Joachim Peiper and the Malmedy massacres again

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
Jochen S.
Member
Posts: 200
Joined: 16 Apr 2002 15:13
Location: Netherlands

Re: Joachim Peiper and the Malmedy massacres again

Post by Jochen S. » 02 May 2010 08:55

You made an assertion. Do you have any evidence to support your claim that it wasn't comman practice?
It is often repeated that the US prisoners at the crossroads on 17 December 1944 were searched and valuables taken away. They were indeed searched and in some cases possessions may have been taken but many victims still had their watches, wallets, rings, money and other itmes on their bodies. Source of my assertion: photocopies of the autopsy reports performed on 14, 15 and 16 January 1945.

PFLB
Member
Posts: 454
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 10:21

Re: Joachim Peiper and the Malmedy massacres again

Post by PFLB » 02 May 2010 15:39

'One wonders whether this the general consensus of American press at the time, whether it changed over time, whether certain American periodicals reported German war crimes more or less than others? As far as I know within the historical literature there is no adequate monograph on the US press response to reporting German battlefield war crimes. If anyone knows of one please let me know.'

I recall that in Frank M Buscher's book, The US War Crimes Trial Program in Germany, he said that the American press didn't really pay much attention to Nazi war crimes until the Red Army overran Majdanek. According to him, the tendency in both the media and government before then had been to view claims of German war crimes from the Soviet Union (which was the source of most such accusations) with scepticism.

User avatar
Penn44
Banned
Posts: 4214
Joined: 26 Jun 2003 06:25
Location: US

Re: Joachim Peiper and the Malmedy massacres again

Post by Penn44 » 03 May 2010 08:33

PFLB wrote:'One wonders whether this the general consensus of American press at the time, whether it changed over time, whether certain American periodicals reported German war crimes more or less than others? As far as I know within the historical literature there is no adequate monograph on the US press response to reporting German battlefield war crimes. If anyone knows of one please let me know.'

I recall that in Frank M Buscher's book, The US War Crimes Trial Program in Germany, he said that the American press didn't really pay much attention to Nazi war crimes until the Red Army overran Majdanek. According to him, the tendency in both the media and government before then had been to view claims of German war crimes from the Soviet Union (which was the source of most such accusations) with scepticism.
Whereas the subject of the Malmedy massacre and the US press is off-subject, I will respond to your comment this one and last time. My use of the term "battlefield war crimes" was meant to describe events like the massacre which happened on the battlefield as opposed to the concentration or extermination camp crimes which occurred far away from the battlefield. The one ETO "battlefield" war crimes case in which the American public was most interested was the Malmedy case. Buscher as well as other authors have noted that US public interest in the Malmedy case. The public interest remained high for while then started to drop off. I assume US press interest/coverage followed the same trajectory as American public interest.

Penn44

.
I once was told that I was vain, but I knew that vanity was a fault, so I gave it up because I have no faults.

Rob - wssob2
Member
Posts: 2387
Joined: 15 Apr 2002 20:29
Location: MA, USA

Re: Joachim Peiper and the Malmedy massacres again

Post by Rob - wssob2 » 05 May 2010 04:08

Thank you for the article's transcript - but what does it tell us? There are some mistakes such as the always present 'Tigers' and taking away of personal possessions such as watches, money or other itmes they fancied. Ofcourse this happened in isolated cases but wasn't common pratice on that day in 1944.
I posted it because - as Penn44 mentioned - it's interesting to see what contemporary journalism was reporting about the incident. In addition

1) Yes we can discount the "Tiger Tanks" mis-identification (pretty frequent in Allied ETO reporting). No surprises there.

2) I was surprised to see mention of the single pistol shot at the onset of the massacre. This pistol shot, fired by Georg Fleps (sic) was discussed during the trial. The mention of this pistol shot made me wonder if the Time reported actually interviewed one of the massacre survivors, and if so, which one.

3) It was interesting to see that in the main, the basic components of the event were accurately described (the massacre, the mopping up by the SS troopers, the playing dead in the field for an hour, etc.)

4) That is correct that during the January 1945 investigations, the US Army forensics team found that many of the GI cadavers killed at Bagneuz still had personal effects and identification on them. (Dog tags, wallets with money, etc.) However, I do believe some survivors mentioned that some SS troops did take some small items from at least some of the surrendered GI's - specifically cigarettes and gloves. It's probably mentioned in Bauserman's work, although I can't recall a specific citation.

Jochen S.
Member
Posts: 200
Joined: 16 Apr 2002 15:13
Location: Netherlands

Re: Joachim Peiper and the Malmedy massacres again

Post by Jochen S. » 06 May 2010 19:06

Rob, I know from serveral survivors personally that indeed in some isolated cases items were taken. On the other hand personal items were thrown away before being searched by the Germans - incl. captured German weapons which were meant as souvernirs. A German veteran of the very first tank which reached the crossroads vividly remembered how the overwelmed soldiers were waving/showing their watches to them.

mdmguyon
New member
Posts: 1
Joined: 23 Jan 2012 11:39

Re: Joachim Peiper and the Malmedy massacres again

Post by mdmguyon » 10 Mar 2012 14:12

David Thompson wrote:"Revisionist" websites have extensively re-circulated the supposed Van Roden article. See, for example:

"American Atrocities in Germany"
http://www.codoh.com/atro/atrusa4.html

"Atrocites Americaines en Allemagne"
http://www.vho.org/F/j/RHR/6/VanRoden22-28.html

Zundelsite
http://www.zundelsite.org/english/zgram ... 00301.html

"Real History and the camp at Dachau"
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Dachau/VanRoden1948.html

None of these "Revisionist" websites bother to mention that Van Roden didn't really write the article and disavowed it in testimony before the US Congress. Perhaps as a result, most people who read the article on the "Revisionist" sites tend to believe the allegations.
Had Judge van Roden known he would be represented as its author, he would have adjusted it, but "disavowed" is going too far. He essentially agreed with the allegations, but regarded it as exaggerated.

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23512
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Re: Joachim Peiper and the Malmedy massacres again

Post by David Thompson » 10 Mar 2012 16:02

mdmguyon -- You wrote, after quoting me:
Had Judge van Roden known he would be represented as its author, he would have adjusted it, but "disavowed" is going too far. He essentially agreed with the allegations, but regarded it as exaggerated.
Well, let's take a look at what Judge Van Roden had to say, from Hearings Before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Armed Services . . . Part 1 (1949), pp. 256-57:
http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/ ... ation.html
Senator HUNT. Judge Van Roden, I have here before me a magazine known as the Progressive, I believe it is called.

Judge VAN RODEN. I have seen that.

Senator HUNT. Which carries, I presume, a written article by you, at least it accredits the article to you, and that makes some rather serious, very serious and direct charges, and I would like to ask you some questions with reference to the source of your information for making those charges.

Judge VAN RODEN. Before you do so, Senator, I want this to be made very definitely of record. I did not write that article.

I had made a talk at a Rotary Club meeting in our county and a gentleman who was there took some notes on the talk. and I understand that is supposed to be a condensation of the things, some of the things that I said at that Rotary Club gathering.

The gentleman who actually did write that article, actually is the author of it, telephoned to me that it was to have a byline. I did not how what a byline was, believe it or not, gentlemen.

[256]

257 MALMEDY MASSACRE INVESTIGATION

Then I was startled by receiving a copy of that as the author of that article. I am not the author of that article.

Senator HUNT. Let me ask you, Judge, after having read the article, would you like to say that the statements in there are statements made by you, or are they incorrect statements attributed to you?

Judge VAN RODEN. Well, some are correct and some are not correct.

Senator HUNT. Judge, in your report of January 6, 1949, which you signed along with Colonel Simpson and Col. Charles W. Lawrence, this paragraph appears :
There was no general or systematic use of improper methods to secure prosecution evidence for the use at the trials.
Now, does that statement reflect your position as a member of the board ?

Judge VAN RODEN. I would say so as stated therein.

Senator HUNT. That certainly is in direct conflict. Judge, to my way of thinking, with the statements made in this article, and perhaps I should get specific and ask you just which statements in this article you do say that you made at this address, and which you did not make, because you could not make those statements in the article and at the same time sign this report with the statement in there, because they are entirely incompatible.

Judge, might I ask you on other occasions before other clubs in substance have your remarks been practically the same as in this article in the Progressive?

Judge VAN RODEN. I have said "No, sir." I did not write that article in the Progressive. Some of the things that are there I have said. Some of the things that are there I did not say at any time.

Senator HUNT. Well, I am glad to know, Judge, and for the record I think it should be noted, that you did not write this article.

Judge VAN RODEN. That is correct.
Interested readers can see Judge Van Roden's full testimony before the US Senate subcommittee at pp. 225-270 and pp. 1073-1102 of this rather long (65+ MB) pdf download.

User avatar
H. Hoth
Financial supporter
Posts: 79
Joined: 08 Apr 2012 02:19

Re: Joachim Peiper and the Malmedy massacres again

Post by H. Hoth » 07 Apr 2012 17:49

Pieper lived out his remaining days peacefully in France in the 70's, when during the night his house was set on fire and he was murdered. He did fight back but uselessly. This crime has never been solved.

Max
Last edited by Dieter Zinke on 08 Apr 2012 08:53, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Peiper - not Pieper !!!

User avatar
Harro
Member
Posts: 3080
Joined: 19 May 2005 18:10
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Joachim Peiper and the Malmedy massacres again

Post by Harro » 07 Apr 2012 20:26

Max Hansen wrote:Pieper lived out his remaining days peacefully in France in the 70's, when during the night his house was set on fire and he was murdered. He did fight back but uselessly. This crime has never been solved.

Max
It is interesting to note that you've got almost all your facts wrong, even down to the spelling of his name.

User avatar
H. Hoth
Financial supporter
Posts: 79
Joined: 08 Apr 2012 02:19

Re: Joachim Peiper and the Malmedy massacres again

Post by H. Hoth » 08 Apr 2012 00:08

Well, wise guy, please correct me and enlighten all of us as to his final days.

Max

User avatar
Harro
Member
Posts: 3080
Joined: 19 May 2005 18:10
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Joachim Peiper and the Malmedy massacres again

Post by Harro » 08 Apr 2012 01:30

C'mon, a simple use of the search function in this forum is your friend since this topic has been discussed to death over the past decade.

User avatar
Marcus
Member
Posts: 33963
Joined: 08 Mar 2002 22:35
Location: Europe

Re: Joachim Peiper and the Malmedy massacres again

Post by Marcus » 08 Apr 2012 09:41

Please keep this thread focused on the Malmedy massacre, the death of Peiper can be discussed in one of the numerous threads on that topic, for example:
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 8&t=140501
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=27483

/Marcus

PF
Member
Posts: 2127
Joined: 27 Oct 2004 13:19
Location: USA

Re: Joachim Peiper and the Malmedy massacres again

Post by PF » 28 Jun 2013 19:28

Postscript
List of defendants
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso ... medy1.html

Postscript to bauserman's book:
survivor karl daub fate
http://articles.mcall.com/2004-01-24/ne ... onald-daub

redgemak
Member
Posts: 55
Joined: 13 May 2013 09:19
Location: Schoten Belgium

Re: Joachim Peiper and the Malmedy massacres again

Post by redgemak » 02 Jul 2013 09:08

The American propaganda set aside (I'm not a revisionist but not always see things from the victors poitnt of view) remember that none of the accused were senteced to death (a punishment appropriat for this crime).
They were all released from prison and one of them even became general of the panzertruppen in the bundeswehr (if he was a mass murderer he never would have been a general in the new army)...

Just my two-bits

PS for the people who can read Dutch see the work of Gerd J. Cuppens
"Massamoord in Malmedy ? Ardennen : 17 December 1944."



Jean

User avatar
Penn44
Banned
Posts: 4214
Joined: 26 Jun 2003 06:25
Location: US

Re: Joachim Peiper and the Malmedy massacres again

Post by Penn44 » 02 Jul 2013 10:25

redgemak wrote:The American propaganda set aside (I'm not a revisionist but not always see things from the victors poitnt of view) remember that none of the accused were senteced to death (a punishment appropriat for this crime).
They were all released from prison and one of them even became general of the panzertruppen in the bundeswehr (if he was a mass murderer he never would have been a general in the new army)...
Just my two-bits
Jean
Unfortunately, this forum is littered with the posts of people giving their "two bits" worth of opinion.

What "American propaganda" are you referring to?

How do you account for the multiple mass murders throughout the 1st SS PD's zone of advance?

In regards to your point of an SS man ending up as a general in the Bundeswehr, who are you referring to? No reasonable person ever said that all of Peiper's Kampfgruppe were guilty. Some clearly were. On your other point, a number of Germans implicated in various roles in German atrocities eventually ended up in high positions within the FRG government.

Penn44

.
I once was told that I was vain, but I knew that vanity was a fault, so I gave it up because I have no faults.

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”