I Have A Question

 

I Have A Question (Randyjw; January 30, 2017)

 

As I sit here reviewing a lovely abundance of email notifications in my account’s inbox, I’m struck by an interesting question posed in my mind.

 

The question came about as I was looking at a picture from a Nazi death camp during the Holocaust. The picture was featured on yesterday’s The Algemeiner.com (January 29, 2017), and shows a street filled with the bodies of dead victims, probably Jewish, lining a long and wide stretch, while other people are standing nearby.

 

It’s hard to see who the people are standing nearby. Are they German concentration camp administrators? Gestapo? American or Russian liberators?

 

I’ve never seen this particular image before. I don’t know how far into the indexing, researching, and cataloguing the documentarians have come in processing the miles upon miles of Nazi files shelved in their warehouses, and whether this one happens to be a recent release.

 

I have an awful thought. It suddenly occurred to me as I stared for awhile at the horror of all my people and all of the others who were murdered. I know that the liberators recorded their thoughts upon seeing the camps, which became enshrined as part of the historical record.

 

The liberated victims began their beginnings of a free life. Veterans returned home, and people began to pick up the pieces and resume living, once again. Both groups couldn’t bear to speak about the horrors that they went through and witnessed. The Holocaust was too much pain to bear, let alone utter the horrors of what was experienced.

 

War takes a tremendous psychological toll on everyone: perpetrator and victim, as well. It’s always far worse for the victims, though. Especially the innocent ones, who didn’t ask to be any part of this.

 

It wasn’t just World War Two from which veterans refrained from speaking — but, it’s been an effect from all of the wars. People tend to bottle up these horrors inside, because these atrocities are too difficult to speak aloud and to renew their energies.

 

But, why didn’t the veterans come to speak out against the Holocaust deniers, who deny the number of our dead, or the fact that it even happened at all? Why have the Jewish victims had to speak about the reality of the Holocaust for ourselves, and why haven’t the liberators, who have seen these atrocities with their own eyes, spoken out to the public on any regular basis, if at all? Is there a gag order in place, preventing military men from commenting on the Holocaust?

 

I have already informed you that the meticulously-kept Nazi documents during the Holocaust were turned over as part of the surrender, and placed within miles and miles of shelving in warehouses for cataloguing and review.

 

I have shown you already the forty-plus years’ time delay by the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), which office became defunct when replaced by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), in declassifying Nazi documents, from 1941 and 1947 (?) respectively, showing the present status for that time of the whereabouts and ownership of confiscated Jewish art collections, which was taken over by the Einsatzstab Rosenberg. For more on this, see my article: Stolen Art, Stolen Lives (https://newsnotes1.wordpress.com/2016/11/14/stolen-art-stolen-lives/). The declassification of the specific document(s) didn’t occur until 1984. Did it take them forty-plus years to just get to this document, or has it been withheld without being released for that long? These are important questions to answer.

 

Were veterans ordered not to speak about the Holocaust? Is this a reason why they have not appeared as speakers to lend their support to the veracity of the statements that Jews to this day must still continue to uphold and prove true? I just really haven’t seen this happening; have you? Shouldn’t they have been? PS: I admire and have the utmost respect for veterans of free nations and I’m thankful for your service. But, I really want to know. If anybody does know, or has seen this, I hope you’ll weigh in. Thank you.

 

Advertisements

13 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

13 responses to “I Have A Question

  1. I know! That’s exactly the point! I’m sure that veterans have an obligation to the security of our nation to not reveal military information, and I know that part of the liberation was due to the US Army forces, but you would think that some of those people would have stepped up to the plate and spoken out about the unjustice of it all. It will really be s sad day when the generation is no longer with us. And so much harder to defend without survivors.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Thanks for your valuable input. I appreciate what all veterans have given in service to the people of this country. My father and my uncles were all in WWII and my mother has long given years in the aid of veterans herself. I do realize that PTSD is a major silencer, regardless of the specific circumstances which insidiously found themselves in to its sufferers. I have the utmost compassion for those who are caught in its grip. I understand that it’s sufferers might be able to speak about anything at all, except for the horrors, which turn them mute, in those areas. I don’t blame them or feel that there is a diminishment of their roles in the war. I understand that the U.S. had to play a larger role in preserving its interests and the larger picture of sustaining democratic ideals and those other countries trying to preserve the same. It wasn’t the role of the U.S. to care about the Jews abroad being slaughtered wholesale, or Japanese- or German-Americans in its midsts. We did what we did, under dire needs, and in a different time — and it worked, toward US and world favor, in the end. But, then again… We are slowly learning, and have suspected, that the government was more apprised of the situation about the Jews then they care to acknowledge. Because they did restrict the quotas of immigrants (Jewish), which could have been humanitarianly waived; because we’ve learned that nearby reconnaissance had revealed the existence of the camps; because no-one from the government, as I’ve mentioned, continued to support the claims by the Jews of the Holocaust after the war ended, and nigh eighty-some years since the beginning of Hitler’s ascension as Chancellor, they have mostly not been present to give credence to our claims, though they saw the camps, and the dead. I know that Holocaust survivors also were silent, and didn’t speak of their ordeals… It was too painful. Until there was a shift in mental health and the drawing away of the fear of stigma attached to revealing one’s suffering of problems (though it still leaves many silenced, or in various phases of incapacity…). Bureaus were formed and Holocaust survivors have finally spoken out. Grandchildren finally wheedled out the words from WWII veterans. It took decades for this to occur, and we’ve learned that such suffering needs expression, and people in your field do a wonderful service. But, in my own feeling, I can’t but help be disappointed that the government would absorb many Germans into its ranks during those years, would hold anti-Semitic stances through their foreign policy offices, and more subvert, than expose, acknowledgement of the same. My personal discovery into an innocent, but nagging, query regarding something popping up on the internet with my same last name led me to discover that artwork confiscated by the Nazis and its documentation, clearly shows the obsessive focus and determination that the Germans possessed to try to unearth the location of every last Jew they vould find. The US came into possession of the Nazi archives upon German surrender in 1945 or so (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End_of_World_War_II_in_Europe), but the document wasn’t declassified until 1984 — 39 years later. Did it really take 39 years to get to that document in the miles of archived information, or was it translated way earlier, but was held back in release until much later? Because, it would be clear that the government knew about the Jews being targetted and their assets and holdings confiscated, yet complicit in keeping valuable information to track or locate those stolen assets from the knowledge of the Jews. Just wondering. Is it enough, dayenu, that those who survived found liberation? Well, it would have been enough. Would it have been enough, dayenu, that the liberator who pulled a body from the piles because they recognized the name on the dog tag, allowed one more Jew to survive? Well, it would have been enough. Would it have been enough, dayenu, to receive all of the documentation; to have the liberators have spoken out and stood up to the likes of Holocaust deniers Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or David Duke? Can it be enough? I hope the caseload of those under the care of Nidal Hassan are being forthrightly re-reviewed and attended to. He was a sick man, himself. With the disregard for the previous warning signs he gave, I hope the follow-up care will be more compassionate toward all those he may have “treated”, and wonder when his attack might really have begun…

    Liked by 1 person

    • Yes. Helping someone to realize their self-destructive or expressed manifestation of anger, generalized as hatred, of some sort, and channeling their thought processes toward more constructive action, is beneficial. Making them feel that their thoughts are important, because, as this other person said, it is basically the essence of ourselves, is also important, as well as not to diminish their thoughts as unreasonable but in better need of readjustment. It would be nice to live in a utopia where everybody inherently acted thus. The reality is that this is not an across-the-board phenoma; it involves often conditioning and learned responses; and reasoning with a jihadist as the sword is raised whilst expressing their hatred (rationalized, in their eyes) is a futile gesture of denial. And the lessons need to be learned in each generation, like those of the Egyptian pharoah that knew not Joseph. We can kvetch or kvell and each deal with it in our own ways. ‘Course, everybody has different ways and don’t agree to the “best” methodologies and practice. And that’s humanity, under the looking glass. Thanks for the reference. Maybe I’ll read it, one day.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Another thing — and maybe I’m wrong on this, since you’re the expert. You say that “hate is irrational”. Let’s apply linear logic to that statement. Hate is an emotion. Hatred as a thought can remain submerged without acting on its expression, or it can find expression by further physical action, in some way. Whether it is physically enacted upon the perpetrator, or misdirected and projected onto another, is irrelevant. As a vengeful statement or enactment against its perpetrator is more logical; as against other innocents is more irrational. Either way, the manifestation is a further level of involvement to somehow “find closure” against the perceived wrong, and to “make it right” (which it can never do, as the original hurt was done in the past). Nevertheless, the brain perceives and judges things which it deems right, or wrong, regardless of whether a “true” classification of the matter can ever be really assessed. Someone experiencing anger, or hatred for the behavior/action of another, is experiencing an emotion. Is it wrong to experience emotions? The word “irrational”, I think, means that there is no attached reason associated between things. For instance, one person says, “The sky is blue”. Their respondent answers, “Spaghetti”. It is irrational because it doesn’t relate to either the sky, the color, the weather, the science behind light refraction, or any number of relevant answers that have to do with its original expression. But, a person experiencing the emotion of hatred against the killer of his family, say, does so in their mind with, at least, some salient reasons directly relative to the previous incident. Is the entire emotion invalid? Are, then, all emotions equally irrational? Is love only a physical expression, void of emotion or feeling, and also, therefore, irrational? A person can give care to, but not love, another… So, physical expression alone is not enough to demonstrate the existence of love. Perhaps it is, rather, that feelings can be both rational and irrational, though never wholly detached from the individual. So, perhaps they’d best be deemed valid — just, not always expressed in rational manifestationf of either statement or action. Sometimes, indeed, hatred is purely irrational, but formed due to biased perceptions inculcated in the individual through parental/societal attitudes. Bias may result without actual due cause, that’s true. A person may project what some people do as a stereotypical label toward classifying all of that “label” as those who would do the same. The statistical likelihood of that occuring is unlikely to be 100%, thereby invalidating that argument. I’m not sure that an emotion felt as perceived hatred can be deemed across-the-board as an irrational response; maybe anger is a better choice of words. Yet, people have feelings, emotions, delusions, fantasies, thoughts and more. Are they all invalid? Why just the one? In fact, somebody else just mentioned basically the same thing, in effect, in another conversation in this blog. We may agree that vengeance accomplishes nothing and is wrong for that reason alone. Channeling anger into non-violent outlets is the more productive venue and mode for its expression. Why should someone else’s actions provoke anger in another, when realizing that that person was resonsible to choose their own action/reaction? Maybe not great discernment/filtering abilities, etc. Perhaps the brain conceives this as an attack upon the self and reverts to limbic response via the fight/flight adrenal response, subject to conditioning factors, as well. I’m sure that those who have studied such matters are more knowledgeable about it — maybe it’s even a DSM entry. In any case, it’s just an outward ramble of an internal dialogue, at present, based on your wording. I once read a short blurb by Suzy Cohen regarding the effects of various deficiencies in the body, whether amino acids, vitamins, etc. and the roles which diagnosis and addressing such balances could do to improve some mental health aspects within the body. Of course, my mention is not to be construed as medical or life advice; you probably wouldn’t comment, for the same reason. I was also just wondering.

    Liked by 1 person

    • You’ve repeated everything I’ve laid out, now using your own examples, so — that’s good! You’ve basically affirmed everything I’ve just said. Of course, I agree. However, I’m more of the psychology methodology, that cannot prescribe medications, as opposed to the psychiatrist methodology, that can and does. This will be a good first lesson for people who are unaware of the differences. I am not in agreement with your assessment to first use medication. I am of the opinion, mostly, that it should be considered as a last resort.
      You’ve misunderstood the association made in my reference to amino acids and vitamins. I am not speaking about food. I am speaking of the body’s ability to produce enzymes which interact with amino acids, or bodily deficiencies which do not properly utilize nutrients and are depleted or deprived or are in some way impaired of their ability to do so. I have her old article here, which I meant to send to a friend in the field, and haven’t. Here are some of the highlights (the article deals with depression) of testing regarding these factors, and how to change their balance: IL-10 (it’s a cytokine). C-reactive protein. TNF-alpha (another cytokine). Free T3. Neopterin and biopterin. Hormone evaluation. Yes, and some nutritional deficiencies, assuaged through food choices or other additional means, such as magnesium, folate etc. This is not medical advice, nor is it intended to be seen as such, and so cannot treat, cure, or diagnose any condition. It is sort of a pointing out to you of what she thinks are important. I think these things should be understood and evaluated for their usefulness first, before standing so rigidly within one discipline without the benefits of information regarding less interference and reactionary side effects and results. Thalidomide, bad idea. Lithium, not really so great. Lobotomies and electroshock therapy. No. How about those who prescribe it first receive it themselves, and then we can re-evaluate. It’s a never-ending plethora of synthesized chemicals that may have never been a natural byproduct of the biochemical processes within our bodies. Not to say we don’t do the same to kill cancer, etc. But, I’m just saying. Psychiatrists medicate. How can a dazed person in some lithium-induced haze really be that “teachable”? You need your faculty and your wits about you to be “teachable”; otherwise, you might just resemble a sedated automaton. Eastern philosophies are less medication-happy than Western; think India and China, for instance. I don’t discredit bodily medication, where necessary.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Thanks for that. It is indeed difficult; nor would I wish it on others. I have half a lifetime of experience in my family with such matters, and have had a friend with this devastating illness, similar to your story of the mother-daughter. Theirs turned out to be a seemingly inherited bipolar issue, over four generations. The daughter wound up having it, as well. My friend has had very bad psychotic episodes; it’s awful. It became ultimately threatening to the safety of me and my family, and I had to end our friendship.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Well, we were originally discussing PTSD, basically, so that is what I was basically responding to.

        I believe neurosis is part of “genuine” mental illness, although it can be often treated, with some success, with some behavior modification techniques, as we had been discussing.

        And, here again… About what I was saying… It’s not a nutrients/amino acids “model” — again. Not food; not just amino acids. More of a whole body approach to find and to attempt to treat the CAUSE, and to rectify, imbalances in the body. This could be cytokines; hormones; nutritional (vitamins, minerals) deficiencies; enzymatic; other. This isn’t to say that just applying a pill to the systom can’t assist. It definitely can. It can’t cure, but it can sometimes help symptoms. People go off the wall, both with and without these meds.

        Though I wasn’t there in person, my friend vividly detailed all the feelings, her episodic responses, the hospitalizations, the effects of various medications and regimens she’d been through… It was tough. I know her travails: kids through different fathers, the loss of them to her Aunt and the resentment, the struggle to retain custody of her last child, the different doctors and programs, the loss of her grandmother and mother, the loss of her home, trusting someone to help her that failed her and winding up in another state. Eventually, she was okay, but I had to extract myself based on what I was hearing from her. She’s been through alot. She was among the first children to survive childhood leukemia, though I didn’t know her, then. The meds saved her, but gave her a stunted heart and that has had some bad results. Her life has been difficult, to say as a complete understatement.

        Like

    • Again, and also, your “hate is irrational”, when it’s not personal, is a nice platitude, but that doesn’t mean that some people won’t get angry, be disappointed, be disgusted, and entertain ideas of vengeance on the perpetrators of evil, like the murderers of their family members or spouse, etc. True, vigilante justice is a no-no, and that is why we have the court system to administer justice. Anger is a step in grief, according to Elizabeth Kubler-Ross. Does anger translate to hatred? Well, it could. It could instill fear in remaining family members that the same thug gang which killed their kin will also come for them. It will instill fear in the domestic abuse victim that the restraining order will have no effect to keep at bay the person who might kill them. These emotions may have slight differences: fear, anger, hatred, but the body reacts to them all in pretty much the same fashion — fight or flight. People may initially have hatred or anger which dissipates with time. Sometimes, it won’t. Hatred is often just fear: of the unknown, of consequences and of the future, of differences. It still needs to be addressed as a valid part of an individual’s expressions and feelings. You seem to be substituting “bias”, perhaps, for “hatred”. I’m not sure if there is a difference; and haven’t thought that far on that differentiation. You’re speaking of projection, in kicking the dog because of a bad day. I sort of think it still diminishes the person who might harbor a feeling of hatred. I hate chopped liver. I’ve never tried it. The smell makes me gag. Is it possible that I might like it, if I did? Maybe; but you won’t get me to that point. Is it irrational? Well, certain aspects give me enough information upon which I’m formulating my decision. It may be irrational (and not a good example), since I didn’t, indeed, taste it, but other information helps me to form that decision. I don’t think undervaluing certain experiences, even if they don’t provide the direct experience, constitutes irrationality. I think that behavior modification exercises can help thwart some fears, and know this was instrumental with me in the aftermath of terrorist attacks and the like. It took me about two weeks, when first using the Israeli bus system, to stop literally looking over my shoulder for terrorists as I boarded the bus. Then, the fears dissipated. I really didn’t want to attend a going away party for someone, that they chose to host at a venue which had been bombed and where people had been killed. It was just the vague feeling that because something bad had happened there before, that it became a little bit engrained in my psyche as a “bad” place, giving me a “reason” to feel uneasy (that translated to some conceivability that it was still a target, though of course it is no more or less one than any other place). I was basically “forced” to go (I couldn’t not see this person off) and I’m really thankful, because that saved me from falling into that rabbit hole. That is why Israelis go on with life, rebuild and revisit right away. We must. People must. As for anti-Semitism, I believe that the cause is jealousy. I’ve said this for years (nobody wants to listen). People are angered that there were individuals that were “chosen” by G-d. Though they miss the fact that G-d chooses others for certain things, and bestows blessings to non-Jews… they don’t see past that, or make that part of the consideration. Other religions grew that became the basis for their own chosenness. But, being the first makes us the original ones to throw scorn at. And so, that is what has been done. It starts with resentment, springing from this jealousy. It gets perpetuated in the handing down through successive generations to the biases that existed beforehand, and this has extended through millenia, as you know. So, the hatred results as a conditioned response to the biases and prejudice that were handed down to them in society (home, school, community) from previous generations (and on down the line). Seen in this context, anti-Semitism has a “reason” for its existence (in the minds of its proponents) and would be considered (by them) a rational response to a bias, yet it is, of course, unjustified in being carried out in its bias, simply because they have not been personally harmed, for instance, by a Jew. Even though there is no REAL basis for the anti-Semitism to be carried out, and is indeed an irrational act, the long-chain of bias over the millenia gives it its “justification”, in the minds of the misguided thinkers of this school of thought. So, considering anti-Semitism as irrational, when it does, indeed, have a seemingly relevant basis in chain-link bias (my term), is just parroting the blather of refusing to look at its root cause. The same can be said for the mind-think which refuses to view the ideology of Islamic theology and its subsequent hadiths and rulings, as the basis for the reason behind Jihadist ideology. Neither of these things cropped up in a vacuum. Only by acknowledging the causes for each can we begin to address and find ways to combat these pernicious beliefs — if there ever IS any way (I’m not sure that there ever will be, as there will always be the Pharoah that knew not Joseph). I hope this will inform your practice. Thanks.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Sometimes He has given anti-Semitism to others… as when He hardened Pharoah’s heart to chase after us out of Egypt. Our Sages sometimes reckon that this was done so that the Egyptians could see that He was G-d. Christians believed that it was incumbent for us to be trodden down, as that was suppposed to be our Fate as non-believers.

      G-d created his Laws and gave them to us, because He wanted to. If others were jealous because of it, that may just be human nature (of the other nations whom G-d has also made), but… Not necessarily a G-d attributed action. Anti-Semitism has also had an often opposite effect, also, of almost purifying and refining us, by fire, as it were, to be even better people, and better at what we do, etc. A specific example would be the old exclusions (suddenly “new”, again) from guilds and jobs, leaving us only open to the financial fields, which the Christian people did not wish to enter. It had the unanticipated effect of making us an astute and accomplished purveyor of the industry — to our advantage, rather than to our detriment. And now, it’s become a conspiracy theory. How ridiculous the world turns. Oy!

      Like

Comments? Please be nice...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s