Hitlers birthplace to be demolished

dav3

end of the road wrote: »

i won't thanks very much. if it is the case that the building is being used as some sort of shrine then they're will be a mountain of evidence to back it up. sympathisers will still come building or no building so this is a waste of time.

You won't take a statement from a local as evidence? There's not much that can be done for you.

I'd have thought with all the dodgy websites that some of you boys visit all you'd have to do is ask around and they would have helped you out with the pics.

Here are a few anyway.

Nazis on their pilgrimage

http://cdn1.salzburg24.at/2015/08/B19P7764-650x435.jpg

Riot Police

http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/austrian-police-officers-walk-by-the-house-where-adolf-hitler-was-picture-id471389130

Documented problems in Braunau

http://braunau-gegen-rechts.at/antifaschistische-chronik-braunau-am-inn/

It's an ongoing issue for the locals. The nazis turn up, they get beaten off the street. It's been going on for years. You can understand why they want this resolved.

I'd doubt the knuckledraggers will make the pilgrimage if the building is unrecognisable, portrays Hitler and the nazis in a poor light or is adorned with a couple of Stars of David.

end of the road

dav3 wrote: »

You won't take a statement from a local as evidence? There's not much that can be done for you.

I'd have thought with all the dodgy websites that some of you boys visit all you'd have to do is ask around and they would have helped you out with the pics.

Here are a few anyway.

Nazis on their pilgrimage

http://cdn1.salzburg24.at/2015/08/B19P7764-650x435.jpg

Riot Police

http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/austrian-police-officers-walk-by-the-house-where-adolf-hitler-was-picture-id471389130

Documented problems in Braunau

http://braunau-gegen-rechts.at/antifaschistische-chronik-braunau-am-inn/

It's an ongoing issue for the locals. The nazis turn up, they get beaten off the street. It's been going on for years. You can understand why they want this resolved.

I'd doubt the knuckledraggers will make the pilgrimage if the building is unrecognisable, portrays Hitler and the nazis in a poor light or is adorned with a couple of Stars of David.

they will probably spray over the star of david with some symbols of their own. the reality as i said is this isn't going to make any jot of difference. you don't have to like it but it is what it is

jimmy blevins

You'd have to ask why now? The political system in Austria has been fairly vanilla since WW ii dominated by two centralist parties until the recent presidential election.

Slieve Gullion

I am very annoyed about this sad news.

Atlantic Dawn

Why don't they take in to public ownership the car company he founded VW and shut it down while they are at it?

Hans Bricks

Isn't it great that we allow completely incompetent wet-the-beds to erase historical monuments/landmarks to the glee of blue haired tumblrites and philistines ?

The bunker where Hitler committed suicide and where the Nazis finally acknowledged defeat in WW2 is now a fucking carpark. A carpark. But Right on everyone ! Good for you !

Capt'n Midnight

entropi wrote: »

I don't agree with destroying a piece of architecture simply because it was attached to someone who had a major impact on World history. If that were the case, the Roman Colliseum, Nanking, the Soviet Republic, and Katyn should have been obliterated from the World map by this stage.

Ever been to the Colosseum ?

People dressed as Roman Soldiers outside it, because they will make Rome great again. :pac:




The difference is that all of the examples you listed are monuments to the victims. They all represent lessons from history that should not be repeated.

A birth place has no link to victims so only serves to rehabilitate the memory.


Or maybe it could be used to house orphaned refugees ? Like those boys from Brazil ?

Capt'n Midnight

Ted111 wrote: »

Adolf Hitler was the first politician to go on the election trail.
In olden days they didn't travel around to meet/con the public.

The Romans had a category of slave to memorise names. During the republic meeting and greeting your public was a daily occupation for senators.

Annasopra

end of the road wrote: »

it is when it is simply for political symbolism only.

the history happened, it shouldn't have, it was horrific, but eradicating it won't change anything. it won't go away, it won't be erased, it won't be forgotten, and nor should it be. trying to erase it and pretend it never happened is a disservice to the victims.

A minor legal instrument is really not fascism. It's bizarre that anyone would claim it is.

whoopsadoodles

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

Which both were destroyed. Didn't you know that whoops?

You can still go and stand in a gas chamber in Aushwitz. You can visit a crematorium. You can stand under the sign which says "work will set you free" and visit buildings to see where jewish people were forced to sleep.

They still exist.

wakka12

That spot where the new building will be will still be the place he was born. I doubt it will deter neo nazis from visiting, just seems like a stupid idea. Especially considering its quite an old and historic building.

B.A._Baracus

whoopsadoodles wrote: »

You can still go and stand in a gas chamber in Aushwitz. You can visit a crematorium. You can stand under the sign which says "work will set you free" and visit buildings to see where jewish people were forced to sleep.

They still exist.

Yeah but the gas chambers and huts are destroyed. Did you just Google that or something?

Watch BBC Aushwitz documentary on Netflix and you'll see how little remains.

whoopsadoodles

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

Yeah but the gas chambers and huts are destroyed. Did you just Google that or something?

Watch BBC Aushwitz documentary on Netflix and you'll see how little remains.

I've been in Aushwitz twice and Birkenau once.

Quite a bit of it was destroyed, but lots remains.

Ted111

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The Romans had a category of slave to memorise names. During the republic meeting and greeting your public was a daily occupation for senators.

All politicians have always met the public. On the steps of the senate. At their own homes or office. Or incidentally if they were somewhere on other business.

The nazis pioneered the idea of formally traveling to every village and parish in the nation and meeting and speaking to everyone in the country - in the run up to Federal Election in the Reichstag. Parliamentary Democracies were cutting their teeth in many places at the time.

There were no elections to the Roman Senate by the way.

B.A._Baracus

whoopsadoodles wrote: »

I've been in Aushwitz twice and Birkenau once.

Quite a bit of it was destroyed, but lots remains.

Well there's no point to argue with that one. Let's just agree to say some of it is still there... Some of it is gone. Fair enough?

But back to it... I personally just don't care about the house. It's not like knocking it down will magically make all the documentaries, movies, books and even video games about Hitler and the nazis go away. So I don't understand why people are saying trying to hide the past or those who ignore the past are doomed to repeat it. I mean world war 2, Hitler and the nazis are well documented.

darkpagandeath

Idiotic thinking.... Soon to be replaced by pilgrimages to the place Hitlers house used to be... Jesus...

Jimmy Garlic

dav3 wrote: »

Nazis on their pilgrimage

http://cdn1.salzburg24.at/2015/08/B19P7764-650x435.jpg

Really now, is that the best you could find? A few blokes in shorts taking photographs from the other side of the road is evidence of a neo-nazi pilgrimage? How do you come to the conclusion that they are neo-nazis?

darkpagandeath

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

Really now, is that the best you could find? A few blokes in shorts taking photographs from the other side of the road is evidence of a neo-nazi pilgrimage? How do you come to the conclusion that they are neo-nazis?

Stiff legs when walking ?

Jimmy Garlic

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Idiotic thinking.... Soon to be replaced by pilgrimages to the place Hitlers house used to be... Jesus...

If neo-nazis didn't go on a pilgrimage to the place of Adolph Hitlers birth before (there is no real evidence to suggest that they did) they will definitely want to go there from now on, house or no house.

Jimmy Garlic

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Stiff legs when walking ?

That must be it.

Skommando

I see they are still good at the old doublespeak over there :

The statement said the commission had recommended against leaving the site empty, which could be interpreted as an attempted "denial of Austrian history".

. . . but yet demolishing it and trying to disguise the site it with some non descript modern office building isn't an attempt to deny Austrian history ?

No wonder themselves and the German's literallly buy and sell the likes of the Irish, the Greeks and the Spanish in the EU

s4uv3

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

Well there's no point to argue with that one. Let's just agree to say some of it is still there... Some of it is gone. Fair enough?

.

The vast majority of Auschwitz is still there. A lot more than some. An awful lot.

Holograph

I think some who disagree with the building being demolished are mistakenly being viewed as supportive of Hitler's stances and what he implemented. It is possible not to support - to unequivocally condemn actually - any of the above but to disagree with the house being demolished. The owner does not want to sell and it is just where Hitler's mother gave birth to him - that's it. There are other buildings where the adult Hitler frequented - they have not all been destroyed. If this building is destroyed, neo nazis will find somewhere else to use as a shrine to him. Ok, I guess people could argue it is symbolic, but what would destroying it actually achieve?

Although I would understand e.g. a Jewish person wanting the place demolished, but the sites of the concentration camps are still there - with visitor centres, so that people will not forget.

darkpagandeath

Holograph wrote: »

I think some who disagree with the building being demolished are mistakenly being viewed as supportive of Hitler's stances and what he implemented. It is possible not to support - to unequivocally condemn actually - any of the above but to disagree with the house being demolished. The owner does not want to sell and it is just where Hitler's mother gave birth to him - that's it. There are other buildings where the adult Hitler frequented - they have not all been destroyed. If this building is destroyed, neo nazis will find somewhere else to use as a shrine to him. Ok, I guess people could argue it is symbolic, but what would destroying it actually achieve?

Although I would understand e.g. a Jewish person wanting the place demolished, but the sites of the concentration camps are still there - with visitor centres, so that people will not forget.

Problem is with that kind of logic someone wanting it demolished, How would the Americans feel like some of the founding fathers gaffs being destroyed. Some where slave owners and alike. I mean what about stalins house or any other numerous places. It's part of history. Don't think anyone in the thread liked Hitler.

dav3

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

Really now, is that the best you could find? A few blokes in shorts taking photographs from the other side of the road is evidence of a neo-nazi pilgrimage? How do you come to the conclusion that they are neo-nazis?

I'm surprised, I thought you'd know what a neo-nazi looks like.

They are neo-nazis on a pilgrimage and the reason I know this is because that picture is taken from an article which describes what they were doing.

http://www.salzburg24.at/blood-honour-neonazis-fotografierten-hitlers-geburtshaus/4421322

How about these lads?

Nazis

or these lads?

Nazis

How much evidence do you need?

http://www.vice.com/de/read/braunau-hat-noch-immer-ein-hitler-problem-019

The locals want to stop all the knuckledraggers and degenerates from coming into their town on a pilgrimage. You can't blame them.

My name is URL

Who needs living history when you have the internet in your pocket and chat groups filled with people willing to be offended by the same things as you? /s

beauf

Use it as a honey trap....

Holograph

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Problem is with that kind of logic someone wanting it demolished, How would the Americans feel like some of the founding fathers gaffs being destroyed. Some where slave owners and alike. I mean what about stalins house or any other numerous places. It's part of history.

I just mean I would understand where they are coming from, even if I did not agree.

Wibbs

jmayo wrote: »

A lot of countries try and turn a blind eye to what happened in the early 40s.
I have visited museums in the Baltic states that exhibit a hell of an amount of amnesia about the years 1941 to 1944.

Then again the Baltic states were screwed either way, their choices were the Nazis or Stalin.

It is never quiet as black and white as some would try make out.
Hell the French still haven't come to terms with Vichy France and try lay the blame on just the likes of Marshall Petan.

Rarely truer words typed.

dav3 wrote: »

I'd have thought with all the dodgy websites that some of you boys visit all you'd have to do is ask around and they would have helped you out with the pics..

dav3 wrote: »

The house is being demolished to prevent it becoming a place of pilgrimage for neo-nazis. It makes sense to the majority of normal people.

Us "boys" eh? "Normal people" eh? Jmayo sums your contributions up pretty damned well.

jmayo wrote: »

Ahh FFS give it a rest with your far right bullshyte.
You are the equivalent of one of mccarthy's stooges spying a commie under every bed. :rolleyes:

At this stage it is anyone that doesn't agree with you.

It really never ceases to amaze me the level of irony failure those who are so keen to erase things suffer from. Of all stripes.

My name is URL

dav3 wrote: »

The locals want to stop all the knuckledraggers and degenerates from coming into their town on a pilgrimage. You can't blame them.

How many people would you honestly say visit the town simply because a building exists in it?

Braunau is going to be the man's birthplace regardless. People will visit it. I wouldn't blame them for wanting to disassociate themselves from the neo-nazis that visit, but there's probably better way to do that than by tearing a building down and trying to sweep the rubble under a car-park.

entropi

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Ever been to the Colosseum ?

People dressed as Roman Soldiers outside it, because they will make Rome great again. :pac:




The difference is that all of the examples you listed are monuments to the victims. They all represent lessons from history that should not be repeated.

A birth place has no link to victims so only serves to rehabilitate the memory.


Or maybe it could be used to house orphaned refugees ? Like those boys from Brazil ?

That alludes briefly to my point exactly. Each of those buildings or zones had attachment to major events that shaped the history of the Earth, yet no Government would step in and raze them to the ground. Yet they feel because this is "just" a small building that maybe it has no cultural or architectural significance, unlike, say...any of the concentration camps? They could just build over a battlefield site for the craic while they are at it.

I'm not sure if they've sought out and destroyed the birthplaces of other despots and tyrants like Stalin, Lenin, (Mugabe in time), Talat Pasha or King Leopold II, but I doubt it has happened.

p.s. I've heard about the Colosseum these days :pac: Too commercialised and set up to hurry people through it and make money, rather than allow the history of the place to soak in.

dav3

My name is URL wrote: »

How many people would you honestly say visit the town simply because a building exists in it?

Braunau is going to be the man's birthplace regardless. People will visit it. I wouldn't blame them for wanting to disassociate themselves from the neo-nazis that visit, but there's probably better way to do that than by tearing a building down and trying to sweep the rubble under a car-park.

Well one nazi visiting the town is one too many.

There have been many attempts at finding a solution to the problem including turning the building into a museum or refugee centre. I think those options are still on the table, it may not be demolished. The owner, who doesn't live there, nobody does, is having none of it, she wants to keep it as a shrine. What else are they to do?

Means Of Escape

Irish Guitarist wrote: »

Looks like a perfectly good house. Seems stupid to knock it down just to put another building in its place. It's just a pile of bricks, it didn't do anything to anyone.

25 Cromwell St Gloucester

darkpagandeath

dav3 wrote: »

Well one nazi visiting the town is one too many.

There have been many attempts at finding a solution to the problem including turning the building into a museum or refugee centre. I think those options are still on the table, it may not be demolished. The owner, who doesn't live there, nobody does, is having none of it, she wants to keep it as a shrine. What else are they to do?

was doing so well :P

SafeSurfer

dav3 wrote: »

The house is being demolished to prevent it becoming a place of pilgrimage for neo-nazis. It makes sense to the majority of normal people.

Define a "normal person". Someone who agrees with you?

ArtSmart

The far-right is growing significantly in Austria.

Any form of potential shire to Hitler is a bad thing, no?

I like the carpark thingy. Or better yet, an immigrant/ refuge center.

Hitler wasn't a nice person folks. Aint no room for catch phrases here

fryup

once they demolish it they should build a synagogue there, i'm sure Adolf would have approved

oik

ArtSmart wrote: »

The far-right is growing significantly in Austria.

Any form of potential shire to Hitler is a bad thing, no?

I like the carpark thingy. Or better yet, an immigrant/ refuge center.

Hitler wasn't a nice person folks. Aint no room for catch phrases here

Good way to get a load of immigrants burned alive.

oik

fryup wrote: »

once they demolish it they should build a synagogue there, i'm sure Adolf would have approved

Good way to get a load of Jews burned alive.

Holograph

ArtSmart wrote: »

Hitler wasn't a nice person folks. Aint no room for catch phrases here

I don't think many are disputing that here. Merely leaving the building, in which he was born (and that's all it is) intact, is not a statement that he was a-ok!

Ted111

ArtSmart wrote: »

Aint no room for catch phrases here

Nice to see you. To see you nice.

end of the road

ArtSmart wrote: »

The far-right is growing significantly in Austria.

Any form of potential shire to Hitler is a bad thing, no?

I like the carpark thingy. Or better yet, an immigrant/ refuge center.

Hitler wasn't a nice person folks. Aint no room for catch phrases here

the only way to deal with the far right is to show their views for what they are, via challenging their views at every opportunity. they won't be dealt with by demolishing a building.

Jesus.

ArtSmart wrote: »

The far-right is growing significantly in Austria.

Its growing everywhere because of the Liberal elite's total disregard for the common people.

B.A._Baracus

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Define a "normal person". Someone who agrees with you?

aka.... "ahh man, this comment is bound to give me some thanks *jerks off* I showed them" :pac:

Wibbs

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

A minor legal instrument is really not fascism. It's bizarre that anyone would claim it is.

You do understand(unlikely) that the practical arm of fascism(and pretty much every dodgy "ism" that has come along) was based on "minor legal instruments" until they reached a point where they weren't so minor for many people? It's one of the main ways totalitarianism operates. Shít quite the number of Nazi scumbags post war claimed the "defence" that what they did was legally prescribed and the law of the land, so that's OK. An extension of the "just following orders" BS. Another trait is an absolute conviction that the particular ism in question is the Right Thing. Another is top down control. Yet another is whitewashing of the past and present to suit the current expediencies. Totalitarianism rarely arrives announced and fully formed, it comes along slowly with the thin end of the wedge appearing reasonable.

Is the subject of this thread the thin end of the wedge of such a movement? Of course not, however society, truly liberal society has to stay alert to even small examples of such mechanisms and that includes whitewashing of history when it suits.

Holograph

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

aka.... "ahh man, this comment is bound to give me some thanks *jerks off* I showed them" :pac:

You could say that about any response, why just focus on that one? The person they were replying to was referring to people as far right nuts entirely based on people disagreeing with a building being demolished because Hitler's mother gave birth to him there, that's it. It wasn't even his home. They were also speaking for the majority without even knowing what the majority think. So it seemed a warranted response in my opinion.

jmayo

dav3 wrote: »

Well I suppose we could take the local's word for it. I assume they want the building dealt with one way or another.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30539384



As for finding you pictures and videos on neo-nazi websites...it's not going to happen. Maybe you haven't stumbled across any, but it would be naive to think they don't exist. You'll just have to accept the local's word for it for now.

Now why do I think if someone you disagree with said that about some other topics you post on they would lambasted for not providing verifiable evidence. :rolleyes:

whoopsadoodles wrote: »

I've been in Aushwitz twice and Birkenau once.

Quite a bit of it was destroyed, but lots remains.

That is one of the few death camps that still exist in any meaningful way.
Part ofg maybe has to do with the way it was built.
Very little of Treblinka, Belzec or Sobibór remain.
All that is in Treblinka is a pile of rocks to symbolize 700,000 to 900,000 slaughtered there.
Belzec has part of the death road, but little remains of the camp.

Maybe the Poles don't want to be just a tourist destination associated with mass extermination.

And the likes of Bergen-Belsen, Ravensbruck, Buchenwald, Dachau and Sachsenhausen were not death camps, but concentration camps.
The Germans didn't want to be unseemly and site the death camps in the Fatherland. :rolleyes:

Also never forget thousands upon thousands of what the Germans classified as undesirables were slaughtered by Einsatzgruppen, SS and yes Wehrmacht soldiers together with local militia and local police forces in forests, swamps and roadsides throughout the occupied territories in the East.