Still they go on and on and on...

[trustme]

Don't deny he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. The German army on the Russian front had 300000 Hiwis or non Germans from invaded countries plus Romanian. Hungarian & Italian divisions. Many Ukranians hated the Russians & were more than happy to serve the Germans at the first opportunity.
You have made it abundantly clear that you believe he should not have been prosecuted
You have never even attempted to answer my question as to what justifies a prosecution, you obviously have no idea other than a gut reaction

I believe that if there is sufficient evidence for a prosecution then a charge should be laid & it is for the courts to decide. If the charge can't be proved then the accused goes free, if it is proved then the accused is sentenced . In this case I agree with the judges sentence. I do not see the sense in putting him in jail , but I do think it is important that the process was followed.
If we start to arbitrarily decide which case is worth prosecuting & which is not based on emotions without regard to facts than we no longer have a justice system. it ain't perfect but it beats anarchy

[Winston001]

And the Latvians. Don't forget the Latvian concentration camp guards. They were the most brutal and feared in the camps. And they weren't Germans.

[trustme]

Just the chap. All I have ever wanted was for someone to put a line in the sand, to give a set of parameters that justified prosecution or otherwise. I'm still waiting. I don't have anything against this guy , I simply believe if there was a case to be answered then he should answer it, no one has given me a credible arguement to the contrary

Batter up Winston, am I wrong??

[Paul in NZ]

Just the chap. All I have ever wanted was for someone to put a line in the sand, to give a set of parameters that justified prosecution or otherwise. I'm still waiting. I don't have anything against this guy , I simply believe if there was a case to be answered then he should answer it, no one has given me a credible arguement to the contrary

Batter up Winston, am I wrong??

You are a wind up merchant and this is my last post here.... I've placed my line in the sand from post one - there is no real case to answer..... thats the point. They got it wrong and then cooked this up with very little real evidence of any sort because they didnt want to admit it. It took them YEARS to find anything that sort of placed him (or a guy with a similar name) in a camp (a different camp than he was arrested for). Suddenly survivors 'identified him'... Some of them were not even at the camp at the same time - its a crock.

Even if he was there and it was him. There is not one, I'll repeat that, NOT ONE shred of evidence that he hurt a single person or could have done anything to stop it. The only reason this is being done so that a legal precedent can be set so that 'Nazi Hunters' can keep their jobs and income chasing a diminishing pool of 'maybe' people.

If this was a normal 'murder' case he would never have been tried. There is a very very good chance he is innocent.

[Winston001]

Just the chap. All I have ever wanted was for someone to put a line in the sand, to give a set of parameters that justified prosecution or otherwise. I'm still waiting. I don't have anything against this guy , I simply believe if there was a case to be answered then he should answer it, no one has given me a credible arguement to the contrary

Batter up Winston, am I wrong??

No argument from me, I'm with you.

I'm reading some stuff about morals http://www3.sympatico.ca/saburns/pg0412.htm which is interesting but hard going.

The 'line in the sand" changes over the centuries. Horrific things have been done by moral men. Salem witch trials, the Inquisition, Al Queda et al.

Edmund Burke said "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing". .

Nearly every guard, officer, and Nazi on trial at Nuremberg said they were obeying orders - as if that absolved them from participating in the hellish acts. If enough had refused, the Final Solution would have evaporated. Sometimes it only takes one person to make the difference.

[jaffaonajappa]

Sometimes it only takes one person to make the difference.

I like this.
I try to conduct myself thinking this is Right. And that Karma exists.

But NZ's full of too many hard arsed 'realists'.
Im afraid Winston, your going to get Burrrrrned.

Which is a pity - I admire your stance on the topic.

[avgas]

Sometimes it only takes one person to make the difference.

Revenge is never satisfied.

[trustme]

Justice is where evidence is gathered & placed before a court for the court to decide.

Revenge is what happened to the terrorists that attacked the Israeli team at the Munich Olympics

[Winston001]

Just following up with examples:

Hamza Ali al-Khateeb - 13yr old boy tortured and killed by Syrian security a few days ago. His death has sparked fresh riots and energised the peoples revolt in Syria.

Mohamed Bouazizi burned himself to death in protest in Tunisia, 17 December 2010. His death started the whole revolutionary cycle we are currently seeing in the Middle East.

Khaled Said was beaten to death by Egyptian police on 6 June 2010. The circumstances of his death were published around the world in a Facebook campaign and led to the successful uprising in Egypt.

One person can make a fundamental difference.

[jaffaonajappa]

a couple of other examples found here......the Israelis even have a name for these types....One Person makes a difference. Yad Visham.
Inspiring one is this japanese chap.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiune_Sugihara

Others listed here....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Righteo...ng_the_Nations

And most peeps have seen Schindlers list...