In 1980; the University of Oklahoma Press published a ten-book series titled Newcomers to a New Land that described and analyzed the role of the major ethnic groups that have contributed to the history of Oklahoma. The series was part of Oklahoma Image; a project sponsored by the Oklahoma Department of Libraries and the Oklahoma Library Association and made possible by a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities.In response to numerous requests; the University of Oklahoma Press has reissued all ten volumes in the series. Published unaltered from the original editions; these books continue to have both historical and cultural value for reasons the series editorial committee stated as well.“Though not large in number as compared to those in some states; immigrants from various European nations left a marked impact on Oklahoma’s history. As in the larger United States; they worked in many economic and social roles that enriched the state’s life. Indians have played a crucial part in Oklahoma’s history; even to giving the state her name. Blacks and Mexicans have also fulfilled a special set of roles; and will continue to affect Oklahoma’s future. The history of each of these groups is unique; well worth remembering to both their heirs and to other people in the state and nation. Their stories come from the past; but continue on the future.â€
#232482 in Books Schocken 2011-03-15 2011-03-15Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 7.77 x 1.00 x 5.32l; .81 #File Name: 0805242600272 pagesGreat product!
Review
116 of 122 people found the following review helpful. Unflinching history and a new classicBy G. Ware Cornell Jr.On the last day of the sixth grade in 1962; as my mother was taking me home from school; the news on the radio was that Adolf Eichmann had been hanged in Israel. If there was a defining moment that influenced my choice of a career and course of study; it would be that car ride.I started reading that afternoon. Each question I had only led to more questions. At first I did not know who Eichmann was.Then; I could not understand how he had been prosecuted in a country which was not even in existence during the Second World War. I wanted to know how the Israelis had gotten hold of him. I was fascinated by the glass booth.I became a history major at Emory where I continued my struggle with the Eichmann trial. In law school at Georgia I studied international law with Professor Dean Rusk who had been Secretary of State in the Kennedy and Johnson administrations. Professor Rusk set forth the legal basis for any country to prosecute crimes against humanity. After law school I served as a law clerk to a federal judge where issues of the application of laws for extra-territorial crimes were often present.In short; I thought I knew all I needed to know to answer the questions which perplexed me as a twelve year old. Professor Lipstadt has proved me wrong.This is a magnificent account of the crimes; capture; confinement; trial; appeal and execution of Adolf Eichmann. Professor Lipstadt; who teaches history at Emory; was given access to Eichmann's memoir in the 1990s during her own defense of an English libel trial brought by a Holocaust denier. But for that access it is doubtful this important work would have ever come to be.Lipstadt unflinchingly examines the myths; realities and politics of these events. Simon Wiesenthal's claim of involvement in Eichmann's capture from Argentina is debunked. The American Jewish Committees peculiar reticence to the indictment and trial is explored. The Argentine government even gets a surprising semi-kudo when she demonstrates it observed Eichmann's takedown and did nothing to interfere with the Mossad team.Historians and lawyers will find answers to many questions in these readable and engrossing pages.7 of 7 people found the following review helpful. FIFTY YEARS AFTER THE EICHMANN TRIALBy Tony HausnerApril 11; 2011 is the 50th anniversary of the start of the trial of Adolph Eichmann; the event that brought the full significance of the Holocaust to the world's attention.The Holocaust has played a major role in my life. First; my parents were fortunate to escape from Vienna shortly after Hitler and the Nazis marched into Austria in 1938 - "Anschluss;" as it was called back then. My parents were then able to get their parents out of Vienna a year later. I was born in 1942 in England and my parents and I moved to the U.S. in 1950. Other members of my family were not so fortunate. Many of them died in the Holocaust. On several occasions in my first 15 years after we moved to the U.S.; I was the recipient of anti-Semitic remarks. All of these events made me feel that Jews were a much hated people.In 1993; I learned that the late Gideon Hausner; the chief prosecutor in the Eichmann trial; was a distant cousin. I got to know his widow; son and daughter and we became very close. I learned that Gideon was attorney general of Israel at the time of the trial. Later; he was the founding President of the Yad Vashem; the Israel-based center for documentation; research; education and commemoration of the Holocaust. He also served as a member of the Israeli Knesset (Parliament) for many years; and a minister at large in Golda Meir's Cabinet. Historian Deborah Lipstadt has just written a vital account of the trial of Eichmann; the SS officer who managed the logistics of setting up death camps and transporting Jews to them.In "The Eichmann Trial;" (Nextbookpress); Lipstadt makes the point that it was the volume of witnesses who testified that finally put a face on the horror of the Final Solution. Even though many who testified were not directly affected by Eichmann's cruelty; their eyewitness accounts of calamity and destruction were riveting. They ensured that the unspeakable tragedy did; in fact; have a voice.In contrast; Lipstadt notes; the Nuremberg trials just after the close of World War II were chiefly examinations of documents. The most poignant moment of those trials was the use of film of emaciated survivors taken by liberators of the concentration camps.The decision by Gideon Hausner to call a multitude of witnesses was a risk. Lipstadt writes that it was a questionable legal strategy and that Eichmann's judges questioned the relevance. But the personal narratives won out.The testimony "would transform the trial from an important war-crimes trial into an event that would have enduring significance;" Lipstadt said. "It would give a voice to the victims that they had not had before."The Eichmann trial was one of the first times the world heard that many Jews actively fought German tyranny. Witnesses recalled the Warsaw ghetto uprisings; fierce and brave resistance ultimately crushed by the Nazis who leveled the area with tanks and heavy artillery. This challenged a prevailing view of passivity in the face of the German regime's power.The trial was significant in showing that the Holocaust was unique and was not just another example of anti-Semitism throughout world history. The enormity of the testimony proved the Holocaust "was an unprecedented crime....No one had ever tried to wipe out an entire people and then erase any vestige either of them or the crime;" Lipstadt wrote. The trial's location also was key. The Eichmann trial was the first of the Holocaust aftermath to be held in Israel. It became a national obsession; with citizens glued to radios for hours listening to the proceedings. Although Hausner was opposed to the death penalty and later supported the banning of capital punishment from Israeli law; he made an exception in Eichmann's case.The significance and reach of this legal case has been much debated; particularly by political theorist Hannah Arendt; who wrote "Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil;" a book that was highly critical of the trial. Arendt particularly took Jews to task for failing to fight back against the Nazis; and even in some cases helping to facilitate their own destruction. Lipstadt points out that they did fight back in some instances and that in any case; the rest of the world made very little attempt to help the Jews.Lipstadt also disagrees with prosecutor Hausner's version of Eichmann's role; which was described in his book; "Justice in Jerusalem." Hausner considered Eichmann as the chief architect behind the entire Holocaust; including the concentration camps; ghettos and mass graves. He believed that Eichmann developed the plans that led to most of the deaths in the Holocaust. But Lipstadt describes Eichmann as the chief operating officer carrying out orders; pointing out he made only minor changes to commands. Yet she details how Eichmann allowed a number of people to escape by leaving Europe instead of reporting to death camps. Such autonomy seems to argue against her view that he was more functionary than commander.Lipstadt is both complimentary and critical of Hausner's handling of the trial. I am not in a position to assess her comments as I have not reviewed the trial's tapes. However; as noted earlier; she particularly acknowledges that Hausner's decision to call 100 witnesses was most important because it placed a face on the holocaust. The world felt the full significance of the Holocaust and that endures to today. .Lipstadt also underplays the significance of Simon Wiesenthal in the Eichmann trial and Wiesenthal's role in capturing many other Nazi war criminals. She correctly notes that he did not play the key role in Eichmann's capture in Argentina. However; as was described by author Tom Segev in his recent biography of Wiesenthal; Weisenthal fought the efforts of the Eichmann family to have their relative declared legally dead. This led to the continued efforts to find and ultimately capture him.Like the Eichmann trial; Lipstadt herself played a significant role in convincing the world that the horrors ofthe Holocaust actually occurred. She and her publisher; Penguin Books; were sued by David Irving over her earlier book; "Denying the Holocaust." She had described some of Irving's writings and public statements as denying the Holocaust. An English court ruled in Lipstadt's favor after a highly publicized trial; constituting an important victory against deniers.Similarly; fifty years ago; the Eichmann trial played an essential role in convincing the world of the truth of genocide. Although it strains credulity that deniers continue to exist; the dismissive statements of some world leaders in Iran and elsewhere show that attention must be paid to eyewitness accounts of the Holocaust. "The Eichmann Trial;" as well as a video of the trial produced by the Public Broadcasting System in 1997 are needed antidotes to the resilience of misinformation that pollutes truth.See New York Times book review section on 42011 for an excellent review of the book. (Tony Hausner lives in Silver Spring; Md.)1 of 1 people found the following review helpful. Solid History and ContextBy Kindle CustomerThis is a personal response or rebuttal of sorts to Arendt; as well as a reflection of the author's own trial and comparison of the same to the Eichmann trial.Although well steeped in the topic; I still learned plenty -- in particular the real-time reaction to the capture and trial as it was happening and the criticism of same from both American Jewish and non-Jewish quarters. I also found the the whole topic of how we were coming to terms with survivors and transitioning from "displaced persons" to the Holocaust and what that meant to be very insightful and well-done.Though not essential; Ms. Lipstadt offers a different perspective and one well worth exploring.
