crime of taking another human’s life by hiding it long enough; you must inevitably pay the piper.

Which brings us to this 90-year-old man. The time has come for him to pay the piper, or has it? Just because we can charge someone with a crime doesn’t mean we should. At 90 years old how much time does he have left? What a different person he may have become after all these years. Where is the compassion in us that he was lacking so long ago? Is incarcerating a 90-year-old really going to be justice? Execution, is that the justice those 57 dead deserve? I struggled with this at first, but my unequivocal answer now is no. This man does not deserve prison nor the death penalty. Hear me out… the best way he can serve humanity, to pay his debt to those 57 Jews he executed mercilessly, is to live on and share his firsthand account every day of his life he has remaining.

This man’s sentence should be to help educate the world about the atrocities the Nazi regime committed. He should be a living example for all to hear and see of what hate and extremism lead too. Have his sentence be paid by going from city to city, classroom to classroom, person to person and have him tell of the atrocities committed. Force him to answer the question every day of his life, “Why?” For those Shoah (Holocaust) deniers the world now sees all too many of, this man can be yet another brushstroke in the tapestry of proof we offer, but this time, from one of the very criminals they say didn’t commit crimes. Bloodlust is not a Jewish value, but education is.

Should he refuse? Remind him the piper gets paid, one way or another.

Watered-down Nazis

For years now we’ve seen an increase in use of the word Nazi to indicate something or someone we don’t like or who is too strict. Someone too strict at work? The “office Nazi.” A woman that proclaims too much or too loudly feminist ideals? ‘Feminazi,” a term widely popularized by Rush Limbaugh. Honestly, of all people, I blame a Jew for this. Yes, Seinfeld’s “Soup Nazi” seemed to be the opening of the flood gates for the use of this colloquialism. It seemed to signal to the general public that the taboo had expired and the term no longer heralded the ultimate in evil, but rather, a watered-down word that no longer carried the burden of a constrained reference.

Recently we’ve seen a dramatic rise in its use as a result of the healthcare debate. Rush Limbaugh (still a big, fat idiot) has compared the healthcare logo to that of the Nazi party. (See image at right). We’ve seen Nazi “SS” signs and armbands at healthcare protests and increasingly the reference to “Nazi SS death panels” as part of the healthcare reform. (Side note, I’ve read the section and it’s complete crap. Read it for yourself and don’t rely on me or any other pundit.) Swastikas have even been painted on a pro-healthcare reform congressman’s office sign.

Now this article isn’t about being pro or anti healthcare reform. Again, read it for yourself and make up your own mind. Don’t let the media or political hacks decide for you. What this is about is the trivialization of the true meaning of the terms. The word “Nazi” should be reserved for exactly what it is; a reference to the most evil and vile, dehumanizing political and sadistic organization the world has ever seen. It represents pure, unadulterated evil. There is no comparison. Hell, even “Neo Nazis” don’t have shit on the 1930’s Nazis. If you don’t believe me, go sit down with a Holocaust survivor or even a German citizen from that time. I dare you to listen to the stories not from a text book, but from a real person who witnessed these atrocities with their own eyes.

So my request of you. It’s time to take healthcare reform talks back to a civil discussion about what’s best for America. It’s time to honor the memory of ours and other Allies’ fallen soldiers from WWII and those who perished in the Shoah, the Holocaust. These are the people who paid the ultimate price at the hands of the “Nazis” and the “SS” death squads. If we continue to water-down these terms how else can we possibly explain to future generations the true horror that Nazis actually represent?

Pro-Israel Neo-Nazis?

From the file of “WTF” comes a story with the perfect definition of contradiction. As you may have already read out there in the webosphere, there is a new group out of Germany calling itself the “National Socialists For Israel.” (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/990228.html The link on the name takes you to their homepage, which is mostly in German. Read the second link for a brief summary.)

Seriously? Well, the members have yet to publicly declare themselves and hide behind the anonymity of their website, fueling speculation this may simply be a German leftist plot to simply stir things up. You can read plenty about this elsewhere on the web, but what I want to focus on is the underlining nature of such support, if it reveals itself as legitimate, not just to Israel and the Jewish people, but universally.

“The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” This ancient Arab and/or Chinese proverb has not only shown up in both the Hebrew and Christian bibles in similar form (Exodus, Chapter 23:22), but has also served as foreign policy and even business guidelines for the modern era. We’ve all taken it with a grain of salt for the most part, but something this ideologically converse in such tangible measures really forces us to ask the question, is the enemy of my enemy my friend? In short, would this group prove to be a true and honest effort on behalf of the organizers and members, should we willingly accept and embrace their support?

This reminds me of the outpouring of support from the religious right, especially following the 1994 “Republican Revolution,” for Israel. The question then, as it remains to this day, is should Israel and the Jewish community accept the support considering the motives behind the support? Evangelicals support Israel not for Israel’s sake, not out of an altruistic love of freedom and democracy in a sweltering pot of Muslim despotism, but rather for their own religious beliefs and hopes. Beliefs, I remind you, that the “Second Coming” of Jesus will happen only when the “Ingathering’ of Jews to Israel takes place (See Pat Robertson, among others).

Are we really all enemies? Of course not. Are we completely in line with each other’s motivations and beliefs? Obviously not. So, where does the acceptance of support end? Should it end with Neo-Nazis, and their support for Israel based on Social Darwinian precepts and espoused eugenic rationalization?

As a child I was taught you say a lot about yourself by the company you keep. Although good advice for our personal lives, we also need to view our political beliefs in similar reference. As a Zionist can I and should I accept support from a group who bases its support for Israel on a dogma that completely and wholeheartedly disgusts me?

I’ve struggled with this for years when considering the evangelical support. I like the ADL’s response, in form of an article by Abraham Foxman, in which he states we should accept evangelical support, but only in accordance with holding to our principles and faith and, in such, that we do not offer a quid pro quo, nor are asked for one. I humbly embrace the evangelical support for Israel and do so with the expectation that although our basis for doing so is different, both come from a genuine and well intentioned origin.

As for the “National Socialists For Israel,” well, as we continue to wait for the true identities of the organizers and something more than a website and some bumper stickers, I will, at this time, have to decline your support for my beloved Israel. I cannot, in good conscience, accept support based on Social Darwinism and pseudo-eugenics, the ideas of which were used in Hitler’s Nazi Germany as a means of justification for the genocide of the Shoah. Yes we are a people of few numbers and perhaps should welcome support from wherever it comes from, but in order to be the People of the Book, the people we are and the ones we aspire to be, we must chose our friends wisely and distance ourselves from this organization.

Your thoughts?