Talk:Herberts Cukurs

How to improve this article
I have uprated this article to Start-class in the WikiProject Latvia. The article could be improved with more details on some of the issues linked to in external links. Philaweb  T  13:32, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

What the hell is going on here? There is no question this vile monster was beyond a doubt guilty. Why else was he hiding in fear in Brazil, across the world from his 'homeland' he was a supposed hero of???? If I ever end up in that country that welcomed harboring war criminals, the highlight of my visit would be posting a photo on the wiki page about this horrible waste of human potential of me pissing on the steaming pile of shit I will have ceremoniously deposited on his grave.


 * Holocaust Denial is a very serious matter. 46.109.13.37 made this statement: "However, up to 2011 there has been no authoritative research done that would clearly prove or disprove the alleged crimes of Herberts Cukurs, although it is claimed that there are plenty of documents found to prove his guilt in archives in Israel."  His source was a Lithuanian editorial peice from here:


 * Here is the translation of that article from GoogleTranslate:


 * Herbert Sugar. Definitely guilty


 * Sdr. Efraim Zuroff, the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Israel Office of the Director, 2005. On 7th June 00:00


 * ''Anyone who is looking for convincing evidence that it is appropriate to prosecute Nazi war criminals, and not be punished by death without trial, just to look at events for Herbert sugar last year Latvian. A former pilot, who won the thirties of the overall national recognition for his international flights alone, but later - ignominious reputation as a notorious Arajs deputy commander, now, thanks to a full-scale campaign, again taken the place of honor heroes Latvian Pantheon. Under normal circumstances, when he was about his crimes would be tried, such an attempt would be doomed to failure, but the fact that the sugar without a trial sanctioned by the death of Mossad, ironically, has opened his acquittal efforts Pandora's box, and these efforts have been involved in the famous Latvians who at least in theory, should be well informed about the case. He who last fall started as a right-wing extremists, organized under the table with a picture of sugar distribution, has recently resulted in a wide range of exhibition under the name Herbert Liepaja Sugar: the presumption of innocence and the film, which initially had the same name and which highlights the documents and facts that seem to deny the participation of Sugar war crimes. They can be added to partially exonerating comments from such reputable historians as Andrew Ezergailis by May 17, this newspaper quoted saying that there was no evidence to put the sugar to the pit Rumbula and in any case it is proved that he was "most ardent Jewish Latvian shooter." Although Latvian historians such as Andrew Ezergailis and Aivars Stranga, clearly recognizes the sugar situation Arajs team, they seem to indicate that there is almost no convincing evidence of his personal involvement in mass killings, creating a clear impression that, although Sugar was no obvious Righteous Christian, it is unclear whether he would be convicted in court and hardly deserved the cruel fate in the hands of Mossad. But the truth is quite different. Contrary to right-wing nationalists and the Sugar family attempts to fully rehabilitate the sugar and other Latvian efforts to question or undermine his individual guilt, the Israeli archives have extensive evidence of personal involvement in the sugar murder of Jews, which are detailed and clearly proves his guilt. Even more - they referred to specific cases and not limited to his role in a large-scale actions, which on November 30 and December 8, 1941 the Riga ghetto was destroyed Latvian Jews. For example, in Riga events surviving Rafael subs, who was interviewed in Canada, said that on July 2, 1941 Sugar in the new [Jewish] cemetery burned for eight Jews and even mention their names - Feldheims synagogue warden, his wife and four children, cantor Mintz and his wife. Abraham Shapiro, who at that time (in 1949) lived in Munich, was detained Arajs team headquarters Valdemara Street 19, when the Sugar expropriated his family's apartment. He said Sugar personally killed two Jews, one of whom was called Laitmans and who had the command stood up in the ranks. He also was a witness to the fact that sugar and other senior Latvian officers sexually molested a young Jewish girl and tortured him until he orders the Sugar played the piano in the apartment, the sugar was taken away Shapiro family. Maybe visapsūdzošākos evidence provided Tukaciers Max, who on September 23, 1948 in Munich showed liberated the Jewish Central Committee of the legal department in Germany. Tukaciers was the Jewish people, who were arrested "Sugar men" (Arajs team) and delivered Valdemara 19th There he was personally beaten Sugar, he broke nearly all the front teeth and he saw how many Jews were tortured and then shot at the Sugar command. 15 July 1941, he personally saw the Sugar ordered a board as an elderly Jew rape a twenty-year-old Jewish prisoners and Latvian police officers in front, and when he failed to do so, repeatedly forced her to kiss all the girls naked body. Those prisoners who were not able to watch this hideous picture of Sugar beaten with pistol handle, some 10-15 of them to death, and some women. Tukaciers also showed the active role of sugar in the broad equities of November 30 and December 8, stating that he was beaten and shot men, women and children who are unable to keep up with other walk [to Rumbula]. Additional witnesses confirmed the Sugar lethal role of Latvian Jews in the liquidation of the Riga Ghetto. For example, Isaac Kram said, how does he personally have seen sugar was shot by an elderly Jewish, whose daughter was not allowed to board the led on December 8, elderly Jews to Rumbula, as well as a small child who was crying, because he could not find his mother. These statements clearly show that there can be no doubt that Herbert Sugar was one of the leading participants in the liquidation of the Riga Jews, who personally murdered men, women and children. It is therefore clear that if he would be tried within a reasonable time after the war ended, he would undoubtedly have been found guilty. However, various political and legal reasons it was not happened in twenty years after the Second World War. It seemed that it would never happen, and it prompted the Mossad to punish him with death. I think that would never have started the current campaign to mitigate his guilt, if he had been convicted because of his active participation in mass murder of Jews should be known to everyone and no self-respecting man do not try to justify them. Sugar was spared the embarrassment of what would have led to litigation and they punished without trial. Those who did it, never dreamed that his punishment of death then becomes a catalyst and justification for attempts to get him to hero status in Latvian and deny his tremendous guilt.''


 * When 46.109.13.37 uses terms like "..no authoritative research...", "...alleged crimes...", ..."although it is claimed [of his guilt]..." it


 * "Holocaust denial is a serious matter." So is famine and chemical warfare. You should never put one suffering and pain above the other, all deaths are horrific and all are condemnable. The dying never care for reason, only pain. Just as well if you would claim that murderers and torturers are evil people I would also agree to that. However, that has nothing to do with the content of the comments. 46.109.13.37 comments were mine and the content of said comment in no manner whatsoever questioned the fact of deaths (that is, of the Holocaust process itself). I pointed out that the interpretation of actions of 1 person who was involved in these events has not been researched and proven beyond doubt and as such should be presented - however, as I explained, this conclusion was based on now slightely wrong assesments and thus after comparing evidence I agreed with your action, even if chosen method was unethical and you still stand and defend such attitude. The Diena article confronts the defenders of Herberts Cukurs (with defenders I mean those that assume that he did not participated in Holocaust activities and killed people), thus, Diena article exactly proves that such "controversy" exists, though it is not precisely the right word to be used here. Thus, while author of the article clearly and strongly is of opinion of Cukurs guilt, his arguments and existance of article itself shows that there would not be need for an article entitled "Definitely guilty", if there would be no-one to confront it with (and those that made exhibition and attempted to white wash him probably are the ones he confronts). However, to call it an academic dispute or "proper" controversy would be wrong, since those that wish to interpret Cukurs as not guilty of crimes against humanity, do so on non-academic basis, while Stranga and Ezergailis are professional historians and their work is academic and authoritative. Anyways, discussion was ended 2 posts ago. Yes, I used word "alleged" with implication that unclear situations should be presented as such (a point in which I acknowledged my mistake - though Ezergailis and Stranga are not 100% sure of Cukurs guilt, they do seem to be pretty sure, situation should be claimed as unclear only if competing and equally qualitative research with anti-thesis would be presented, which is not the case). "No authoritative research" was direct re-telling of the comment of Ezergailis which he made in 60s, but since he changed his position in 90s (and did the research also himself) then that point was outdated. And "although it is claimed..." is a direct retalling of Zuroffs position - he does not mention any research (authoritative or otherwise) only stresses his position, thus the used word "claim" and not "prove" instead - he acknowledges that even Stranga and Ezergailis who have studied this topic do not claim that situation would be absolutely clear "Although Latvian historians such as Andrew Ezergailis and Aivars Stranga, clearly recognizes the situation of Cukurs in Arajs team, they seem to indicate that there is almost no convincing evidence of his personal involvement in mass killings, creating a clear impression that, although Cukurs was no obvious Righteous Christian, it is unclear whether he would be convicted in court and hardly deserved the cruel fate in the hands of Mossad." Whats more, word "claim" here was used to describe the position of documents in Israelian archives (to claim that there are documents is not equal to present research which has used and researched these documents).ims (talk) 00:51, 15 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I know very little about Cukurs, *IF* there is evidence that solid academic scholars believe that he had been wrongly accused, then source that. Your use of the terms "..no authoritative research...", "...alleged crimes...", and "...although it is claimed [of his guilt]..." you are not being accurate to what the article said.  These are also weasel and alleged words.  The article stated he was very much guilty (hint - Title: "Herberts Cukurs: Certainly Guilty"). You implied with the above wordage that the article said he was not.


 * Here is the original English version of Efraim Zuroff, of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Israel (Not translation):


 * If it was not your intention to minimize his actions, then this was a misunderstanding. However, Wiki has daily battles of Holocaust Deniers that tries to use wordage just like you did.  I did see your list of contributions and, although you started several years ago, you've had little experience in contributions - it's okay, because everyone starts someplace.  WP:BITE may also apply here, which you can be given leeway for this.  If it was not your intention to minimize, then we can start over and use more clear statements.  If there is controversy over his involvement or execution, then that should be described in detail in the article - but we need very strong academic sources with strong wordage.  Take care... Dinky town   talk  04:17, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * "If there is controversy over his involvement or execution, then that should be described in detail in the article - but we need very strong academic sources with strong wordage." Absolutely. I'll see if such adequate (academic) sources exist, though, as I've mentioned before, I doubt it. So, whatever minor contraversy there does exists, its likely to be non-academic and thus, probably should not be presented here.ims (talk) 09:29, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Does Elsergaillis give any hint as to the documents that caused him to retract some of his claims? 24.128.186.53 (talk) 01:21, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 * As much as I understand it he had wrong weapon. Still, though his role in the holocaust may be disputed, he has some crimes that are not alleged, such as burning down villages near Velikiye Luki and shooting people there. - Melilac (talk) 19:28, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

For ordinary users ...
For ordinary non-expert users of Wikipedia this article is confusing and unhelpful. It appears to detail claims, then says that most (?) of the allegations were withdrawn. Surely, someone with a knowledge of the subject can summarize the main issues? Norvo (talk) 17:18, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Update required
It has been made public that the Prosecutor General's Office in Latvia has terminated criminal proceedings against Herberts Cukurs. In short, since the beginning of investigations in 2006 no one could provide evidence that H.Cukurs indeed was involved in what you claim he is "Definitely guilty" for, the case was closed. Sorry. https://www.tvnet.lv/6522992/generalprokuratura-izbeigusi-kriminalprocesu-pret-herbertu-cukuru 87.110.180.50 (talk) 10:11, 15 February 2019 (UTC)


 * The main problem with witnesses is that victims were dead along with their relatives and family members. As for claim that Cukurs was not guilty - we don't know if he killed or didn't killed anyone in Latvia, but guilt is very stretchable meaning - Cukurs clearly was not an accountant under Arājs... if he was still alive, he would end his days in prison. Also Cukurs was sent as member of forces to actively find and shoot jews and partisans in Belorussia - how is that less of a crime?
 * Also - "kā arī kriminālprocesā netika noskaidrota neviena konkrēta un dzīvi esoša persona, par kuras darbībām saistībā ar tās iespējamo dalību kādā no šādām ebreju tautības civiliedzīvotāju masveida iznīcināšanas akcijām būtu pamats un nepieciešamība veikt turpmāku izmeklēšanu" basically it says, that criminal case can't be processed, because Cukurs IS NOT ALIVE.
 * Cien. Stulbeni! Neblamēsim paši savu tautu - iemācies lasīt un saprast savā valodā kas tajā rakstā ir teikts, pirms publicē saites!195.147.206.144 (talk) 08:34, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Did the court really need 13 years ("...2006. gadā sākto kriminālprocesu...") just to determine that Cukurs is not alive anymore? –Turaids (talk) 19:10, 6 March 2019 (UTC)


 * And today the verdict of not guilty has been annulled as "the criminal procedure was terminated prematurely, before all the possible investigative and processional actions defined in the Criminal Procedure Law for gathering and verifying evidence had been carried out" (lēmums par kriminālprocesa izbeigšanu pieņemts priekšlaicīgi, pirms izmantotas visas iespējamās Kriminālprocesa likumā paredzētās izmeklēšanas un procesuālās darbības pierādījumu iegūšanā un pārbaudē; http://www.la.lv/atcelts-lemums-par-kriminalprocesa-izbeigsanu-pret-herbertu-cukuru). –Turaids (talk) 18:06, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Two or three witnesses were needed in ancient Hebrew law to establish a claim under civil law or a crime under criminal law. A false witness could lie under oath during judicial proceedings in order to establish guilt in a criminal case, or fault in a civil case. Since judgment based on false testimony could destroy the life or property of innocent human beings and discredit a country's system of justice, the penalty for perjury was very severe. Is it true that nowadays in situations like this we just plainly get away with it?212.3.199.33 (talk) 10:32, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Witnesses
These two articles mention quite a few additional witnesses: http://www.latviannews.lv/news/6232 (use WaybackMachine) http://www.la.lv/br-27-01-rits-herberts-cukurs-slavens-lidotajs-un-vai-kara-noziedznieks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.57.230.186 (talk) 14:02, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Lead paragraph borders on Holocaust denial
The phrasing and choice of presentation of facts in the lead paragraph borders on Holocaust denial. The first sentence, which serves as the summary on a Google search: "Herberts Cukurs was a Latvian aviator". Really?? That's the sentence summing up this individual? That's the Wikipedia takeaway? Surely his one-sentence infamy is that he committed war-time atrocities as a leader of a Latvian Auxiliary Police unit (German Sonderkommando), as attested to by multiple contemporary witnesses. The fact that prior to the war he was an aviator is secondary to this info.SLSolomon (talk) 21:35, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
 * His role in the Holocaust in mentioned in the next sentence so I don't see it as a huge issue. At any rate feel free to improve the lede. Alaexis¿question? 08:14, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Every time
Every time someone here praises Cukurs I will add another citation about his crimes.--QazyQazyQazaqstan (talk) 19:34, 15 October 2023 (UTC)