Jewish Resettlements to the East

[Hannover]

Don't get your panties in a bunch 'Rutger'. Perhaps you should actually read what I said:

I'll defer to you on the passport bit for now. It's my opinion that area of residence was given. IOW, a Jew from the Ukraine was considered Ukrainian, I'll check.

Then, since the allegations of 'mass murder' have not been deemed convincing, any legitimate court of law would pronounce the accused innocent, thanks.

- Hannover

[Hannover]

Now Rutger falls back from his previous assertions:

The nationality listed in the passport was, **in most cases**, that of the father. Later on, in the 1970s and 80s, people of mixed ethnic background had ability, however limited, **to decide which nationality they want listed** (basically it all depended on the mood of a government bureaucrat issuing passport that day).

He originally said:

I guess you have never seen a Soviet passport then. In the Soviet Union, being "jewish" was not a matter of religion but nationality. I guess "nationality" might sound a little confusing for someone not familiar with Soviet realities, perhaps "ethnicity" would be a better word. In other words, a Soviet passport did not say that someone was "soviet", it explicitly stated if the person was "jewish", "russian", "estonian", "tartar" and so on.

Perhaps Rutger has become confused.

- Hannpver

[Rutger]

Regarding "panties in a bunch", is there a need for being rude, 'Hannover'? I thought we were having an intelligent discussion.

Please tell me how these two statements contradict each other. Yes, a person was listed in a passport as "jewish" or "estonian" and that listing was determined by the ethnicity of the father.

[Hannover]

Oh please Rutger, you said:

Dear Hannover, please dont tell me what is and isnt in the Soviet passport, I carried the damn thing.

But yet I'm 'being rude'? Now that's chutzpah, Rutger.

- H.

[Rutger]

The "damn thing" was meant facetiously, hence a laughing smiley after it.
Please tell me how those two statements contradict each other.

[Hannover]

By your own words a 'Jew' was not necessarily labeled as such.

- H.

[Rutger]

By your own words a 'Jew' was not necessarily labeled as such.

- H.

I fail to see your point. Me saying:

In other words, a Soviet passport did not say that someone was "soviet", it explicitly stated if the person was "jewish", "russian", "estonian", "tartar" and so on

in no way implied that a jew was always labeled a jew. We were having a different argument, about whether nationality was mentioned in the Soviet passport at all.

Someone whose both parents were jewish would indeed be labeled a jew under any circumstances during any Soviet period.

[Turpitz]

Rutger wrote:

I am not prone to rash judgements and prefer to make up my mind only after I have seen solid evidence from both sides.

Ahem, let me see now, how long is it since the end of the war ? Nearly 'fifty nine years' ! Well Rutger, there is no chance of anyone accusing you of making a 'Rash Judgement'.

As for solid evidence, you have to admit that surely 'half a century' is enough time to have produced some evidence ! How much longer do you think the liars require ? The revisionist's evidence is in abundance. It comes in the shape of the collosal empty void that has been made by the liars complete lack of evidence.

To a rational person, fifty odd years of pointing the accusing finger, whilst hissing and spitting at the accused. Without producing the slightest bit of evidence to substantiate their heinious accusations and hate-mongering, should suggest the allegations are completely un-founded and baseless.

Who know's Rutger, maybe by 2050, the Industry might have found a bone....or maybe even a wing !

[Rutger]

Ahem, let me see now, how long is it since the end of the war ? Nearly 'fifty nine years' ! Well Rutger, there is no chance of anyone accusing you of making a 'Rash Judgement'

You misinterpreted what I said, my dear Turpitz. "Rash judgement" does not refer to when the events took place but solely to the timeline of my own interest in the subject. I have become interested in this fairly recently. I hope you understand my point now.

[Hannover]

Rutger said:

Someone whose both parents were jewish would indeed be labeled a jew under any circumstances during any Soviet period.

That implies that the person applying for the passport identified themselves as a 'Jew' and/or that their parents did the same.

- H.

[Turpitz]

"Rash judgement" does not refer to when the events took place but solely to the timeline of my own interest in the subject. I have become interested in this fairly recently. I hope you understand my point now.

Yes I undertand and appreciate your personal view-point Rutger. But in all fairness, and to put thing's into context. Regardless of how long you have personally been interested, the fact remains that you have access to nearly 'Sixty Years' of Industry archives/lies at your disposal. And yet amongst this festering mound of unsubstantiated drivel, not a single piece of hard evidence has ever been brought forward..In nearly 'Sixty years'.
Remember we are talking of the supposed biggest crime in history.

Being an intelligent, and rational person, does this not strike you as odd ?

[Hebden]

How did the Soviets deal with the Mischlinge problem?

The nationality listed in the passport was, in most cases, that of the father. Later on, in the 1970s and 80s, people of mixed ethnic background had ability, however limited, to decide which nationality they want listed (basically it all depended on the mood of a government bureaucrat issuing passport that day).

In the 1970s and 1980s when many Soviet Jews had the chance to emigrate, could a Russian nationality stamp in one's passport be a hindrance to leaving?

How did you personally get out? Or is the question indiscreet?

[Sailor]

- something I saw on another forum and always wanted to understand: if this was indeed the case, why was resettlement not used by Nazis as a defense during the Nuremberg Trial, considering that their lives were at stake?

I wonder why the man on the other forum said, that the accused Nazis did not use the Russian resettlement as a defense? Did he check them all out?
Which trials and Nazi defendants would he be talking about?

The IMT protocols available to the public seem to be rather complete, although Irving thinks that certain sections have been deleted. I could check it out.

The NMT protocols as I have them and as can be found on the Internet are selections only and are incomplete.

The protocols of the Cracow and German Nazi crime trials are closed to the general public.

Did the fellow of the other forum check all these out? I am curious and would like to know.

fge

[Rutger]

In the 1970s and 1980s when many Soviet Jews had the chance to emigrate, could a Russian nationality stamp in one's passport be a hindrance to leaving?
How did you personally get out? Or is the question indiscreet?

The question is not indiscreet at all but I dont think this is something that is relevant to this thread. If you would like to talk more about this, I will PM you.

[Hebden]

The question is not indiscreet at all but I dont think this is something that is relevant to this thread.

Perhaps we'll start a thread on Jewish resettlements to the West.

If you would like to talk more about this, I will PM you.

Best not. Lest it be thought we conspire behind the scences.