| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Home Front: Culture Wars | |
| US judge orders ex-Nazi in Pa. back to Austria | |
| 2010-05-19 | |
Anton Geiser and his attorney did not immediately return calls and an e-mail for comment on the decision announced Tuesday by the Justice Department. Judge Charles Honeyman issued the 14-page order out of Philadelphia on Monday. Geiser was born in what is now part of Croatia and came to the United States from Austria in 1956. He has lived in Sharon, about 60 miles northwest of Pittsburgh, since 1960, became a citizen in 1962 and is married with three sons. "As a Nazi concentration camp guard during World War II, Anton Geiser must be held to account for his role in the persecution of countless men, women and children," Assistant U.S. Attorney General Lanny Breuer said in a statement Tuesday. "The long passage of time will not diminish our resolve to deny refuge to such individuals." A Department of Justice spokeswoman said Geiser is not in custody. He can appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals in Washington. Geiser has acknowledged being an armed guard who watched over and escorted prisoners at three Nazi death camps. But he has argued that his service was not voluntary and that he was therefore eligible to emigrate under the Refugee Relief Act of 1953. Geiser, an ethnic German, was drafted into the German army at 17 and served as an armed SS Death Head guard at Sachsenhausen concentration camp near Berlin for much of 1943. He later was transferred to an SS officer training camp at Arolsen, where he escorted prisoners to and from the Buchenwald camp, where tens of thousands of Jews and others were exterminated. He was at Arolsen until April 1945. Geiser has denied harming any prisoners, though he has acknowledged having orders to shoot prisoners who tried to escape. | |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #10 I don't know TW. This guy was 17 when he was conscripted - a kid. The war was over by the time the guy hit 20. Given the atmosphere at the time and without any other evidence to the contrary I think this is a stupid call. BTW - you didn't exactly agree to be drafted in any position in the German army. Somehow over the past 50 yrs we know that he has not been haunted everyday w/what happened in those camps? This guy was supposed to give some public act of contrition? Also, how the heck do any of you know what happened, what he did or didn't do. How easy it is to sit behind a desk. |
| Posted by: Broadhead6 2010-05-19 19:20 |
| #9 GirlThursday, we don't post every article submitted, preferring for the most part to cleave closely to War on Terror subjects. Yes, we do include articles of general interest and amusement -- and the one you submitted certainly fit that category -- but there are many more of those submitted than we can use. It's a balance issue, is all. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2010-05-19 18:19 |
| #8 It's ok GirlThursday, Polanski never wore an icky military uniform. He gets a pass. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2010-05-19 18:13 |
| #7 Roman Polanski (two time known child rapist) is looking for a housemate. Speaking of, why has the Burg been silent about bad old Polanski's British second victim coming forward? I submitted an article the other day, which was denied, and I believe would have made for lively discourse. He probably raped well more than two, but only two had the stomach to cop to it. |
| Posted by: GirlThursday 2010-05-19 17:11 |
| #6 Messicans and Arabs can come in by the tens of millions but Geiser must go? I think I'm beginning to see a pattern developing. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2010-05-19 16:54 |
| #5 tw: I cringe at the thought of intermingling forgiveness with the law, because it leads to evil outcomes. I quite agree. But I didn't think I was addressing that in responding to Glenmore's comment. Refusing conscription or disobeying an order in the German army meant being stood up against a wall and shot. Quite true, Dopey Ulamble1018. And quite, quite beside the point. By acting as he did, he kept himself from being shot, yes. But, the cost of that was the death of how many hundreds or thousands of concentration camp inmates, many of whom were neither Jewish by faith nor descent... so cultural antisemitism played no part in Mr. Geiser's decision. Nor does Mr. Geiser claim that, once he agreed to be drafted into the position, he acted to in any way sabotage the murder factories that were the concentration camps, which he easily could have done. Sabotage possibilities range from smuggling in food, medicines, false papers... to damaging equipment, misplacing files, smuggling out babies... the possibilities were endless for a man with access and imagination. Mr. Geiser had the first, and each day chose again not to exercise the second. This is the price of proclaiming, "I was just following orders." By choosing to passively acquiesce, one's choice makes one a participant in the result. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2010-05-19 16:05 |
| #4 Could the guy be telling the truth? Refusing conscription or disobeying an order in the German army meant being stood up against a wall and shot. How many thousands of Germans were forced to commit unspeakable acts simply to stay alive. The instinct of self preservation is the strongest in nature. I wouldn't be so quick to judge the motivations of others. |
| Posted by: Dopey Ulamble1018 2010-05-19 14:08 |
| #3 tw: I cringe at the thought of intermingling forgiveness with the law, because it leads to evil outcomes. When a judge demands that a person who plead "not guilty" yet is convicted of a crime, confess to the crime for a lighter sentence, the only reason is that the judge wants solace in his judgment. "If you make me feel good, that I am punishing a lawbreaker, you will be rewarded. But if you still maintain your innocence, you will be punished." This is the opposite of justice. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2010-05-19 13:49 |
| #2 But it is mentally (and theologically) unhealthy in both cases. Glenmore, I see no indication that Mr. Geiser has in anyway repented his actions or sought forgiveness from those he sinned against by his actions. He has not earnt forgiveness, and therefore does not deserve it. There is a big difference between not brooding over the wrong done, and actively granting forgiveness. I will not wast psychic energy on the first but, again, the second must be earnt. To forgive without desert is to make of the sin a mere bagatelle, a temporary inconvenience. Theologically speaking, I mean. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2010-05-19 12:13 |
| #1 "Never forget, never forgive." Doc, I feel the same way about 9-11. But it is mentally (and theologically) unhealthy in both cases. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2010-05-19 08:47 |