Podcast appearances and mentions of otto ohlendorf

Otto Ohlendorf era economista e advogado, falava várias línguas e tinha uma cultura refinada, além de uma aparência atraente e uma fala que seduziu o próprio juiz que o condenou à morte: “parece uma pessoa legal", o juiz disse, durante o julgamento. Mas Otto Ohlendorf chefiou um grupo de extermínio que matou milhares de homens, mulheres e crianças judias na Moldávia e na Ucrânia. O que leva pessoas comuns a agirem assim?

Mit dem Beginn des zweiten Weltkriegs wurden Juden und andere nicht akzeptierte Minderheiten in den besetzten Gebieten verfolgt und meist ermordet, wobei besonders die Ostgebiete betroffen waren. Viele der verfolgten Menschen wurden nicht in Konzentrations- oder Vernichtungslager deportiert, sondern vor Ort von mobilen geschulten Erschießungskommandos getötet, den sogenannten Einsatzgruppen. Otto Ohlendorf war Leiter der Einsatzgruppe D, und damit für die Ermordung von 90000 Menschen aus der Ukraine und dem Kaukasus verantwortlich. Ohlendorf und seine Mannschaft verübten brutale Massaker, bei denen nicht akzeptierte Ethnien in Massen erschossen wurden, selbst Kinder wurden nicht verschont. Zeitzeugen berichteten, dass Ohlendorf so kaltherzig war, dass es einem das Blut in den Adern gefrieren ließ, und diese Person keinerlei Respekt vor dem Leben hatte. In diesem Video geht es um die grausamen Verbrechen von Otto Ohlendorf und der nach dem Krieg stattgefundenen Anklage sowie Bestrafung dieses Verbrechers.

Die unglaubliche Ruhe, und Kälte, mit der Otto Ohlendorf bei den Nürnberger Prozessen den Mord an 90.000 Menschen gestand, hüllte den ganzen Zuschauerraum in Schweigen. Selbst der Richter wusste sich nur noch durch eine literarische Metapher zu helfen: Dr Jekyll und Mr Hyde.  Noch als Gymnasiast trat Ohlendorf der SA bei, studierte in Italien genauestens den Faschismus und erfand später mit Ludwig Erhardt die soziale Marktwirtschaft. Jurist, Volkswirt und Massenmörder – Otto Ohlendorf bleibt einer der komplexesten Verbrecher des Dritten Reiches. Seine Geschichte erzählen wir in unserer heutigen Podcast-Folge.

April 1946, the trial continues but the German people either don't believe the evidence or just ignore it. Is it because or in spite of the horrific evidence? But they have to start paying attention – only then can the healing begin. Trial fatigue is setting in: British and American newspapers only want the gruesome stories, and the Germans are doggedly uninterested – it's either lies or they should just get on and execute them. Even Otto Ohlendorf, who led an SS Einsatzkommando which cold-bloodedly shot 90,000 Jews, talks like an accountant. Starring Alex Kingston as Madeleine Jacob, French foreign correspondent and featuring Jonathan Cullen as Otto Ohlendorf, called to give testimony of his own soldiers' barbarism. Madeleine Jacob - ALEX KINGSTON Christa - ROSIE SHEEHY Daily Mirror Reporter - ANDREW WOODALL New York Post Reporter - HARI DHILLON Herald Tribune Reporter - CLIVE WOOD Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe - FORBES MASSON John Amen - JOSEPH ALESSI Roman Rudenko - NIGEL LINDSAY Charles Dubost - ILAN GOODMAN Bishop of Limburg - NATHAN WILEY Robert H Jackson - JOSEPH MYDELL Titles - LEWIS MACLEOD Sound Designer - ADAM WOODHAMS Studio Manager - MARK SMITH Casting Director - GINNY SCHILLER Original Score - METAPHOR MUSIC Writer and Director - JONATHAN MYERSON Producer - NICHOLAS NEWTON A Promenade Production for BBC Radio 4 and BBC Sounds

Gerhard Zwerenz‘ Hörspiel basiert auf Vernehmungsprotokollen mit Otto Ohlendorf aus den Nürnberger Prozessen. Das Stück geht jedoch über eine Dokumentation hinaus und reflektiert darüber, was in diesen Prozessen zu Tage kam. Das ist zuallererst das Erstaunen der Ankläger, denen teils noch gar nicht klar war, welche Ausmaße die Massenmorde des Holocausts hatten. Und es ist die von Hannah Arendt formulierte „Banalität des Bösen“, mit der diese unvorstellbaren Verbrechen in sturem Gehorsam ausgeführt wurden.

The Hake Report, Fri, 4/17/20: RINO Gov. Larry Hogan (MD) vs. Trump on the ‘rona' shutdown. James loves boomers: JLP, Bill Lockwood... Bill O'Reilly quotes from Benny Ferencz and Gen. Otto Ohlendorf… both violence and very fine people on many sides. Great calls from Mark from NYC (he black!), Hans from Germany (Jesse's RACIST!), Mark from San Diego (We have no rights!), Azzmador from TX (fact-checking the mainstream narrative).  BLOG: https://www.thehakereport.com/blog/2020/4/17/fact-checking-the-mainstream-narrative-fri-41720  VIDEO: https://youtu.be/SEQ7F-nwolw  Call in! 888-775-3773, live Sunday through Friday 9 AM (Los Angeles) https://thehakereport.com 

Hitler caused the Holocaust, that much we know (no Hitler, no Holocaust). But did he directly order it and, if so, how and when? This is one of the many interesting questions posed by Hilary Earl in her outstanding new book The Nuremberg SS-Einsatzgruppen Trial, 1945-1958: Atrocity, Law, and History (Cambridge UP, 2009). The book is about the trial of the leaders of the Einsatzgruppen, the mobile killing units that, in 1941 and 1942, spearheaded the Nazi effort to eradicate the Jewish people. The Einsatzgruppen murdered something on the order of a million people using almost nothing but firearms. In 1947, their commanders were brought to justice in what might be called the “other” (forgotten) Nuremberg Trials. The trial left an enormous body of reasonably fresh-after-the-fact testimony for historians to work with in trying to understand this episode in the Holocaust. Hilary does a masterful job of mining this material. She also points out that the roots of our own understanding of the Holocaust can in large measure be traced to these disturbing trials. The defendants were the first Nazi genocidaires to publicly describe what they had done and why they had done it. To be sure, their testimony was self-serving and is therefore suspect. But–and this is perhaps the most remarkable part–in many instances it was remarkably accurate. They (and Otto Ohlendorf in particular) “told it like it was” because they believed they had not really done anything wrong. Hitler had said that the Jews were the mortal enemies of the Reich; they believed him. Thus when Hitler ordered them to kill the Jews man, woman, and child they were not particularly conflicted–they were simply following orders, orders they believed to be in the objective interest of Germany. Just how they came to hold this completely irrational view is another, and very interesting, question. For those interested in it, I refer you to Claudia Koonz, The Nazi Conscience (Harvard UP, 2003). Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hitler caused the Holocaust, that much we know (no Hitler, no Holocaust). But did he directly order it and, if so, how and when? This is one of the many interesting questions posed by Hilary Earl in her outstanding new book The Nuremberg SS-Einsatzgruppen Trial, 1945-1958: Atrocity, Law, and History (Cambridge UP, 2009). The book is about the trial of the leaders of the Einsatzgruppen, the mobile killing units that, in 1941 and 1942, spearheaded the Nazi effort to eradicate the Jewish people. The Einsatzgruppen murdered something on the order of a million people using almost nothing but firearms. In 1947, their commanders were brought to justice in what might be called the “other” (forgotten) Nuremberg Trials. The trial left an enormous body of reasonably fresh-after-the-fact testimony for historians to work with in trying to understand this episode in the Holocaust. Hilary does a masterful job of mining this material. She also points out that the roots of our own understanding of the Holocaust can in large measure be traced to these disturbing trials. The defendants were the first Nazi genocidaires to publicly describe what they had done and why they had done it. To be sure, their testimony was self-serving and is therefore suspect. But–and this is perhaps the most remarkable part–in many instances it was remarkably accurate. They (and Otto Ohlendorf in particular) “told it like it was” because they believed they had not really done anything wrong. Hitler had said that the Jews were the mortal enemies of the Reich; they believed him. Thus when Hitler ordered them to kill the Jews man, woman, and child they were not particularly conflicted–they were simply following orders, orders they believed to be in the objective interest of Germany. Just how they came to hold this completely irrational view is another, and very interesting, question. For those interested in it, I refer you to Claudia Koonz, The Nazi Conscience (Harvard UP, 2003). Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hitler caused the Holocaust, that much we know (no Hitler, no Holocaust). But did he directly order it and, if so, how and when? This is one of the many interesting questions posed by Hilary Earl in her outstanding new book The Nuremberg SS-Einsatzgruppen Trial, 1945-1958: Atrocity, Law, and History (Cambridge UP, 2009). The book is about the trial of the leaders of the Einsatzgruppen, the mobile killing units that, in 1941 and 1942, spearheaded the Nazi effort to eradicate the Jewish people. The Einsatzgruppen murdered something on the order of a million people using almost nothing but firearms. In 1947, their commanders were brought to justice in what might be called the “other” (forgotten) Nuremberg Trials. The trial left an enormous body of reasonably fresh-after-the-fact testimony for historians to work with in trying to understand this episode in the Holocaust. Hilary does a masterful job of mining this material. She also points out that the roots of our own understanding of the Holocaust can in large measure be traced to these disturbing trials. The defendants were the first Nazi genocidaires to publicly describe what they had done and why they had done it. To be sure, their testimony was self-serving and is therefore suspect. But–and this is perhaps the most remarkable part–in many instances it was remarkably accurate. They (and Otto Ohlendorf in particular) “told it like it was” because they believed they had not really done anything wrong. Hitler had said that the Jews were the mortal enemies of the Reich; they believed him. Thus when Hitler ordered them to kill the Jews man, woman, and child they were not particularly conflicted–they were simply following orders, orders they believed to be in the objective interest of Germany. Just how they came to hold this completely irrational view is another, and very interesting, question. For those interested in it, I refer you to Claudia Koonz, The Nazi Conscience (Harvard UP, 2003). Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hitler caused the Holocaust, that much we know (no Hitler, no Holocaust). But did he directly order it and, if so, how and when? This is one of the many interesting questions posed by Hilary Earl in her outstanding new book The Nuremberg SS-Einsatzgruppen Trial, 1945-1958: Atrocity, Law, and History (Cambridge UP, 2009). The book is about the trial of the leaders of the Einsatzgruppen, the mobile killing units that, in 1941 and 1942, spearheaded the Nazi effort to eradicate the Jewish people. The Einsatzgruppen murdered something on the order of a million people using almost nothing but firearms. In 1947, their commanders were brought to justice in what might be called the “other” (forgotten) Nuremberg Trials. The trial left an enormous body of reasonably fresh-after-the-fact testimony for historians to work with in trying to understand this episode in the Holocaust. Hilary does a masterful job of mining this material. She also points out that the roots of our own understanding of the Holocaust can in large measure be traced to these disturbing trials. The defendants were the first Nazi genocidaires to publicly describe what they had done and why they had done it. To be sure, their testimony was self-serving and is therefore suspect. But–and this is perhaps the most remarkable part–in many instances it was remarkably accurate. They (and Otto Ohlendorf in particular) “told it like it was” because they believed they had not really done anything wrong. Hitler had said that the Jews were the mortal enemies of the Reich; they believed him. Thus when Hitler ordered them to kill the Jews man, woman, and child they were not particularly conflicted–they were simply following orders, orders they believed to be in the objective interest of Germany. Just how they came to hold this completely irrational view is another, and very interesting, question. For those interested in it, I refer you to Claudia Koonz, The Nazi Conscience (Harvard UP, 2003). Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hitler caused the Holocaust, that much we know (no Hitler, no Holocaust). But did he directly order it and, if so, how and when? This is one of the many interesting questions posed by Hilary Earl in her outstanding new book The Nuremberg SS-Einsatzgruppen Trial, 1945-1958: Atrocity, Law, and History (Cambridge UP, 2009). The book is about the trial of the leaders of the Einsatzgruppen, the mobile killing units that, in 1941 and 1942, spearheaded the Nazi effort to eradicate the Jewish people. The Einsatzgruppen murdered something on the order of a million people using almost nothing but firearms. In 1947, their commanders were brought to justice in what might be called the “other” (forgotten) Nuremberg Trials. The trial left an enormous body of reasonably fresh-after-the-fact testimony for historians to work with in trying to understand this episode in the Holocaust. Hilary does a masterful job of mining this material. She also points out that the roots of our own understanding of the Holocaust can in large measure be traced to these disturbing trials. The defendants were the first Nazi genocidaires to publicly describe what they had done and why they had done it. To be sure, their testimony was self-serving and is therefore suspect. But–and this is perhaps the most remarkable part–in many instances it was remarkably accurate. They (and Otto Ohlendorf in particular) “told it like it was” because they believed they had not really done anything wrong. Hitler had said that the Jews were the mortal enemies of the Reich; they believed him. Thus when Hitler ordered them to kill the Jews man, woman, and child they were not particularly conflicted–they were simply following orders, orders they believed to be in the objective interest of Germany. Just how they came to hold this completely irrational view is another, and very interesting, question. For those interested in it, I refer you to Claudia Koonz, The Nazi Conscience (Harvard UP, 2003). Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hitler caused the Holocaust, that much we know (no Hitler, no Holocaust). But did he directly order it and, if so, how and when? This is one of the many interesting questions posed by Hilary Earl in her outstanding new book The Nuremberg SS-Einsatzgruppen Trial, 1945-1958: Atrocity, Law, and History (Cambridge UP, 2009). The book is about the trial of the leaders of the Einsatzgruppen, the mobile killing units that, in 1941 and 1942, spearheaded the Nazi effort to eradicate the Jewish people. The Einsatzgruppen murdered something on the order of a million people using almost nothing but firearms. In 1947, their commanders were brought to justice in what might be called the “other” (forgotten) Nuremberg Trials. The trial left an enormous body of reasonably fresh-after-the-fact testimony for historians to work with in trying to understand this episode in the Holocaust. Hilary does a masterful job of mining this material. She also points out that the roots of our own understanding of the Holocaust can in large measure be traced to these disturbing trials. The defendants were the first Nazi genocidaires to publicly describe what they had done and why they had done it. To be sure, their testimony was self-serving and is therefore suspect. But–and this is perhaps the most remarkable part–in many instances it was remarkably accurate. They (and Otto Ohlendorf in particular) “told it like it was” because they believed they had not really done anything wrong. Hitler had said that the Jews were the mortal enemies of the Reich; they believed him. Thus when Hitler ordered them to kill the Jews man, woman, and child they were not particularly conflicted–they were simply following orders, orders they believed to be in the objective interest of Germany. Just how they came to hold this completely irrational view is another, and very interesting, question. For those interested in it, I refer you to Claudia Koonz, The Nazi Conscience (Harvard UP, 2003). Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven't already.