18 Comments

• seanomelbourne | Aug 22, 2011, 08:08 PM EDT

  The U.S. did not object to former nazis working for the military and the state dept after WW11. Ed needs a reality check.

• RedBranch | Aug 21, 2011, 06:01 AM EDT

  Perhaps the question here is WHY did the Irish govt. allow Folens in and furthermore to stay in as revelations uncovered?

• TheYank | Aug 20, 2011, 03:39 AM EDT

  JamesDempsey,
  
  Usually when that happens it's because there may be a word that triggers a halt/review process that someone involved with the site can address. Any links to other sites will do that. This is to stop spammers.
  
  Having said that, I checked the bin of messages for review and pretty much everywhere and I don't see your message.

• JamesDempsey | Aug 20, 2011, 03:08 AM EDT

  Wow! I just wrote a piece commenting on some current and past issues in the USA and it was not posted! It was not offensive or vulgar in any way and seemed to me to be an at least half decent written piece following a logical progression. I believe it was not posted because it did not agree with somebodies politics. Who exactly on this site decides whether a comment is posted? Does Irish central not believe in free speech, a core value of USA and Irish republic?

• seanomelbourne | Aug 19, 2011, 08:30 PM EDT

  Much ado about nothing

• jamieLM | Aug 18, 2011, 11:03 AM EDT

  @ JamesDempsey Name a country that doesn't formulate policies based on their own self-interests. Most countries consider that essential to their survival and to the well-being of its citizens. Countries engaged in protecting and promoting self-interests has been going on since Day One, causing conflict and warfare over the centuries. Even European royal marriages were arranged, not on love, but on a country's self-interests. In fairness, Britain was doing in WWII what other countries, like Germany and Japan, were doing. One country can be critical of another in the "self-interest" arena, calling another's interests "selfish", but it can hardly deny that it, too, hasn't and doesn't engage in the same thing. btw: the U.S. didn't "join" the war as if by choice - Pearl Harbor caused their entry. The U.S. paid out in the loss of 300,000 precious lives for every penny it ever made from the War. I've never heard anyone in the U.S. from that generation say they thought it was a good exchange. Just another perspective.

• jamieLM | Aug 18, 2011, 10:17 AM EDT

  @ The Yank Your daughter is a lucky young lady to have a father who is willing and able to monitor what she's being taught. As a parent, you have every right to ban certain books from your home that you feel give a distorted view, especially by an author with a dubious background. I admire you for discussing your objections with her and taking action. My husband and I also look over the text books that are used in our sons' school and they are only 7 & 9 yrs. old.

• JamesDempsey | Aug 18, 2011, 08:05 AM EDT

  @ The Yank A very interesting clip indeed. I find the idea that he was a nationalist wanted there own language and own insignia and then too work for the gestapo to round up true nationalists in the belgian resistance very contradictory but then his idea of a nation might have been very different to the idea of a nation in the minds of the resistance. And also he may have been an oppertunist and turned on his fellow country men for his 10 pieces of silver. Obvioulsy the axis powers and the USSR were far worse than the western allies during WW2. I do however feel that there may have been an imbalance in the telling of the story of WW2 in europe in that some may like to think that britain went to war on some righteous crusade to stop the evil germans. When Britain declared war on germany for invading poland why didnt she also declare war on the USSR for doing the same? The real reason was to protect her own selfish interests because a stronger germany would have threatened the british empire. Margaret Thatcher expressed the same concern publicly when the berlin wall fell saying that she hope a unified germany would not threaten us again (or something along those lines) No Folens cant draw moral equivilance between the USA and Nazi Germany during WW2, however the USA did become very very rich from WW2 and the idea that the USA joined the war to stop evil is not the entire truth. This is how I interpret the history of WW2. I kind of feel guilty about the comments I made above because I know as an Irish man that a strong USA and a strong UK (except in terms of a united ireland of course) is a good thing for myself and my small country. But i am just trying to tel it like it is. May the USA and UK live long and prosper

• TheYank | Aug 18, 2011, 06:53 AM EDT

  One more thing, JamesDempsey, you say you doubt Folens was involved in "something of a criminal nature like carting people off to be gassed in death camps." Well ... maybe.
  
  What seems beyond dispute is that in 1941 Folens enlisted in the Flemish Legion, which was a voluntary unit of ardent Flemish nationalists (fascists). They volunteered to fight on the eastern front, which they did in the uniform of the Waffen SS. They were not choirboys.
  
  Folens was sent home due to illness in '43 and after that it's murky. The accusation is that he was working with the Gestapo helping them to round up members of Belgian resistance. His family say that's not true.
  
  What seems indisputable is that the post-war Belgian state thought he had done some bad things because he was sent to prison for 10 years. I can't find anything definitive, but supposedly he was convicted by the CROWCASS, an agency set up by the UN after the war to try war criminals.

• TheYank | Aug 18, 2011, 06:44 AM EDT

  Also, JamesDempsey, I think you and seanomelbourne differ fundamentally. You don't see Hiroshima & Nagasaki as war crimes, but implied in seanomelbourne's comment is that he does. It was definitely the tone of that section in my daughter's history book - "Both sides were equally bad." That moral equivalence is something that would please Folens no end.

• TheYank | Aug 18, 2011, 06:40 AM EDT

  JamesDempsey,
  
  It's only a short YouTube clip, but you can hear Folens here.

• JamesDempsey | Aug 18, 2011, 04:16 AM EDT

  @seanomelbourne I agree totally. I just want to point out once again though that the bombing of hiroshima and nagasaki was not a war crime. I believe it saved more japanese than it killed. we have all seen the video of a young woman throwing herself and her baby of the cliff (in okinowa i think) and the stories of whole villages standing around grenades just because the americans were coming. Also the fanatical way in which japanese soldier fought where surrender was unaccepatable would have led to incredible casualties on both sides. I have never spared the USA from critiscism when I believe it is in the wrong... like as in its unrelenting support for a land grabbing and an aggressive colonising nation like Israel. That said me being Irish I know which side my bread is buttered on and I am more than happy that we are in a way allied with the USA (military use of Shannon airport and huge economic ties) I just feel that the Yanks article went a bit too far. I mean does anybody know what exactly did Folens do for the Nazis ? I seriously doubt it was something of a criminal nature like carting people off to be gassed in death camps. I presume he was just a business man working in the economic climate of his day....... even though the gestapo does sound dubious. Also while I havent seen the interview the quote above "stupid and criminal" for insisting on a "complete surrender" by the Nazis. "And that's the stupidity of the Roosevelt." is unsettling if he means that the Nazis should have been left in power. what i believe was unfortunate is that the USA and Britain didnt make it all the way to Berlin before the USSR did, because eastern Germany still hasnt caught up with the west.

• Scotchtommy | Aug 18, 2011, 03:52 AM EDT

  Once again the Nazis trot out the old whine "How can you Yanks go on about the Holocaust when you killed thousands of Japanese civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki".There's not much point in trying to argue/debate with these scum so it's no use pointing out that the Atomic bombs were meant to impose a political solution (i.e. surrender) on Japan.Now if the US had continued dropping these bombs until they'd achieved a "Final Solution to the Japanese Problem" then a "comparison" could be made.It's also worth pointing out that every historian describes the American occupation of Japan as one of the most decent,civilized and honourable military occupations in history.

• seanomelbourne | Aug 17, 2011, 07:59 PM EDT

  To tell the truth about U.S.war crimes doe's not diminish German war crimes.Ed sees the world through stars and striped glasses probably rose tinted.

• TheYank | Aug 17, 2011, 06:01 PM EDT

  JamesDempsey,
  
  Just so you know, I'm always conscious that Ireland was neutral in WWII and there was no shame in not serving in the war. I'm also aware that for many Irish service in the British Army in WWI was & is ... troubling. So I wouldn't question anyone's family history, unless they went off to join the Nazis (or their close allies). And, remember, at the time Folens teamed up with the Nazis, most of his fellow Belgians saw them as occupiers.
  
  I long accepted that a total ban on all Folens books in this house is impractical. However, I draw the line at Folens history books.
  
  The book I mentioned where America's wickedness was a 6th class book back in 2002. And, yes, the curriculum determines what topics are covered, but not the slant put on the coverage.
  
  Also, from what I remember of my daughter's time in that class her 6th class teacher basically just taught what was in the book - history was not her strong suit. I talked to my daughter about what she was taught, but how many other parents did? How many actually picked up the book to read it? I'd say none. So what did the class take out of those lessons other than what Folens imparted?

• JamesDempsey | Aug 17, 2011, 12:41 PM EDT

  @The Yank I feel you are over reacting a small bit by wanting to ban Folens books from your house, after all they are merely the publishers and the content of the books is influenced by the current curriculum in schools. I feel JamieLM makes a fine point in saying that you may use this as an example to your daughters about the different perspectives outlined in different books. I have grown up with Folens books and have never seen any stories of "America's wickedness" that you speak of. I am fascinated by the story of WW2 and have spent thousands of hours reading and watching programs about it from all perspectives and I have come to the conclusion that all parties involved were guilty of "wickedness". That said some were a lot more wicked than others. I believe that the decision to drop a nuclear weapon on Japan saved not only American lives but also Japanese lives. I dont know the text that you speak of that down plays Nazi wickedness, but I highly doubt that it was downplaying it or trying to excuse it. And just before you question my own family history in the World wars, my great grandfather served with the canadian army in WW1 and my grandfather served with the royal navy in WW2

• TheYank | Aug 17, 2011, 11:28 AM EDT

  jamieLM,
  
  As you might have guessed, I don't let those sentiments go unchallenged and in fairness to my daughter she is actually keen enough to seek out other sources. I just don't like giving money to that outfit.
  
  But you know and I know that there are many children whose parents may have only heard the same stories of 'America's wickedness' thanks to Folens books. Many of those will not go looking for other sources or care much. They'll just absorb and push that to the back of their minds, where it will be fertile ground for latter day anti-American sentiments to take root.

• jamieLM | Aug 17, 2011, 11:09 AM EDT

  You can give your daughter a more balanced perspective of WWII and teach her that reading one book, text book or not, doesn't provide that perspective and may not be historically accurate. My grandfather fought in the South Pacific during WWII and was on Iwo Jima, Okinawa, the Phillipines, Luzon, etc. His 1st hand experiences of seeing Japanese atrocities (babies & children beheaded, women raped & bayoneted) towards the civilian populations, let alone U.S. soldiers, on these islands are chilling, to put it mildly. He firmly believes the atomic bombs were necessary and saved millions of Japanese and American lives because the Japanese military warlords didn't think surrendering was "honorable" and wanted to fight to the death - theirs and everyone elses. The 2nd bomb would not have been dropped had there been a surrender after the 1st one and they were warned ahead of time. I don't know the age of your daughter, but when she's older, she should expand her reading on WWII. Meanwhile, you can give her a home education on WWII.