“Nice, Sweet Lady”, 83, Deported For Nazi Past
I’m a bit torn, but on balance I would say no. After 60+ years it should be dropped for all but the larger war criminals. But then…
What do you think?
As much as I hate to say it, because she really does seem to have tried to make amends for her evil past, I think she should be deported and held accountable for her crimes. There is no legal or moral statute of limitations on murder, and that’s something people should realize before choosing to side with people who perpetrate atrocities. Would we allow someone with a “tangential” alliance with Al Qaida to stay in the country and evade punishment? Zero tolerance for Nazi criminals means zero tolerance for Nazi criminals, and to allow her to stay here unpunished is an insult to the people she helped to murder.
Somehow I don’t think we’d be having this debate if this woman was a Muslim criminal, or someone involved in war crimes in Africa.
Well, be fair. If the crimes this Muslim/African person commited were over 60 years ago, they had not directly killed people (as is the case here, if the woman is to be believed), and they had evidently done what they could within their personal lives to atone for their sins and had lived as good citizens ever since then, I think we would definitely be having this debate.
She’s had 61 years of freedom she didn’t deserve. I’d say she’s still going to end up way, way ahead of where she deserves to.
True, I should have added the caveat “in 2060” or something. But even then, my opinion holds. Murderers and war criminals deserve no sympathy.
And what I meant by the Muslim/African remark is because I’m wondering whether people might feel more sympathy for her because she is white and female, like many people’s grandmothers. Kind of like how people felt really bad for the German 17-year-old who was deported earlier this year, when they wouldn’t have felt nearly as much sympathy for a Mexican teenager in the exact same situation.
Moreover, if this is true, it needs to be true for everyone, regardless of race, gender, or age. If we make an exception for sweet old ladies, who’s next? Handicapped people? Born-again Christians?
If we’re talking ‘tangential,’ then yes, we are allowing this guy, a former Taliban envoy, to study at Yale.
Precisely, if we make an exception for her, regardless of the reason, predjudices will be perceived. She’s a criminal, even if her crime was a lifetime or two ago, justice for a crime of this magnitude should have no statute of limitations.
Regardless, she lied on her Visa application. Even if she wasn’t a criminal, she doesn’t deserve to be here simply because of that. By doing so, she spits on all the legitimate immigrants who didn’t lie to get in here.
Well she was former SS in a concentration camp, not some soldier simply on the wrong side of the war. She lied knowingly on her visa application, that in itself is reason to deport someone. The forms clearly ask about any Nazi history on them.
Often, I’ll read an article in the paper about an illegal immigrant who has done well in the United States and is about to be deported. It is usually a tear jerking piece, often in the Sunday paper with pictures of the family.
You made decisions, you have to live with them.
How did she qualify to be buried in a Jewish cemetary?
Did she masquerade as a Jew and marry a Jew to cover her past?
Back to the OP: Hell yes, deport her Nazi ass.
She wasn’t a Nazi.
I beg your pardon.
Hell yes, deport her concentration camp guarding, dog handling ass.
Better? 
I see no legal or moral issue here. There is no doctrine that you get a free pass on murder after X years. Deport her, try her, kill her.*
*Not that Germany has the DP, but still.
I think the deportation needed to be done. She lied on her entry visa, she worked at the camps. She might have repented, but as she already has lied in major areas, we cannot trust her denials.
Concentration Camp guards are not allowed to live in the US and there is no time limit on this.
Jim
Check out the walzkommando.
Displaced persons made a megre living at the site of Auschwitz picking up money people threw away on the way to the gas chambers rather than have it be found by the Germans or the Kapos.
I would weigh the events of her life. Does being a dog handler for the Nazis outweigh marrying a Jewish man, contributing to Jewish charities, trying to atone for working with the Nazis, and living in shame for 60+ years? Saying that she broke the law, and that’s that sounds like zero tolerance to me. I’m not a big fan of zero tolerance because it removes the option of thinking. I look to Portia’s plea in The Merchant Of Venice: ‘And earthly power doth then show likest God’s when mercy seasons justice.’
Maybe she should be deported, and maybe she shouldn’t. But I think there needs to me some leeway instead of simply applying a black-and-white option.
Does any of that outweigh her lying about her past to get a visa to enter the US and keeping it secret for all that time?
In my opinion, NO!
BTW, isn’t one part of atonement admission?