Randal M. Bundy Weekly Column - The RMBNews Report ®
Notes in The matter of Oskar Groening Jewish Holocaust Investigations Research and Investigations by Randal M. Bundy
first begun in 1974 and first posted online 16 July 2015
A Conversation With 71-Year-Old 'Nazi Hunter' Thomas Walther http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read/a-conversation-with-71-year-old-nazi-hunter-thomas-walther-834 071615ThomasWalther
71-year-old judge Thomas Walther "hunts" Nazis, not by foot or by tank,
but by making phone calls, writing emails, and documenting evidence
from Holocaust survivors who can still remember what they saw. Once a
Nazi is linked to murder and identified by the Office of Special
Investigations in National Socialist Crimes, Walther uses his networks
to get statements from the family members of victims, who are legally
recognized as co-plaintiffs in modern court.
The focus of Walther's current resourcefulness is 93-year old ex-Nazi and German SS officer Oskar Groening.
Comment by Randal M. Bundy - he was actually a Seargent - see article: German court convicts former SS sergeant of crimes at Auschwitz.
I don't know if it was the reporter interviewing Thomas Walther
misconstrued the actual rank of Oskar Groening or if it
was Thomas Walther himself. But both the reporter
Walther should know the actual difference between a non-commissioned
officer and an commissioned officer and their differrence in
importanece as well as the importance of being completely honest and
accurate. Words have meaning and proper words should be selected
refer to him as an officer, leads one to believe that he was a
Commissioned officer and thus making him appear to be more of an
important figure than he actually was.
has testified that he guarded prisoners' baggage after they arrived at
Auschwitz and collected money stolen from them. Prosecutors said that
amounts to helping the death camp function.
charges against Groening related to a period between May and July 1944
when hundreds of thousands of Jews from Hungary were brought to the
Auschwitz-Birkenau complex in Nazi-occupied Poland. Most were
immediately gassed to death.
the so-called "bookkeeper" of Auschwitz, counted the money of dead
Jewish people and stood guard as incoming freight trains unloaded their
human cargo. Groening is unique in that he claims innocence, despite
having overseen the deaths of 300,000 people at Auschwitz. Despite
openly speaking about working at the camp and calling it a "horrible
but necessary thing," he claims he committed no crime because he didn't
directly kill anyone with his hands.
What is it like to speak so openly with Holocaust survivors, to relive their memories with them? The
co-plaintiffs all have very, very personal stories about their family
lives and how the Holocaust has affected them. This is what I'm trying
to show, because nobody can possibly understand what it means to have
300,000 people murdered in 57 days—nobody can imagine what it means.
is hard at first, but after a short time they open themselves up and
speak about it. I always have the feeling that it is good for them.
They have a good feeling that somebody is paying attention to that time
and the crimes against their own parents and siblings, that there will
be a trial where the names and the fates of the lives of their closest
family members will be described. It's very late justice for them.
Both men say they have personal reasons for waging a fight against Nazi collaborators so many years after the end of the war.
Walther it is his father, Rudolf, who ran a construction firm in
Erfurt, a city in the center of Germany, and had built factories for
Jewish clients. He hid two Jewish families during the Kristallnacht
riots in 1938 and later helped them get out of Germany. For 20 years,
Walther kept a pen one of the families had sent him as a gift from
So are the families of the victims hoping to get a statement from Groening? I
don't know if he will personally speak with them. But they want to ask
him questions. They want to know how he feels when he looks at them.
They might think, "We are nearly the same age. We were at Auschwitz
together and he was an SS man who was on the ramp, and my parents were
there."... After 70 years they will ask, "What is going on? How do you
Father, Rudolph, hid two Jewish families in the house during the
Kristallnacht riots of 1938. Did this in part inspire what you're doing
there is a connection. I have quite a close mental connection to my
father. He has been important to my education. My knowledge and feeling
of what is right and wrong mostly comes directly from my father. And
these two stories about [hiding] his friends' families, I have always
been very proud that he did such things.
what was certainly among the last verdicts for Nazi crimes against
humanity, the 94-year-old “Accountant of Auschwitz” on Wednesday was
sentenced to four years in German prison for his role in the deaths of
300,000 Hungarian Jews.
sentence – about seven minutes for each of the victims – handed to
Oskar Groening raised the difficult question of whether justice can
ever be done for the mass murders of the Holocaust, whose victims
numbered 6 million Jews and millions of other “undesirables,” including
Gypsies, gays and political dissidents.
historian Michael Wolffsohn, a professor at the Bundeswehr University
in Munich, suggested that nothing short of the biblical “mark of Cain”
was a sufficient punishment.
“Four years for 300,000 persons killed,” he wrote in an email. “Ridiculous. There is no legal way to cope with these crimes.”
Efraim Zuroff, director and head Nazi hunter for the Israeli office of
the Simon Wiesenthal Center, disputed such reasoning, arguing that
Groening’s case makes clear that anyone involved in the Holocaust can
be held to account.
is an incredibly important case,” he said. “Groening was the first
example of someone not physically involved in murder to be convicted.
Now this means that anybody who worked at the camps, whatever their
role, can be brought to court at least to face charges of accessory.”
three-and-a-half-month trial, said Deidre Berger, head of the American
Jewish Committee office in Berlin, “allows a more comprehensive look at
Holocaust murders.” It also offers a lesson to younger generations that
“every individual is in the end responsible for upholding the basic
ethics and values that are the foundation of our civilization.”
was the rarest of accused Nazis. From the first day, he accepted at
least “moral guilt” for his role at Auschwitz. He did not kill, but he
kept track of the wealth the condemned brought with them to the camp.
He even boxed up the stolen cash and brought it to Berlin to swell Nazi
Prosecutors noted that while he didn’t pull a trigger, he did make mass murder profitable for Adolf Hitler’s Germany.
while there was no evidence that Groening was a killer, there was ample
evidence that he was far from innocent. He described once hearing a
baby cry as he stood on the train platform at Auschwitz-Birkenau after
boxcars full of Hungarian Jews had been unloaded and sorted, either
sent directly into slave labor or to the gas chambers. He watched as
another SS guard grabbed the baby by a leg, dashed its head against a
nearby truck and tossed the lifeless body into the truck.
another point, he described standing outside the gas chambers, the
infamous showers of the camp, with a guard and hearing the screams from
inside. As he watched, the guard poured the deadly Zyklon B into a trap
door. He described hearing the screams diminish as he was standing
there, and understanding that those who’d been screaming were dying.
As the trial neared its end, Groening made a final statement about his actions.
did, through my activities, contribute to the functioning of the
Auschwitz camp,” he said. “I’m aware of this. Auschwitz was a place
that one should not have been part of. This is what we heard here, and
I know it to be true. I honestly regret that I did not realize this
earlier and act on it. I’m very sorry.”
Groening at times was an unsatisfying defendant for the witnesses who
came from around the world to confront him. He appeared to drift in and
out of awareness, and witnesses could not always tell if their words
actually registered with him or were simply recorded by the court to
become part of Germany’s horrific Holocaust narrative.
prosecution, which had blocked out court dates through the end of 2015,
appeared to rush to the verdict stage after Groening skipped a couple
court sessions because of poor health or exhaustion.
Walther, an attorney representing some of the victims and relatives of
victims who testified in this case, called the verdict “sadly, a very
late step towards justice.”
He said it was important that a Nazi finally, “for the first time in half a century, apologized and sought forgiveness.”
he also noted that this case made it clear that the German justice
system had failed for decades, looking the other way with all but the
most obvious perpetrators, rejecting cases against those like Groening
who might not have directly murdered but still bore responsibility for
what took place.
in a year filled with symbolism, just before the 70th anniversary of
the end of World War II in Europe and just after the 70th anniversary
of the liberation of the 1,000-plus camps where Hitler’s Germany
murdered its victims, Groening was placed in the
dock, representing the many who volunteered, in his case for the Waffen SS, to become the backbone of Nazi atrocities.
alleged Groening stood on the unloading ramps between May 16 and July
11 in 1944, as the Nazi “Final Solution” was applied to the Hungarian
population. He was accused to have watched as 300,000 of the estimated
400,000 Hungarian Jews were marched to their deaths.
Zuroff, the Wiesenthal Nazi hunter, expects the way is now clear for others to be held accountable for serving like Groening.
year ago, there were 50-some people still alive who met this
description and could be tried,” he said. “Today it’s dozens. But don’t
be fooled: This is not the last Nazi trial. Groening matters because he
was the first to admit he took part, that he was wrong, and to seek
forgiveness. But there will be others.”
of the American Jewish Committee, said the verdict “demonstrates that
there can be no statute of limitations on crimes against humanity.”
“It is never too late, even 70 years later, to conduct trials against Holocaust perpetrators,” she said.
®The RMB News Report, RMB Radio and RMB TV are registered trademarks owned by
Randal M. Bundy - All Rights Reserved.