Not my opinion, the Irish Justice Minister's. "Ireland has admitted for the first time that its 'morally bankrupt' regime of the 1930s denied visas to desperate Jews trying to escape from Nazi persecution. Justice Minister Alan Shatter said that, following Adolf Hitler's rise to power, Ireland's anti-semitic Berlin ambassador Charles Bewley ensured 'the doors to this state were kept firmly closed to German Jewish families trying to flee'. The admission came as he apologised for the way brave soldiers who 'deserted' the Irish Army to fight with the Allies during the Second World War were treated." Irish minister admits for first time that Jews fleeing Nazis were denied visas in 1930s by 'morally bankrupt' regime | Mail Online
I agree, on the other hand historical accuracy is important to avoid making the same mistakes again and "negationism", even in it's milder forms, not a good thing.
Normally I agree that apologies are cheap, easy acts with little relevance but in this case I think there is more substance to it since there are still Veterans around who were affected by the Irish Government's ant-British neutralism. I look forward to seeing that the Irish Government compensate generously the 100 or so Irish who fought for the Allies in WW2. I don't know if the act will mollify the genuine anger of many British Servicemen of WW2 that Ireland did not not release the three Treaty Ports (handed to Ireland in 1938) back to Britian for the duration of the War. This would have saved many Allied ships and their crew. Ireland's strict neutrality meant that at a large number of British Soldiers were tied up permantently manning the Irish border and lack of black out aided U-Boats and German aircraft. I had not heard about the Jewish problem but that is yet another reason for the apology and perhaps some compensation.
Scipio, I think you're missing a few zeros there! Robert Fisk notes that at least 100,000 Irish citizens went to the UK during the war to work, with thousands going into the services. The article about the Irish government's treatment of men who fought for the British is ONLY about Irish Defence Forces personnel who deserted to do so, not the thousands of others who legitimately did. As for the "jewish problem" - well, I'm afraid there IS quite a marked strain of anti-semitism in rural (and sometimes urban!) Ireland in the 19th and early 20th centuries; don't forget the Irish catholic clergy preached a pogrom in the city of Limerick in the late 19th century that led to rioting and the deaths of several Jewish citizens of the city. As for the WWII era...not only did De Valera's government not do much to assist BEFORE the war....AFTER the war, when governments were trying to help the survivors of the Holocaust, the Irish government only gave out one hundred visas for Jewish orphans to enter Ireland!
Moving on to wartime history... To be fair - the RUC and it's Special Constabularies did a GREAT job of manning the border, the Northern Command of the IRA was almost wholly cut off from the Southern Commands during the war, it was a very effectively-policed border... But the British DID mass up to 51,000 men in Northern Ireland in the second half of 1940 - with the intention of INVADING the South if the Germans should land there!
The US was just as morally bankrupt, if not moreso, for turning its back on European Jewry. Alas, anti-Semitism in the US prevented the relaxing of the quotas. When it comes to the Holocaust, the entire world was morally bankrupt.
There will always be some individuals better than their government: [h=1]Hugh O'Flaherty[/h] Another day we can talk about the Erie and the UK.
Another day we can talk about the Erie and the UK. Been done to death efestos..... Freezone to stump to rants and raves...We've been there and done it many times. Next you'll be saying we should do the Falklands....Oh....gawd blimey guv......Fallout.....
LOL I wonder what O'Flaherty made of the Vatican's role in helping GERMAN war criminals escape from Europe after the war!
Urqh: I just was trying to be polite... If you exchange the life of political prisoners and Jews to facilitate the escape of a few rats ... and you are 2000 years old, maybe you think you should do your part of the deal so that when something like the WWII horror happen again... in the next five hundred years ... You could state you respect your pacts. Franco and it´s regime were pro-Germanic (had no choice) but if you flee from occupied Europe it was better to try to go to Spain than to go to the democratic Switzerland. Especially if you were a Jew. What I don't understand is ... Why GB handed over these ports to the Erie?
What I don't understand is ... Why GB handed over these ports to the Erie? Good question. One Churchill eludes to many times in his various works and books. As to politeness..My response was not intended to be provocative, just pointing out, we have debated the Irish problem like the Falklands problem to death on here and lost a few members in its process...I of course would love to do it all over again but know the outcome of the debates where these two are concerned. Certainly not stiffling debate or having a go at you old chap.
Three things I've learned to steer clear of on here...religion, politics...... ....and Ireland ( which always brings in the first two ).
Robert Fisk spends at least two chapters alluding to this in "In Time Of War"....and it seems to honestly come down to the fact that Chamberlain REALLY thought that in the event of a world war, that De Valera would regard it as the gesture of respect it was in 1938....and temporarily hand them back again! But then....Neville Chamberlain has been proved by history to have been a bit of a plonker over a LOT of things Mind you - it's equally fair to recognise that so at times was De Valera; he was seemingly forgetting that the VAST majority of Eire's imports of ALL things that it couldn't produce for itself came via Britain and the Empire ...and if they didn't reach Britain, then Ireland wasn't going to get them in turn...! A lesson that Churchill brought home to Dev starting in 1941 when from that point on, and for the rest of the war - he ordered that Eire not receive a whole range of goods from the UK....on the basis that they were being brought to the UK at the cost of thousands of mens' lives every year on the high seas, and the British were having to eke them out under the Ration system...and yet Ireland could seemingly expect to get a fair share of it all and NOT introduce Rationing OR help provide for the protection of the transatlantic traffic in any way?
