It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Allies ignored extermination of the Jews, claims Vatican

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 03:12 AM
link   
reply to post by silo13
 





The Vatican has accused Britain and the U.S. of complicity in the Nazi extermination of Jews. It claims the Allies deliberately did nothing to either rescue Jews or destroy the death camps.





Throughout the Holocaust, Pius XII was consistently besieged with pleas for help on behalf of the Jews. In the spring of 1940, the Chief Rabbi of Palestine, Isaac Herzog, asked the papal Secretary of State, Cardinal Luigi Maglione to intercede to keep Jews in Spain from being deported to Germany. He later made a similar request for Jews in Lithuania. The papacy did nothing.(5) Within the Pope's own church, Cardinal Theodor Innitzer of Vienna told Pius XII about Jewish deportations in 1941. In 1942, the Slovakian charge d'affaires, a position under the supervision of the Pope, reported to Rome that Slovakian Jews were being systematically deported and sent to death camps.(6) In October 1941, the Assistant Chief of the U.S. delegation to the Vatican, Harold Tittman, asked the Pope to condemn the atrocities. The response came that the Holy See wanted to remain "neutral," and that condemning the atrocities would have a negative influence on Catholics in German-held lands.(7) In late August 1942, after more than 200,000 Ukrainian Jews had been killed, Ukrainian Metropolitan Andrej Septyckyj wrote a long letter to the Pope, referring to the German government as a regime of terror and corruption, more diabolical than that of the Bolsheviks. The Pope replied by quoting verses from Psalms and advising Septyckyj to "bear adversity with serene patience."(8)


Yes, the Pope had a lot to answer for:




The International Catholic-Jewish Historical Commission (ICJHC), a group comprised of three Jewish and three Catholic scholars, was appointed in 1999 by the Holy See's Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews. In October of 2000, the group of scholars finished their review of the Vatican's archives, and submitted their preliminary findings to the Comission's then-President, Cardinal Edward I Cassidy. Their report, entitled "The Vatican and the Holocaust," laid to rest several of the conventional defenses of Pope Pius XII. The often-espoused view that the Pontiff was unaware of the seriousness of the situation of European Jewry during the war was definitively found to be inaccurate. Numerous documents demonstrated that the Pope was well-informed about the full extent of the Nazi's anti-Semitic practices. A letter from Konrad von Preysing, Bishop of Berlin, that proved that the Pope was aware of the situation as early as January of 1941, particularly caught the attention of the commission. In that letter, Preysing confirms that "Your Holiness is certainly informed about the situation of the Jews in Germany and the neighboring countries. I wish to mention that I have been asked both from the Catholic and Protestant side if the Holy See could not do something on this subject...in favor of these unfortunates." The letter, which was a direct appeal to the Pope himself, without intermediaries, provoked no response. In 1942, an even more compelling eyewitness account of the mass-murder of Jews in Lwow was sent to the Pope by an archbishop; this, too, garnered no response.


Source




# After months of pleas to say something about the extermination of Europe's Jews, Pius finally spoke in Dec 1942. He made a vague, pathetic reference to "those hundreds of thousands who, without any fault of their own, sometimes only by reason of their nationality and race, are marked for death or gradual extinction". These diplomatic words could mean anything, and were chosen not to antagonise the Germans or break his neutrality. He did not mention the Jews. He did not mention the Nazis. He never would, until after the war. # The encyclical Mystici Corporis (June 1943) is perhaps the defining example of the Catholic church's silence during the war. Some vague, weak complaints about euthanasia, which don't mention the Nazis by name, and don't even mention what country is meant to be referred to. Not a word about the ferocious extermination of the Jews burning across Europe, which the Vatican was by this time well aware of. # Pius XII never used the word "Jew" in any of his wartime speeches. Nor did he ever use the phrase "anti-Semitism".





The Jews of Rome * While Pius was Pope, in October 1943, the Jews of Rome, just outside his door - men, women and little children - were rounded up and taken away to be killed, to die in agony, watching their loved ones being killed in front of them. This is the defining moment in the history of the Catholic church. There will never again be such a test. Never again will it face such satanic evil in the holy city. This was the moment that two thousand years of history had led up to, the moment when the church could have shown that it was on the side of good and against evil. But it did not, because it is not. * See article by Cornwell in Vanity Fair, Oct 1999 (and mirror). * Pius made no public protest over the deportation and killing of these men, women, children and babies. None. Not even this would make him break his public neutrality. * Even after this, Pius never mentioned the word "Jews" in any of his remaining vague, diplomatic wartime speeches condemning "violence". * After a train journey from hell, all of the little children and babies were murdered by the Germans at Auschwitz, along with 99 percent of the adults.


Source

It seems to me that the Pope was playing the middle of the road stance. He knew of the German atrocities, but didn't want to ruffle any German feathers as they could take Him away as well as anyone else. But, Hitler wouldn't want to inflame any Catholic nations he may have been making overtures to: IE: Ireland. I think he did help some Jews later in the war, when informed by the Allies that their victory was assured. A very tricky situation for the Pope indeed. Many thought a strongly worded condemnation of the atrocities by the Pope would have helped.


[edit on 17-8-2009 by Oatmeal]




posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 03:17 AM
link   
reply to post by silo13
 


i posted this about 2 years ago:


Breckinridge Long was the Assistant Secretary of State during WW2 , and was in charge of immigration ; in 1942 he was directly handed the information , including photographs about the extermination camps in operation in poland , yet he chose to play down the significance of the find and impede jewish immigration


Breckinridge Long wrote in a memo from june 1940:


"We can delay and effectively stop for a temporary period of indefinite length the number of immigrants into the United States. We could do this by simply advising our consuls to put every obstacle in the way and to require additional evidence and to resort to various administrative devices which would postpone and postpone and postpone the granting of the visas."



www.pbs.org...

www.gwu.edu...


motlc.learningcenter.wiesenthal.org...



In November 1943, when the House was considering a resolution that would establish a separate government agency charged with rescuing refugees, Long gave testimony saying that everything was being done to save Jewish refugees, which caused a loss of support for the measure. However, his testimony was false and misleading: Long exaggerated the number of refugees and included non-Jewish refugees in his count of 580,000.[1]

Long is largely remembered for his obstructionist role as the official responsible for granting refugee visas during WWII. He "obstructed rescue attempts, drastically restricted immigration, and falsified figures of refugees admitted. The exposure of his misdeeds led to his demotion, in 1944. He has become the major target of criticism of America's refugee and rescue policy."






so whilst some of you are slathering at the chance to defame another `anti-semite` , history does show he is telling the truth not only was the 1 person who could have saved more , was totally apethetic towards jews , but , when the Hungarian ambassador , Joel Brand, met with the Jewish Agency of Palestine to try and save 1 million jews - yet , not only did the british but David Ben-Gurion say NO to saving these 1 million.


the same David Ben-Gurion who also sent the irgun and the Haganah against the british in 1945>1946 which started the terrorist actions of murder and bombings.

[edit on 17/8/09 by Harlequin]



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 03:28 AM
link   
Haven't bothered to read all the replies but guys, I'm sorry to report that any reasonably serious student of history knows this already. It wasn't just the UK and USA either. Everyone knew. All the major world powers knew and did nothing about it. The same will happen again. Wait for it. Look at what you turn a blind eye to already now within your own countries - specifically and particularly the US and UK. You don't have to look at Afghanistan or anywhere else. Just look outside your kitchen window.



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 03:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by CosmicEgg
Haven't bothered to read all the replies but guys, I'm sorry to report that any reasonably serious student of history knows this already.


And any reasonably serious member who wishes to be taken seriously knows to read the thread in which he intends to post.




posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 03:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Harlequin
 





"We can delay and effectively stop for a temporary period of indefinite length the number of immigrants into the United States. We could do this by simply advising our consuls to put every obstacle in the way and to require additional evidence and to resort to various administrative devices which would postpone and postpone and postpone the granting of the visas."


Yes, but isn't this like the pot calling the kettle black? The OP was about the Vatican accusing the allies. Almost every area of the world refused to take any of the Jews who were fleeing Europe. The Pope on the other hand, was in an actual position to affect the Nazi policy of deportation and extermination.



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 03:33 AM
link   
Disney Catering to Von Braun?





posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 03:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Oatmeal
 


the second part of the post stated that long knew of the camps , had photo`s of them and did nothing - and even when the allies acknowledged the camps in 1944/45 they still did nothing - bombers flew over them and did nothing.



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 03:41 AM
link   
Vatican politics and war

The Church vs Mussolini


However, in Italy, instead of a concordat, a Lateran Treaty was negotiated and signed in February 1929. According to that treaty, Roman Catholicism is the only recognized religion in Italy. The church was given 108.7 acres and complete control over it as Vatican City. The treaty also banned any Catholic participation in politics. Nevertheless Pope Pius XI encouraged priests throughout Italy to support the Fascists and even spoke of Mussolini as "a man sent by God." In effect the Lateran Treaty and that papal support of Fascism removed ant obstacle to his invasion of Ethiopia and other countries.


The Church vs Hitler


The Lateran Treaty also gave Hitler the idea that he could negotiate a similar treaty. The negotiation dragged on for months. During this time pope praised Hitler's anticommunist crusade. Pacelli was in direct negotiations with Hitler despite the German bishops' reluctance. Hitler demanded and got a provision that permitted him to ban any form of political social action performed by Catholics, which meant the disbanding of the Catholic Center Party, a substantial independent and democratic party. In return Hitler agreed to Catholic intervention in German schools and to authorize the cost of educating Catholic students from primary through secondary education. Cardinal Pacelli, who had become the Vatican Secretary of State in 1930, signed the concordat July 20, 1933 after Hitler had begun persecuting Jews, including those who had earlier converted to Catholicism. Also, in spite of Pius XI's Casti Connubi, a doctrine about the sanctity of human life, Pacelli signed the pact after Hitler's law was adopted for "Prevention of Genetically Diseased Offspring." This included the sterilization of hundreds of thousands of persons with mental retardation and physical problems such as blindness. In other words, Cardinal Pacelli sold out to Hitler by giving him a blank check to destroy democracy, persecute the Jews and in effect to do anything that Hitler viewed as a political decision. This was a clear assertion of Vatican power, as neither the German bishops nor the Catholic Center Party were able to thwart the Vatican bureaucracy. In March, 1939, Pacelli became Pope Pius XII.


findarticles.com...



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 03:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin
reply to post by Oatmeal
 


the second part of the post stated that long knew of the camps , had photo`s of them and did nothing - and even when the allies acknowledged the camps in 1944/45 they still did nothing - bombers flew over them and did nothing.


What would your course of action have been?

(Keep in mind, you cannot see evidence of mass extermination from those overflight photos - so you'll have to factor that in)

[edit on 17-8-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 03:55 AM
link   
Interesting OP

Could it be possible that UK US Soviet Union 'allow' the Nazi to invade europe and let them exterminate jews? Perhaps the antismitism was secretly running strong. Perhaps they didnt expect Hitler to try to take on the US and USSR?



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 03:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


not just overflight photos - photo`s from within the camps , tatoo`d inmates who survived escaping, for example Leon Feldhendler who escaped from Sobibor in 1943, but he was not the first.


the allies HAD the information and did nothing.

they could have attacked the crematoria in late 1944 when they had the plans - precision attack aircraft like the British Mosquito would have been ideal for the role , heavy bomber for the infamous `ramp`


heck , even bombing the camps would have been wanted if survivor statements are believed.



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 04:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Harlequin
 


Post some of the photos which you are citing.

(You are using hindsight, post some of the photos you cited and let us see what we can distinguish in them)



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 04:12 AM
link   
reply to post by CosmicEgg
 





Haven't bothered to read all the replies but guys, I'm sorry to report that any reasonably serious student of history knows this already. It wasn't just the UK and USA either. Everyone knew. All the major world powers knew and did nothing about it. The same will happen again. Wait for it. Look at what you turn a blind eye to already now within your own countries - specifically and particularly the US and UK. You don't have to look at Afghanistan or anywhere else. Just look outside your kitchen window.





The world, said Chaim Weizmann, "was divided into two camps : One, of countries expelling the Jews and the other, of countries which refused to admit them."





After the Anschluss, Roosevelt realized Europe would soon be awash with refugees. Eleven days later, he invited thirty-three nations to confer on the refugee problem at Évian-les-Bains, France. FDR had carefully circumscribed the goals of the conference to head off opposition : The agenda stipulated that no nation would be expected to admit more refugees than its present laws permitted, making it crystal clear that the haven sought was to be outside the United States. And lest Germany take offense, no mention was made of that country or of Jews. Sure enough, at Évian the U.S. would do no more than cut existing State Department red tape for German and Austrian refugees. Thus, for the first time, the U.S. would allow the number of such immigrants to reach the legal quota of 25,957. (The U.S. fulfilled its annual quota of German-Austrian immigrants only once in the next six years - in 1939, following the shocked reaction to Kristallnacht, in November 1938.)





The other delegates readily followed suit : France had taken enough refugees ; Britain was not a "receiving nation" and Palestine, of course, was off limits ; a senior Canadian official said "None is too many." (A number of high Canadian officials of the day were anti-Semitic, including the prime minister.)


Source




This article explores the ways in which Brazil closed its doors to potential Jewish refugees in the 1930s and early 1940s. The resulting picture mirrors, to some degree, the situation that prevailed throughout South America. The behavior of the Brazilian consuls and ambassadors not only reflected the growing antisemitism at home and in the countries to which they were posted, but rather some of these diplomats actually helped shape these policies. On the one hand, actions taken by the Brazilian elite towards Jews showed the many difficulties of fleeing Europe in the face of policies that sought to bar them from the country, and, on the other, human behavior spanning the spectrum, from racist antisemitism to philosemitism on humanitarian grounds.


Source




The policies of rulers such as Getulio Vargas (Brazil), Roberto Ortiz (Argentina), Arturo Alessandri (Chile), Lazaro Cardenas (Mexico), and Fulgencio Batista (Cuba) reflected this trend, which encouraged the development of anti-immigrant political parties or platforms and strong press campaigns against immigration. These attitudes were reflected in increasingly tight immigration laws introduced throughout Latin America in the late 1930s (Mexico in 1937; Argentina in 1938; Cuba, Chile, Costa Rica, Colombia, Paraguay, and Uruguay in 1939). The results of these laws were striking. Argentina, which had admitted 79,000 Jewish immigrants between 1918 and 1933, officially admitted 24,000 between 1933 and 1943. Another 20,000 Jews entered Argentina illegally, crossing the border from neighboring countries. Brazil admitted 96,000 Jewish immigrants between 1918 and 1933, but only 12,000 between 1933 and 1941.





In this climate, Cuban authorities denied entry to most passengers on the ship the St. Louis, when it docked in Havana in May 1939. While the St. Louis carried an unusually large number of would-be immigrants and was accompanied by significant media attention, the incident was not isolated. Passengers on the ships Orduña, Flandre, and Orinoco were caught in a similar bind. In November 1941, the German government virtually cut off the flow of Jewish refugees into Latin America when it banned all Jewish emigration from territories under its control.


Source




The Nazis could not have annihilated one-third of the Jewish people from the face of the Earth without the enthusiastic collaboration of their local allies among the Swiss, the French, the Italians, the Romanians, the Poles, the Lithuanians, the Latvians, the Estonians, the Hungarians, the Slovaks, the Serbs, the Croats, the Bosnians, the Albanians of Kosovo, the Bulgarians, the Belarusians, the Ukrainians, the Dutch, the Belgians, the Norwegians, the Swedes and, yes, the “Palestinian” Arabs (with a large assist from Great Britain).


Source





It must be remembered that in July 1938, at the Evian Conference in France dealing with the burgeoning number of refugees from Nazism, the Australian representative’s rationale for his country’s refusal to accept any of them was that Australia did not have a racial problem and didn’t want to introduce one. [48] It was a policy soon to be slightly eased under pressure from Great Britain and the United States of America, when permission was reluctantly given for 15,000 to enter, with some 8,000 actually doing so just before the outbreak of World War Two. Only some 5,000 of them were Jews. [49]


Source



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 04:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Harlequin
 





the second part of the post stated that long knew of the camps , had photo`s of them and did nothing - and even when the allies acknowledged the camps in 1944/45 they still did nothing - bombers flew over them and did nothing.





the allies HAD the information and did nothing. they could have attacked the crematoria in late 1944 when they had the plans - precision attack aircraft like the British Mosquito would have been ideal for the role , heavy bomber for the infamous `ramp`


The Mosquito was a short range fighter plane and could not have reached the "Death Camps", and were not precision in the same sense as today's aircraft.

What could they do at that point? Bomb them? I don't think that was an option.

The Allies invaded Sicily in July 1943. Landed on mainland Italy in January 1944. D-Day invasion June 1944.

They finally invaded Germany proper in November 1944, now that they were into Germany on the ground they could begin to see what was going on. The Russians were also liberating camps as they came through Poland and into Germany.

[edit on 17-8-2009 by Oatmeal]

[edit on 17-8-2009 by Oatmeal]



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 04:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


what? so you don`t believe tatoo`d inmates who were there?

and why would i personally have these photo`s? the same photo`s supplied to US and UK intelligence and not made available to the public?


since your wanting to argue , you prove , beyond all doubt that nothing happened , that its all a work of fiction since thats the postion your taking.

[edit on 17/8/09 by Harlequin]



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 04:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


I was replying to the OP. There is nothing anyone can contribute to this topic that is not already known to me.

*SNIP*


Mod Edit: Hold off on the name-calling thanks. Cheers -alien

[edit on 17-8-2009 by alien]



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 04:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Oatmeal
 


as i said , acttacking the infrastructure of the entire operation was viable IF the allies wanted to - but as you said yourself a form of ` dont ask don`t tell` was in force , do not publically acknowledge it and maybe the problem would go away.



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 04:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by In nothing we trust
Don't forget that WWII had to take place for the state of Israel to be created.


why others cant see this too



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 04:54 AM
link   
reply to post by TheOracle
 





Could it be possible that UK US Soviet Union 'allow' the Nazi to invade europe and let them exterminate jews? Perhaps the antismitism was secretly running strong. Perhaps they didnt expect Hitler to try to take on the US and USSR?


Hitler's antisemitism was well known before he was elected Chancellor in 1933. If you read Mein Kampf, Hitler outlined every step he would take if he was in power. Invading Russia was priority number one. He needed Lebensraum ("living space") for more land and raw materials. He stated that he would depopulate these areas to the East, and settle them with Ethnic Germans.

Hitler's policy towards the United States, was somewhat fuzzy.




“In the future, the only state that will be able to stand up to North America will be the state that has understood how – through the character of its internal life as well as through the substance of its external policy – to raise the racial value of its people and bring it into the most practical national form for this purpose. But by making such a solution seem possible, a great number of nations will be able to participate in it, which can and will lead to greater strengthening already as a result of the mutual cooperation.


Source

He denounced the US for being a racially mixed country and assumed this would eventually lead to her downfall. He also assumed that most Americans had an attitude of indifference toward the war in Europe. He was right about that, until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, then Hitler declared war on the United States, since we had been waging an undeclared war on Germany anyway by aiding Britain.

[edit on 17-8-2009 by Oatmeal]



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 04:56 AM
link   
It's really weird how much the Holocaust is being brought up recently. I've never heard about it so much in my life as I do recently.

Is there some reason for it?



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join