Wars and Conflicts聽 permalink
how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.聽
Posted by Elkstone (U3836042) on Thursday, 2nd December 2010
It was common knowledge they committed attrocities against Russian POWs and civilians, many were sent to concentration camps. But did the Nazis or German military make sure they did not do likewise to the British/American forces?
So were they treated the same or did they segregate them? Do we know how they treated black GIs or British sevicemen? They must have known about segreation in the US. Or they did not want the allies to know of how they may have death camps?Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 2
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Thursday, 2nd December 2010
Elkstone
I just watched yesterday the second part of "The American Dream".. and it featured an Afro-American who was only allowed to train as a pilot when the war increased demand. Up till then "blacks" were only allowed to do ground maintenance work.
He became a Lieutenant in the US airforce and was shot down. He floated down and got caught up in some trees. At ground level he found the Germans waiting to arrest him and he became a POW.. But he was treated as an officer and a gentleman-- in other words better than he had been treated at home-- or was to be treated when he went back home.
But perhaps not all the camp guards were Nazis..My father-in-law who lived for 4 years under German occupation in France stresses that most of the Germans were not real Nazis.. and they learned to recognise the guards on the coal stack near the railway station who just turned the other way when "the locals" helped themselves to a bag of coal.
On the other hand, one of our schoolteachers had been shot down in the RAF and kept, it was said, by the Gestapo for 4 years.. I was reminded of this in 1999 by another Old Boy who this teacher had taught A level German.. He ended up working for the 麻豆约拍 World Service, and one day they needed someone to interview Germans. So he went to the room and waited. The interviewee came in. He started his interview. But the person burst into tears and ran out. This happened 2 or 3 times. Then he found the head of section in the room waiting for him, who explained that his guests had been so distraught because he was speaking "Gestapo German".
My German friend Thomas B does not understand what this might have been.. But he was not born in Nazi times.
As for us as children we took account of the war experiences to understand the rather sadistic and even cruel tinge in the teacher's behaviour.. For a black american it might have seemed more than OK.. For a middle class Englishman from Oxford perhaps it seemed worse.
But the Senegalese soldiers fighting in the French Imperial Army mostly never got to be prisoners of war.. A documentary shown on French TV this year featured the fact that the Germans were not prepared to take them prisoner and massacred them on the battle-field; on at least one occasion their white officer refusing to stand aside and insisting that he must share the fate of his men- even if that meant death.
CassLink to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 3
Posted by Mr_Edwards (U3815709) on Friday, 3rd December 2010
But the Senegalese soldiers fighting in the French Imperial Army mostly never got to be prisoners of war.. A documentary shown on French TV this year featured the fact that the Germans were not prepared to take them prisoner and massacred them on the battle-field; on at least one occasion their white officer refusing to stand aside and insisting that he must share the fate of his men- even if that meant death. 聽
Germany announced over radio after the fall of France and Chad's refusal to be part of this surrender that "the coloured and white fighters of the so-called Free French forces will not be treated as prisoners of war, but will be shot."
Felix Eboue and Charles de Gaulle responded by a radio broadcast in which they said that in that case, they would not be taking any prisoners either.
Personally, I think it's a shame that we didn't place Africans into poisitions of power in every town in Germany during the occupation.Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 4
Posted by LongWeekend (U3023428) on Friday, 3rd December 2010
Elkstone
Germany was a signatory of the Geneva Convention and, by and large, observed its obligations during WWII.
Allied combatants who became POW were the responsibility of the relevant service (hence Stalag was an Army POW camp, and Stalag Luft the designation for an air force one). The only segregation from the German point of view was between officers (who were not required to work for their captors) and other ranks (who were). British Indian Army troops were also treated properly, although they were subject to recruitment attempts for Bose's movement.
The US Army, on the other hand, was segregated at the time. I do not know whether the Germans allowed US POWs to segregate themselves. As there were relatively few black POWs, because they were not allowed in most combat roles, perhaps it was not an issue.
The concentration camps were run by the SS and thus POWs were not ordinarily sent to them. This was administrative, not to conceal their existence. Toward the end of the war, as the German political leadership's attitudes hardened toward escapers, commandos and aircrew, numbers of Allied POWs did end up in concentration camps (as did SOE personnel, who were a special case). There may have been a vague idea among some SS officers of holding such POWs hostage in order to negotiate their own escape. Some of these POWs gave evidence at Nuremberg.
LWLink to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 5
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Friday, 3rd December 2010
Looking at it the other way, I was intrigued to re-read in Dudley Stamp's "Man and the Land" that what we think of as the beautiful "green and pleasant land" of much of England owed a great deal to the work of masses of German POW's who were set to work catching up on a great deal of the maintenance work within rural England that had been neglected since the start of the Great Depression in English agriculture in the 1870's.
CassLink to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 6
Posted by LongWeekend (U3023428) on Friday, 3rd December 2010
Sorry, meant to include:
Jewish servicemen taken POW were treated correctly as POWs, not sent to concentration camps. However, there were concerns that this treatment might not continue, and Jewish soldiers, at least in British service were offered the choice of omitting their religion from their identity discs (which information, incidentally, is included so that a body can be buried according to the appropriate rites).Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 7
Posted by Mr Pedant (U2464726) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010
Think I鈥檝e mentioned this story on here before.
My grandmother told me about a good friend of their who was in a Highland regt and captured, along with many comrades in the fall of France.
As they were being processed the Germans asked that all the Gaelic speakers step forward 鈥 and naively he did.
All those who stepped forward were sent to the salt mines, the remainder went to standard POW camps.
He had a bad time down those mines and his health never fully recovered.
I鈥檝e no idea why they were separated in this way.Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 8
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010
Mr Pedant
At the risk of angering other posters, there may have been more to it than that.. Someone has, I think, already mentioned the recruitment of the "turncoat" Indian National Army from POWs who then fought for Chandra Bose and the Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere.
I seem to recall that there was some similar scheme to recruit Scots to fight the English, rather as Irish regiments had served for over a hundred years for France in wars against England.
A book that I have entitled "Highland Clans and Chiefs" by Ian Grimble makes the point that the Highlanders seem to be a remnant of an Aryan population, with the name "Roy" being common to both the Highlands and India, and of course the bagpipes.. And there is more about the legendary ancient civilization which underpinned Highland pride, including the large libraries of books in "Erse" that are referred to in Boswell's "Life of Johnson". The Good Doctor did not accept their existence, but both Wagner and the Nazis seemed to attach a great deal of importance to Valhala and such.
As I have mentioned perhaps elswhere, a youth from the Sudentenland wrote to his parents that he was being shot for refusing to join the SS, so perhaps this particular individual refused point blank to even consider becoming a "turn coat".. As I understand it the whole scheme fell through, though the last Foyle's War play did feature a British "turn-coat" unit.
CassLink to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 9
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010
I have no high opinion of the German "ethos" often recognised even by British. Their ethos was nothing else than 100 dead locals for each dead German soldier. However I have to disagree with most of what has been written above.
No matter what levels of violence employed Germans were no more racists than British or French of the times. However, while they would not hold respect of what you describe as "non-white POWs", in the same manner that down to the basics neither British nor French ever held either (they simply "conveniently tolerated their presence to increase their ranks), they had just another VERY important reason not to respect their lifes at all: it was not their war but they were there to fight. For Germans, the war was between them and the British and the French. So seeing the slaves of the British and French arriving to fight for their masters was something that the Germans would not respect. Do not forget that this was not Africa or Asia but Europe and the introduction of far distant foreign slaves of the British and French was an anathema for the Germans. And down to the basics one must be very naif to have expected the Germans to respect the life of a slave Indian or African (please do not argue with the reality) who no matter all the humiliations and difficulties faced by his masters was still there to fight for their war.
For Germans these were nothing more than slave mercenaries. And like such they were treated.
In my personal opinion, the presence of mercenaries in battles is 100% natural and 100% condemnable. In my understanding it is 100% normal to kill a mercenary for he is fighting a war for money and war is his business, i.e. he makes money out of killing the opponent and as such it is even moral and should be expected that he is executed with brief procedures. Unless you think that a man getting payment to take out his gun in Washington and killing 200-300 people would get away with life imprisonment or something...
While one can write tons about how Senegalese and Algerians were French citizens and how the Indians were commonwealth soldiers - it will go in vain. According to Germans these were slave mercenaries and they earned what they sought for.Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 10
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010
Re: Message 8.
Cass,
"I seem to recall that there was some similar scheme to recruit Scots to fight the English, rather as Irish regiments had served for over a hundred years for France in wars against England."
Did some quick research on Grimble Scots and Nazis and didn't find that much.
As we are on a History messageboard, "I seem to recall" is not good enough, I think?
In my research in my first page on Google I met already: 麻豆约拍 History Messageboard: the History Hub: Was the Commonwealth...and some clash between Nordmann and you...Also a message on the same Hub: Hallowe'en....
We seem to be on Google too. We have the public of the world
. As for my French messageboard and here, I will be even more cautious when I edit a message....
Kind regards,
Paul.Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 11
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010
On the above you have to keep in mind that Germans would not be in position to know who was citizen and volunteer and who was under payroll and such. Even in the first case, it would be unthinkable for them to have people that were on the verge of rebelion against their masters coming to their aid to beat the Germans who no matter what they preached among themselves had not threatened them - quite the contrary would give them a chance to get away from their masters.
One has also to note that the conduct of several units of these mercenaries - especially the Arabic corps were far from exemplary. One has to admit that the foremost motive for the Algerian and Moroccan Arabs to join the French they anyway hated was not so much the hope of getting money, not even so much the loot (which was mostly military material of average after-war value) but above all the chance to rape European women in order to satisfy their lowest complexes of inferiority towards Europeans. Harsh reality so let a third observer tell you so - Germans, French and British will not dare say it so freely. The Algerian & Moroccan troops had raped almost every single woman of the ages of 6 up to 70 (and this is no vague saying, it was the reality) in all the Italian villages they passed by and they did it also quite often in France too on those areas suspected by the French of extensive German collaboration to the point that it had reached the upper echelons and they tried to keep them out of habitated areas for fear of raising so much hatred agains the allies that would even risk the lifes of allied soldiers in supposedly by then turned friendly ground. It goes without saying that with such a fame, Arabs would not hope to get the status of a POW among Germans.
African troops like the Senegalese were not attracted primarily by that and there is no reason to imagine them practicing rape and looting more than any other French, British or American soldiers - perhaps even less since they were rather reserved and followed more closely contraty to Arabs who were rather of their own mind and worked like razzia or gazi soldiers (i.e. hit and run looters). Their presence in Europe was mostly down to personal curiosity and the hope of getting some vague recognition from their white masters instead of remaining living a life of what themselves saw as zero. Still to the eyes of the Germans, they would be slave mercenaries and nothing more, as such of no position to demand mercy.
Now the last case is only that of American soldiers of non-white ancestry. As mentioned above these would be so few (as they usually served in the backlines and in logistics) that Germans would not really be so much occupied with them - eg. having 1 half-caste man in a bunch of 500 POWs would pass by just like that so he would be bunched with the rest of the POWs and treated accordingly. Of course, as this POW would be the first "black man" many Germans would had met in their lifes - most German soldiers being village boys - he might gathered some interest of the German soldiers though I ignore if that would be negative, positive or neutral as to the fate of the man in concern.
What is interesting is that it was the Allies that finally treated their non-white troops in a separate way. When Paris got liberated, the British and the American leadership told Charle De Gaul not to enter with "coloured troops" in the Parisian region for fear of it being a negative connotation and it becoming a propaganda tool in the hands of Germans who had apparently made quite many friends in northern France (about half the population there kept a treacherous stance, depicted by the easy with which Germans found way into French women - 200,000 births meant at least 1 million "relationships" in a region where young, beautiful and fertile women would be not more than 3 million and only a % of them could be described as rape), more than the French would like to admit then as well as today.
So while those Senegalese and Algerians - for whatever reason - fought on the side of the French, they never really got thanked and the French army tried to quickly hide them in the barracks. So many were they that in reality De Gaul trying to man the free French troops to enter a sizeable army in Paris started having lack of French men elsewhere in the fronts and that was a problem as Algerians and Snegalese were only back of the range non-specialised troops (weill Algerians were kind of specialised in surprise night attacks and such but nothing sort of technical). So much was the stress that actually De Gaul had found refuge to hiring even Spanish Republicans and Italian anti-fascists
who were collaborating on various levels with the free French (some of course in combat zones) and as such many of the Free French who paraded in the streets of Paris liberating it were actually Spanish and Italians rather than French (and many means that an important percentage was not French). While one can understand that it is not that much pity that Algerians did not get the honour, perhaps it was a kind of unjust for certain African corps made out of African men, naif people that were dragged out of vague hoped but certainly having a good understanding of the value of freedom and wishing that freeing the French would ensure their own coming to freedom.Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 12
Posted by Mr_Edwards (U3815709) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010
It's worth noting that the seed for the Free French forces came not from General de Gaulle but from Felix Eboue, Governor of Chad, and the first non-white man to graduate from the Ecole Superieur and to be awarded the Legion d'Honneur (in World War One). He was born in French Guiana but his ancestors were from India.
It was Eboue that first said that the French surrender did not apply to Chad (and then he was followed by other French colonies in Africa as well as the Caribbean and St Pierre and Miquelon). The price Eboue extracted for fighting for France was decolonisation (and indeed Syria and Lebanon were granted "independence" in 1943, although that "independence" was not complete until 1946).
Overt racism was difficult within the Free French Army, not least because Africans formed a majority. When Free French troops landed in Marseilles, they did so singing "Here We Come, The Africans". De Gaulle did indeed, disgracefully, move white troops including Spanish and Italian troops into position to be seen to "liberate" Paris, but he did so as you say, at the request of the British and Americans.
Morocco and French Indochina, on the other hand, remained loyal to the Vichy regime. Indeed, French Indochina joined the East Asian Co Prosperity Sphere (although the Japanese attacked anyway when the time came).Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 13
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010
Paul
Thankyou for your post..
The "input" to which I referred was from a TV documentary -probably "The People's Century" which was surely broadcast as part of a retrospective on the Twentieth Century at least ten years ago..A Scotsman described having experienced this-- which is I suppose heresay evidence from 50 years after the events that they described. As far as I know I have no recording of that interview.. and I do not know whether there was a book of the series. If there is I do not have a copy.
But we do know that the Nazis always looked at potentially useful people.. In the field of literature the French novelist Collette, aware perhaps of her vulnerable situation with a Jewish husband, was prepared to write and article explaining how Burgundians like herself were in fact a Germanic race..And the English novelist P.G. Wodehouse, taken prisoner in his favourite haunts on the French side of "la Manche" never overcame his acceptance of broadcasting on German radio, though he insisted that his broadcasts- like his novels- were not to be taken as serious commentary- and he became an American citizen.
The Ian Grimble book merely deals with the Aryan roots of the Highland Scots-. But given the Nazi interest in the idea of an Aryan race- as opposed to Aryan as it was initially employed in reference to an inter-connected body of languages in line with the kind of liguistic analysis pioneered by the Brothers Grimm- it seemed possible that some Nazis might have thought that a common Aryan link was something that could be explored...
I was merely suggesting a positive, rather than negative, reason why Germans might have wanted to identify Gaelic speakers, as I always think that people are encouraged to think the worst of others- especially where conflict or disagreement is concerned.
CassLink to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 14
Posted by VoiceOfReason (U14405333) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010
The Highlanders were Aryans?
Thats a new one on me
The Scots surname Roy is derived from the Gaelic for red (red haired)
Were all the Gaels of the British Isles Aryan or just the Scots Highlanders?Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 15
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010
Glencairn
That things are written is in itself no proof, except from the fact that usually people build on an element of pre-existing material.
The book actually entitled "Clans and Chiefs" came to me by accident because my sister bought it expecting something else. It was written by Ian Grimble, born 1921, educated at Balliol Oxford, who worked as in Intelligence Officer during the war. The flap also tells me that he has a Ph D from Aberdeen University and is a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society..The work was published in 1980, and a MB member has previously mentioned being quite appreciative of Grimble's work on TV in Scotland.
All of this means that it would be churlish to dismiss his effort to tell his story, but it is true that he depends a great deal upon information that has come through the oral tradition, with quite an extensive use of the ballads that were sung by bards and other skilled musicians whose job it was to fix and hand on the story of the Highlanders [Hence James VI banning them]
So Grimble's Chapter One begins "The Gaelic peoples of Scotland spoke a language that has by far the oldest literature in Europe after those of Greece and Rome. It is the most archaic surviving form of the family of Celtic languages to which Welsh also belongs, and those who spoke any of these were defined by their tongue as Celtic peoples... The Celtic peoples were Indo-Aryan folk who were migrating westwards into Europe from perhaps as early as 1500BC... By 700 BC..the Celtic tribes had established a powerful centre at Salzburg in Austria, based upon its salt deposits. But neither here nor elsewhere did they establish a city, the practice from which the term civilization is derived. One of the most distinctive characteristics of these people has been their distaste for settled urban life. To the very end, the tribal societies of the Highlands did not easily form a nucleus; crofting townships consisted of houses scattered over a wide area amongst their own crops and pastures."
Grimble went on a little later:
"Their weakness in political organisation was counterbalanced by an extraordinary cultural unity, which has left the hallmark of the Celtic presence across the breadth of Europe, and even preserved the evidence of eastern origins in a variety of ways"... which he goes on to explain in the next 20 pages that complete this chapter headed "Celtic Tribal Origins"-- He includes a mention of the Ossianic heroes amongst other tales that are common to Gaels on both sides of the Irish Sea.
In an article written in 1939 entitled "Race in Europe" Dr Julian Huxley attacked the way that Nazi Germany in particular had picked up this idea of a common Indo-Aryan root language that meant that suprising similarities emerged [like the German Kaiser and the Indian Kaisar] and built up an idea of Aryan and Nordic races, which he, as an eminent biologist, said was rubbish in the light of the thousands of years of interbreeding within the continent. But we do know that this was one of those ideas that many Nazis took really seriously.
Interestingly Cole and Postgate begin their 1938 history of "The Common People" with Culloden and what they describe as the end of a way of life that went back almost to the time of the Apes.. This is interesting to me in the light of the thoughts that I posted on the Hunters to Farmers thread on the "Ancient" board.. for that thread seemed to jump right over this highly sophicated, intelligent and successful "non-civilization" which by the time of Culloden had been pushed to the peripheries of Western Europe (much as the Arawaks had been pushed right out into the Caribbean) and were of course subsequently crushed by the age of the machine and investment in solid and fixed foundations.
CassLink to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 16
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010
Nik
I am not too sure about the other Imperial British Armies, but I do not think that your general description applies very well to the East India Company Army, nor to those of the Native States under the treaty obligations negotiated by the Welleslys..
The abject condition of slavery would hardly apply to the Sepoys who were employed as security guards by the EICo to guard their factories, nor to the Indian Mutiny/First War of Independence- both those who decided to revolt in favour of the defunct Moghul Emperor and those units, notably Sikhs and Gurkhars who were prominent in suppressing the uprising.
Under the Raj the whole question of the Indian Armies was revised along with the assumption of Imperial Rule for the first time, and the revision of the Army deemed necessary by the Crimean War debacle.
In the First World War many of the Indian units were volunteered by the Princes who had only recently attended the great Delhi Durbhar to hail the King/Emperor George V.. There was an assumption during the 1WW that the officer class would all be "white"; but the war reality and the performance of Indian soldiers in the field undermined that idea, and c1929 an Indian Officer Training College was set up at Dehra Dun to operate as an Indian Sandhurst.. It was the existence of a "modern" and professional miliatary that encouraged the British to believe that Independence was now possible; And after Independence- at which the Army too was Partitioned- the Indian officer class was divided, so that, old-boys of Dehra Dun have faced each other in the conflicts since.
CassLink to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 17
Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010
There was no German 'scheme to recruit Scots to fight the English' and neither were Gaelic-speaking soldiers 'separated' and 'sent to the salt mines'.
What there was, however, was the formation of the Legion Freies Indien (Free India Legion). This is not to be confused with the Japanese-sponsored Indian National Army led by Subhas Chandra Bose and based in Asia. The Free India Legion was German-sponsored and based on Indian troops captured in Europe and North Africa.
In the 1980s I remember speaking to an elderly Berliner who as a youngster has seen the Free India Legion parading through Berlin in 1942. He recalled that the impression that they made on him was so great that he was suddenly convinced that Germany was now really going to win the war.Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 18
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Wednesday, 8th December 2010
Vizzer
That does seem to be a very categorical statement relating to the chaos of war when even a totalitarian German regime may not have always run with total effiency.
Certainly the Germany decribed by the French Doctor- novelist Celine in "Nord" - a world that he lived in because he was counted as a collaborator in France since he had tried to keep a hospital running under the occupation- seems to be one in which very little was certain, apart from uncertainty.
And no doubt most schemes never came to anything. The ex-serviceman that I saw being intinterviewed was pretty clear that the Germans never managed to create a Scottish unit.
And I prefer not to call the ex-serviceman referred to by the other poster a liar.
CassLink to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 19
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Wednesday, 8th December 2010
Casseroleon, no, I used the term "slave troop" to imply that these troops were people coming from colonies, people who were either not citizens of France or Britain and who even if they were citizens they would be not even 2nd class but 3rd class ones. I used the term to put people in German shoes and indicate how they could possibly see all these troops. The common German soldier and the random officer were not in position to know the intrigues of the French and British colonial organisation. Many of Germans had a distaste afterall for British & French Imperialism (though themselves fought to do their too....) and as such they would not even get into the trouble asking to learn. For all they knew, these people were "slave troops" or at best "rogue mercenaries".
Now as far as I know, the position of a mercenary is covered by no treaty - and even if it is covered (to cover the paid troops of many modern armies) it is very relative. To anyone's understanding a mercenary can be seen as a common thug who finds his chance in war to make money and or worse... Hence, Germans naturally would feel no obligation at all to respect any right of such troops.
I am not justifying any "easy violence" against POWs of whatever origins here. I am just explaining that all is not black or white.Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 20
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Wednesday, 8th December 2010
Nik
Your thesis seems to ignore that during the most "civilised" era of warfare perhaps the great majority of the European Armies were mercenaries..
This seems to have been started especially by the Dutch who pioneered the true art and science of war so that from the early Seventeenth Century service in the Dutch army was seen as the best possible apprenticeship for a military career. Hence the Duke of Marlbourough had friendly and sociable relationships with many of the commanders and leading officers on the other side.
This professional approach to warfare became particularly important to many of the German states during the Eighteenth Century during which the earnings of individuals and units fighting in other people's wars was often vital to the National Income of many of the hundreds of small states.. In this regard perhaps the Swiss too were something of a role model, the French monarchy feeling safest before the Revolution when surrounded by "Swiss Guards" that is still the case with the Vatican City- though I am not sure just how "Swiss" the "Swiss Guards" are now.
Of course the marriage of Nationalism and war was something really achieved by the French Revolutionaries- as far as Europe was concerned- but perhaps this too was learned by those French who had seen a "nationalist" war fought by the American colonists.. As Mic Mack quoted on another thread, war became a matter of killing the enemy- in other words terrorism and genocide. And perhaps the Americans had been taught this in the conflicts with the Amerindians that became matters of slaughter and enslavement-- the "save the last bullet for yourself" syndrome.
In one of the Anglo-French engagements in the build up to the capture of Quebec in the Seven Years War, there was an incident when one of the British soldiers had fallen, and was about to be scalped by one of the Amerindian allies of the French. A French soldier shot the Indian dead, and a massive Scottish sergeant went and picked up the wounded man in his arms, and carried him down to safety.
In fact within Nazi Germany the Night of the Long Knives only happened because Hitler understood only too well the vital importance of the Professionalism of the German Army.. It was I believe a professionalism that the Professional British soldiers respected.
But we live in an age now in which Professionalism has become a debased concept-- most commonly associated with the term "Professional foul" when referring to something really cynical.
CassLink to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 21
Posted by hotmousemat (U2388917) on Wednesday, 8th December 2010
Nik
I am not convinced:
The common German soldier and the random officer were not in position to know the intrigues of the French and British colonial organisation.聽
The treatment of prisoners is something laid down in regulations; it isn't left to the common soldier. If Germans behaved brutally towards prisoners because of their race, that was because they were given licence to do so by those who were in a position to know.
Germans were rounding up millions of people of inferior races, including German citizens and war veterans, shipping them to camps and exterminating them. I do not think it is credible to claim that if they behaved similarly towards black prisoners of war this must have been down to some innocent confusion about their diplomatic status.
I am just explaining that all is not black or white聽
I would be hard put to think of any historical event which was blacker.Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 22
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Wednesday, 8th December 2010
Re: Message 13.
Cass,
thank you very much for your elaborated reply to my message. I understand now better your position.
And following the thread I did some quick research about the Dr. Julian Huxley that you mentioned in your message 15. I found that he was the grandson of the Huxley that I mentioned in my Social-Darwinism thread on the "Ancients" forum.
For me an interesting detail was that he also was involved in the eugenic movement from Galton from the time of his grandfather.
Kind regards and with esteem,
Paul.Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 23
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Wednesday, 8th December 2010
Paul
Yes Julian Huxley was the grandson of Professr Thomas Huxley very important for the discovery of the intermaxiliary vertebrae and an expert on human skeletons, placing them in an evolutionary order with the key vertebrae indicating a "missing link" between the apes and humanoids.. This of course was very important for the late nineteenth century concepts of scientific and evolutionary racism-- including the ideas that Hitler may have got in the IWW trenches from Dr Lanz's magazine "Ostara". Lanz argued that apes were downbred human beings, and that evolution was sweeping us from the purity of God's Creation down towards a Hell of animalism.
Interestingly Hitler had his writings banned-- too close to home perhaps.
Dr Julian followed his grandfather into biology and was very prominent as the Professor of Biology at Oxford. He also wrote a popular book about the science of life with H.G. Wells that spelled out that man's future would be based on science (1927).. During the war he was a very popular member of the 麻豆约拍 Brain's Trust and around the time that I was born in 1944 a number of his general pieces were published in a slim volume entitled "On Living In A Revolution".. These are pieces like that article on racism that I frequently go back to in search of the "forward thinking" around at the time of my birth.
I quoted some of the things that he wrote about Evolutionary Biology and War a couple of days ago on the Emily Hobhouse and the Boer Concentration Camps thread.
Julian's brother Aldous Huxley was prevented by very poor eyesight from either pursuing science as a study, or in fact from enlisting during the Second World War.. His most famous novel "Brave New World" published c1931 and republished after the 2WW shows a very different belief in the way foward. And while he spent the 1WW in a strangely quiet Oxford University, he spent the 2WW in the USA, where one of his major activities was a study of "The Grey Eminence" who had been the mastermind of French foreign policy during the Thirty Years War, implying that a militaristic and brutal Germany had been formed as much as anything by French policy during so many centuries of French aggression.
And in concluding he compared the religious journey of this French "monk" to the contemporary Quaker movement that was developing in England at that very time and which had managed to stay true to its pacifist principles for much of its life.
By the way I was intrigued by your Google reference..but even an advanced search revealed no Casseroleon... They do not seek him here...
CassLink to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 24
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Thursday, 9th December 2010
Re: Message 23.
Cass,
thanks again for another enlightening message.
"By the way I was intrigued by your Google reference..but even an advanced search revealed no Casseroleon... They do not seek him here..."
Cass, just put the terms from your message 15: grimble clan and chiefs nazis into google and see...do it once yourself...and you will see...the messageboards open to the world public...as I make some faults in French, when I put some terms on google I come automatically to my specific message of the French messageboard.
Not sure if you type in google uk you will have it on the first window of the entries as my google I think is google be or even google be in Dutch, while I have on my first windows more English and Dutch entries than French ones. I have seen recently that you can change your personal google to a specific country...
Have a look as for this subject to my reply in Caro's bedchamber thread on the Hub...
Kind regards and with esteem,
Paul.Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 25
Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Thursday, 9th December 2010
the Germans never managed to create a Scottish unit.聽
The didn't manage to because they never attempted to. There was no German 'scheme to recruit Scots to fight the English' any more than there was a German scheme to recruit the English to fight the Scots.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not sure just how "Swiss" the "Swiss Guards" are now.聽
Where exactly do you think the Swiss Guard come from?Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 26
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Thursday, 9th December 2010
Vizzer
If you wish to believe that you know everything about what happened in Nazi Germany there is not really very much I can say..
As I have said, from my reading, and, in fact from a conversation with a colleague who was an Auschwitz survivor, I believe that- in spite of the best efforts of a totalitarian regime- things did not always work with mechanical efficiency
This was, for example, was highlighted by the programme that I watched in France last month about Himmler's personal Doctor, a Finnish specialist in alternative medicine based upon his studies of Buddhist forms of treatment in the sub-continent, who used Himmler's utter dependence on his ability to cure his chronic abdominal pains to save the lives of many condemned people, and eventually even Jews.
I am fairly sure that the interview that I saw was in the "People's Century" series, which did seem to have made a particular effort to interview common people whose stories and experience had never really been registered before. Of course oral testimony so long afterwards can be challenged, though it is very difficult to see what motivation anyone would have had for making up such a story.
Rather like the project to actually record all the possible first hand evidence of Holocaust survivors before they died, one got the impression from that series that many of the interviewees were actually talking about these things for the first time as one century was closing and another one opened. And I know that it has become easier to get my parents-in-law to talk about the German occupation of Burgundy now that they are in their late eighties.
As for the Swiss Guards, as I said , I understand that the Swiss Guards were originally Swiss; but I can not be sure that that is now a recruitment criteria. Are French people now allowed to join the French Foreign Legion?
CassLink to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 27
Posted by Mr_Edwards (U3815709) on Thursday, 9th December 2010
French people have always been allowed to join the French Foreign Legion. France had an arrangement with Switzerland whereby any Frenchman wishing to join the Legion could be given Swiss citizenship.
Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 28
Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Thursday, 9th December 2010
I am fairly sure that the interview that I saw was in the "People's Century" series, which did seem to have made a particular effort to interview common people whose stories and experience had never really been registered before. Of course oral testimony so long afterwards can be challenged, though it is very difficult to see what motivation anyone would have had for making up such a story.聽
It's not the oral testimony of Second World War veterans which is being challenged here Cass. What is being challenged is your recollection of what you may or may not have seen in the 'People's Century' series. What you are probably referring to the 'British Free Corps' which (ironically) was indeed originally been intended to be an English outfit called the 'Legion of St George' inspired by John Amery. When that failed the Germans decided to try an all-British approach. Even then the British Free Corps (BFE) never reached more than 3 score in number. You can, however, read about the Scottish members of the BFE here:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for the Swiss Guards, as I said , I understand that the Swiss Guards were originally Swiss; but I can not be sure that that is now a recruitment criteria.聽
The first criterion for being a Swiss Guard is to be a Swiss citzen. Another criterion is to have undergone military training in Switzerland. You can read the full recruitment criteria for the Swiss Guard here:
Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 29
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Friday, 10th December 2010
Vizzer
Well- you are also perfectly entitled to question my ability to remember details of conversations..But I have a long experience of surprising people with such details gleaned from thousands of human contacts.. though as on this occasion I usually preface with "I seem to remember".. for what interests me is dialogue not pontification.
Nevertheless as a teacher pupils often asked me just how I knew things about them, forgetting that they had told me many years before.. And this was not the Legion of St George.. Perhaps you have also not heard of the Scots communists who went and settled in the Soviet Union when "Red Clydeside's" expectations were disappointed.
CassLink to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 30
Posted by Mr_Edwards (U3815709) on Friday, 10th December 2010
The British communists who settled in the Soviet Union were not all Scottish although many were. Quite a few were tricked into renouncing their British citizenship and then purged by Stalin.
Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 31
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Friday, 10th December 2010
Vizzer
Shades of that conversation with Darcy' aunt in "Pride and Prejudice".. Since you said that what I said was impossible- and dismissed my memory- there seemed little point in giving more detail of my recollection of that interview.
The Scottish POW said that the Germans had been interested to see whether any of the Scots could be "turned".. He went on to say that some of them had been canny enough to see whether they could exploit this situation to their advantage without compromising their honour, like anyone might do who is being canvased.. .
E.G. Fox was out kissing babies in an Eighteenth Century election and was looking around for more babies to kiss, when one of the common people (really common) said that he could kiss his "posterior" if he wanted, but he would be damned if he would vote for him..
Back in the POW camp- apparently no-one actually was prepared to take up the offer. But it might not have been a good idea to be quite as blunt as Fox's constituent.. Salt mines?
CassLink to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 32
Posted by Jak (U1158529) on Friday, 10th December 2010
Interesting story by Mr Pedant: all the Gaelic-speaking prisoners were put into one group.
Wouldn't this be so that the Germans could know what they were saying among themselves - in Gaelic? I guess not many Germans would understand the language, but maybe they had one or two ardent anti-English Scotsmen (I've met a few) working for the Nazis, who did know Gaelic, and could keep an eye on the prisoners? Hidden microphones...
As for being sent to the salt-mines, all non-officer prisoners were made to work, and maybe salt-mining wasn't so very different from the other arduous tasks that non-commissioned prisoners were forced into.
How unlike, how very unlike, the amateur dramatics the officers were amusing themselves with, while digging tunnels.Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 33
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Saturday, 11th December 2010
Jak's post reminded me of "Ginger's" story that emerged this year when he was formally recognised as one of the Righteous of all the Nations.
Ginger was a British POW near the Auschwitz work complex and found himself working alongside Auschwitz inmates, who told him of the conditions within the death camp.. Being by his own reckoning a bit of a dare-devil, he decided to change places with one of the Jews, giving him a bit of a break in POW conditions, while he went and spent the night in Auschwitz to see for himself.
He also systematically slipped him some of the precious food rations that POW's were entitled to receive- especially chocolate.
What he did not know until recently was that his friend did actually survive Auschwitz and went to live in the USA where he lived to a ripe old age, always frustrated that he was never able to trace this man who he only knew as "Ginger"- though he reckoned that he owed him his life.
CassLink to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 34
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Saturday, 11th December 2010
Reflecting on Ginger's story- one conclusion from the circumstantial evidence would be -as has been stated already on this thread- that the German professional soldiers took a professional view about the rights of POW's.. This would seem to be backed up too by the famous exploits of multiple escapees. Clearly you were not just "shot trying to escape"- as long as you adopted the "fair cop" attitude of my South London pupils of the late Sixties.
The Germans probably took the view that German POW's too would try to escape and it was a case of "doing onto others as you would that others do unto you"..
So if Ginger had been found out in Auschwitz he would no doubt have been in big trouble- but would probably have been returned to the POW camp to be dealt with.
But did the others run a greater risk. Clearly the exchange could not work without the complicity of other POW's who made sure that their "guest" did not "stick out" from the rest... Of course Nazi assertions that they could immediately identify someone as Jewish, or of part Jewish descent, was demonstrably wrong.. Nevertheless had their been rabid discrimination within the POW camp, the risks involved in this exercise-which was surely really above all the action of bored and frustrated young men trying to "put one over" their guards- would hardly have been justified.
CassLink to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 35
Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Saturday, 11th December 2010
Perhaps you have also not heard of the Scots communists who went and settled in the Soviet Union聽
So now these 鈥楽cots鈥 who were being recruited 鈥榯o fight the English鈥 are suddenly Soviet POWs captured on the eastern front? This 鈥榮tory鈥 of yours Cass just gets better and better.
Not only have I heard of 鈥楻ed Clydesiders鈥 but I also met one who had indeed lived in the Soviet Union for many years. And no he didn鈥檛 spend the Second World War in the Soviet Army but was instead well away from the front (over 2,000 miles behind the front in fact) in Siberia building and equipping factories in Novosibirsk. He had plenty of photos and mementos etc to prove it. When I met him he was living quietly in retirement in the late 1970s and was an acquaintance of my grandfather鈥檚 from his social club. Looking back what strikes me as significant is that towards the end of his life this old communist chose to live 鈥 not in Siberia, nor anywhere else in Russia, nor anywhere else in the Soviet Union, nor anywhere else in the Eastern Bloc, nor even in his own native Scotland but 鈥 you鈥檝e guessed it 鈥 but he chose to live in England.
As for Gaelic-speaking POWs being segregated from non-Gaelic speaking POWs then this is a phenomenon which has just not surfaced in any of the records or accounts of British prisoners during the Second World War. Were Welsh-speakers similarly segregated from non-Welsh speakers? There are several accounts given by Welsh-speaking POWs such as Peter Thomas of Llanrwst and John Elwyn Jones of Dolgellau and none mention segregation. Jones even wrote a book 鈥楶um Cynnig i Gymro鈥 / 鈥楢t The Fifth Attempt鈥 (1971) about his escape from prisoner-of- war camp. Again 鈥 no mention of segregation.
Ironically there is the case of a further Welsh-speaking POW - William Roberts from Welshpool . Roberts also escaped and he made it back to Scotland only to be arrested there as a suspected German spy because of the way he spoke. You can read Roberts鈥 story here:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Salt mines?聽
I鈥檓 glad you put a question mark there Cass because this is a myth which is badly in need of exposing.
The idea that 鈥榖eing sent to the salt mines鈥 was one of the worst punishments available in Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia etc is something a UK invention. How this myth came about in the UK is a mystery in itself. One theory is that it may stem from the spy novels of Graham Greene, Alistair MacLean and John Le Carre or from radio plays, films and television programmes based on them and then gained a life of its own. One thing is for sure, however, and that is that the concept of being sent to the salt mines as some form of special punishment is virtually unknown in Russia, Germany and Poland etc.
If anything salt mining is one of the least dangerous forms of underground mining. Coal mining, for example, is much more hazardous. With salt mining there are no poisonous gases, there are no explosive gases, there is no combustible coal dust, there are no carcinogenic dust particles and salt mines are generally (by definition) dry environments so there is also almost no risk of flooding. Ex-salt miners are also generally free from the respiratory ailments such as pneumoconiosis which afflict their coal-mining counterparts. Not only this but in recent years asthma sufferers in the general population are actually being recommended a trip to salt mines in order to gain relief from their condition.Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 36
Posted by Mick Mac (U5651045) on Saturday, 11th December 2010
As Mic Mack quoted on another thread, war became a matter of killing the enemy- in other words terrorism and genocide.聽 Surely war is always about killing the enemy? But that is not what I said exactly. I quoted Maud Gonne, an Englishwoman who championed Ireland's struggle for independence, as follows:
I have always hated war and am by nature and philosophy a pacifist, but it is the English who are forcing war on us, and the first principle of war is to kill the enemy.聽
What that has to do with terrorism or genocide beats me? Terrorism is a really stupid word. Nobody can define it and the OED definition - 'the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in pursuit of political aims' - is nonsense. Whose authority should the perpetrators of terrorism seek to legitimise it? Their own? Someone else's?
Scottish aryans, Gaelic salt-miners and turncoats, the kind of anecdotal hearsay that gets an outing down the pub or over the back fence among certin company. Reminds me of stories about German submarines refuelling in the western havens of Ireland during WWII. Any evidence for any of it? The only turncoats I know of in WWII were the Britischer Freikorp and that was the idea of the son of Churchill's India Secretery if I recall correctly.
As to 'Ginger' aka Denis Avey - he hasn't yet been admitted to the Yad Vashem hall of fame although the British government have pinned a medal on him. Apparently the veracity of his story is being questioned by some. He claims that he was so traumatised by his two-day sojourn in Auschwitz that he could not speak about it for 60 years!Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 37
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Saturday, 11th December 2010
vizzer
Did I suggest in any way that the Scots who went to work to try to make a success of Communism in the one country that seemed to their mind to be leading the way into the future would have been enlisted to fight against Britain/England?
As for the lack of evidence in the records, such is often the nature of records- as I have intimated- and the preference for keeping things within.. Not quite the same, but I really enjoyed Lisa Jardine's programme "My Father the Bomb and Me" two days ago, though I was surprised that Dr Bronowski's daughter had never worked out that he must have been involved in bombing and had been an official observer of the ruins of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But apparently she did not know until she got access to his recors last year more than 30 years after his death.
In any case I am not sure that either my account or the one that first raised the question of Gaelic speakers necessarily implied segregation.. Certainly the interview that I saw did not imply actual segregation, but merely group activity. And the individual who volunteered that he was a Gaelic speaker might have found himself with other individuals who responded to other questions. When you have to get a number of people to make up a work party you have to find some basis for your selection.
As for the salt mines as a punishment- M.S. Anderson in his survey of "Europe in the Eighteenth Century" observes:
"Where large numbers of workers were concentrated under effective discipline and supervision in a single enterprise, it was often because they had no choice in the matter. Every European State attempted, with varying success, to conscript for forced labour in industry sections of its population which it regarded as unproductive and socially dangerous. Ciminals, vagabonds, prostitutes, orphans, foundlings and sometimes even soldiers were utilized in this way in workhouses, orphanages and barracks... Much more important were the great enterprises which it was possible to create in parts of Eastern and Central Europe by making use of the labour or serfs.."
What I know from long experience is that such a "corvee" approach seems to easily lead to a culture in which work is regarded as a burden and a punishment, something that just have to be endured and put up with -along with vile conditions.
As for the Soviet experience, the salt mines may well have been in Siberia where modern gold and other miners may be lucky enough to have centrally heated homes etc, but back in the Gulag days it was pretty rough, and Siberia was a convenient place for internal exile.
CassLink to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 38
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Saturday, 11th December 2010
Mick Mac
Thankyou for the correction..
But you are wrong in supposing that war is about killing.. War is about conflict settlement- Killing just leads to blood-feud, atrocity and counter-attrocity.--
Of course in a bloody and violent period there was that great AS Chronicle phrase "the place of slaughter", a testing ground-: and the battle was decided when one side was left "in possession of the place of slaughter". And the AS warrior code meant that you could only withdraw on the orders of your leader.
So the Chronicle records a battle in which a King had been killed, and his men fought on so bravely that the enemy stopped fighting and begged them to stop fighting themselves. They assured them that their honour would be intact because their heroism would be recognised by all. Though vastly outnumbered they replied that they could not leave the place of slaughter because their leader was dead. The enemy could withdraw if they wished, or, if they remained, the remnant would fight on until they were all dead..
Thus the Chronicle notes that Harold Godwinson fought bravely at Hastings "with all those who wished to stand by him".
But war did not have to be like that.
One of my allotment friends told me of his great uncle who was decorated in the 1WW.. A German firing position had managed to hit some of his comrades, but he managed to crawl to the rear of their position unseen. He approached the door, and took a hand-grenade in his hand. Pulling out the pin, he knocked on the door. A German soldier opened the door to see him standing there. If war had been all about killing and dying the German would have shot him, and then got blown up. But this courageous Englishman had chosen the way of life, at the risk of his own. The German surrendered.
CassLink to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 39
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Saturday, 11th December 2010
Mick Mac
And thanks for the up-date about "Ginger".. there was that case a few years ago of a best-selling book describing life in the Death Camps (for some reason I seem to recall a Swiss connection) which turned out to be a complete hoax.
But presumably if POW's were not working alongside Jewish inmates of Auschwitz in that complex of Auschwitz Berkeneau the story would have been instantly dismissed: and that is why I mentioned the story. And as for sharing some of the food from the parcels- as you said or inferred of Miss O'Brien in the Boer Camps- people are capable of great heights of humanity.
CassLink to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
-
Message 40
Posted by Mr Pedant (U2464726) on Friday, 17th December 2010
First of all sorry for not replying sooner as I threw in a bit of second hand information that sparked interest and some perfectly reasonable scepticism.
I never met the gent I spoke of unfortunately, he died shortly before I was born, I was named after him.
When my late grandmother told me about his experience I assumed from the effects on his health and the grim image that this was some sort of particular pointed mistreatment.
But reading some of the comments here, the salt mines weren鈥檛 so bad. This tallies with some accounts I was reading from ww1 British poWs, who seem to have been treated worse 鈥損rob mainly due to the crippling blockade, some of whom worked down salt mines, working with\for ordinary German labourers.
I don鈥檛 know what caused the ill health, ill treatment, the mines or just misfortune that permanently damaged his health but the assumption I drew was that it was the dreaded salt mines.
And I don鈥檛 know why the gaelic speakers were separated, I had assumed it was something to do with the risk of them making wireless communications that teh Germans couldn鈥檛 crack, just as the British Army still uses Celtic languages to send uncoded messages through their crappy radios. That though was a major and probably unreasonable assumption, unless the mines were near a sensitive site such as Berchtesgaden.
Actually I don鈥檛 know that the English only speakers weren鈥檛 also used in the same way.
I find the concept of racism or racial preference towards Highlanders an interesting area, I know they were referred to as the 鈥渓adies from hell鈥 and I鈥檝e also stumbled across passing references that suggest they viewed them as semi-civilised savages.
Thankyou for all your replies.Link to this forum: how did the Nazis treat Allies jewish or non white POWs?
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or 聽to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
麻豆约拍 iD
麻豆约拍 navigation
麻豆约拍 links
麻豆约拍 漏 2014 The 麻豆约拍 is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.