What does everyone think of the Nuremberg Trials-Did they prove Nazi guilt?

[Bitsko]

Of course the trials proved the guilt of the Nazi's. Too bad they didn't go a bit further and put Henry Ford's corpse and some IBM execs in the stand along with Goering and the rest of that heinous crew.

Of course, I'm being facetious. It's only unfortunate that in this day and age the question has to be asked.

 

[Biscuit]

Jerry Wright hasn't been back since 12.18.10

I guess I we were a little rough with the little goose stepper.

 

[9/11-investigator]

Jerry Wright hasn't been back since 12.18.10

I guess I we were a little rough with the little goose stepper.

Of course he is not back, he said so himself:

"Have at it boys, I am done with this thread."

Difficulty understanding plain English?

Any evidence that he is "little goose stepper"? Of course not.

 

[9/11-investigator]

Of course the trials proved the guilt of the Nazi's. Too bad they didn't go a bit further and put Henry Ford's corpse and some IBM execs in the stand along with Goering and the rest of that heinous crew.

Of course, I'm being facetious. It's only unfortunate that in this day and age the question has to be asked.

Not Guilty at Nuremberg: The German Defense Case

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v09/v09p353_Brecht.html

http://www.cwporter.com/innocent.htm

Unfortunately for you the entire Nuremberg trial is going to be analysed top to bottom using the internet this time. That will prove to be disastrous for the Anglo/Soviet case. It was one big scam; even an American investigation team admitted that nearly all Germans were tortured ('testicles kicked beyond repair' was the standard Anglo procedure).

December 14, 1948, Judge van Roden said :

“All but two of the Germans in the 139 cases we investigated had been kicked in the testicles beyond repair. This was standard operating procedure with our American investigators.”

It was a stalinist showtrial, as even Sir Norman Birkett, British alternate judge at the Nuremberg Tribunal, explained in a private letter in April 1946:

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v12/v12p167_Webera.html

"the trial is only in form a judicial process and its main importance is political."

Look at the human material running the show:

Judge Iola T. Nikitchenko, who presided at the Tribunal's solemn opening session, was a vice-chairman of the supreme court of the USSR before and after his service at Nuremberg. In August 1936 he had been a judge at the infamous Moscow show trial of Zinoviev and Kamenev.

The Jews admitted that in essence it was their trial:

Indicative of the largely political nature of the Nuremberg process was the important Jewish role in organizing these trials. Nahum Goldmann, one-time president of both the World Jewish Congress and the World Zionist Organization, reported in his memoir that the Nuremberg Tribunal was the brain-child of World Jewish Congress officials. Only after persistent effort were WJC officials able to persuade Allied leaders to accept the idea, he added.

Here another American judge (Iowa Supreme Court justice) who participated in Nuremberg:

Wennerstrum cautiously referred to the extensive Jewish involvement in the Nuremberg process. "The entire atmosphere here is unwholesome ... Lawyers, clerks, interpreters and researchers were employed who became Americans only in recent years, whose backgrounds were imbedded in Europe's hatreds and prejudices."

Here a devastating high level condemnation of this farce:

America's leading jurist was dismayed by the Nuremberg process. US Supreme Court Chief Justice Harlan Fiske Stone remarked with irritation: "[Chief US prosecutor] Jackson is away conducting his high-grade lynching party in Nuremberg. I don't mind what he does to the Nazis, but I hate to see the pretense that he is running a court and proceeding according to common law. This is a little too sanctimonious a fraud to meet my old-fashioned ideas."

More prominent rejections:

In Congress, US Representative Lawrence H. Smith of Wisconsin declared: "The Nuremberg trials are so repugnant to the Anglo-Saxon principles of justice that we must forever be ashamed of that page in our history ... The Nuremberg farce represents a revenge policy at its worst."

'Revenge' is too soft a word if you really understand what happened before and during WW2. WW2 was organized both by the USSR and USA, both preying on Europe and enabled by foolish acting British and French, who thought that Europe could be pushed back into the 1919 Versailles order, with Germany crippled. Now entire Europe was crippled. Nuremberg finished the job of intended destruction of Europe by the 2 global parvenues USSR and USA.

You think that the prosecution was honest enough to let all aspects of WW2 discussed? Of course not:

Field-Marshal Wilhelm Keitel’s lawyers challenged the British government in March 1946 to produce certain foreign office and cabinet documents relating to Churchill’s identical plans for the invasion of neutral Scandinavia. The request caused a mild panic in Whitehall. Cabinet secretary Sir Norman Brooke warned the foreign office that when he took the stand Keitel was expected to claim that Hitler’s invasion of Norway had been undertaken to anticipate a Franco-British plan to go into Norway. The embarrassing thing, said Brooke, was that this defence claim was true – it would 'be supported by documents captured by the Germans in France including records of the meetings of the Supreme War Council'.

And finally Thomas Dodd, former US Senator and top American Nuremberg prosecutor:

You know how I have despised anti-Semitism. You know how strongly I feel toward those who preach intolerance of any kind. With that knowledge — you will understand when I tell you that this staff is about seventy-five percent Jewish. Now my point is that the Jews should stay away from this trial — for their own sake. For — mark this well — the charge ‘a war for the Jews’ is still being made and in the post-war years it will be made again and again. The too large percentage of Jewish men and women here will be cited as proof of this charge.

Well, well, straight from the horses mouth.

It was a setup from the start. But now that we have the internet Anglosphere will not survive as a political entity in it's present form as a consequence of the historic truth coming out. And there are lot of people waiting to fill in the power vacuum that will result from it.

 

[gtm]

Not Guilty at Nuremberg: The German Defense Case

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v09/v09p353_Brecht.html

http://www.cwporter.com/innocent.htm

Unfortunately for you the entire Nuremberg trial is going to be analysed top to bottom using the internet this time. That will prove to be disastrous for the Anglo/Soviet case. It was one big scam; even an American investigation team admitted that nearly all Germans were tortured ('testicles kicked beyond repair' was the standard Anglo procedure).

December 14, 1948, Judge van Roden said :



It was a stalinist showtrial, as even Sir Norman Birkett, British alternate judge at the Nuremberg Tribunal, explained in a private letter in April 1946:

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v12/v12p167_Webera.html



Look at the human material running the show:



The Jews admitted that in essence it was their trial:



Here another American judge (Iowa Supreme Court justice) who participated in Nuremberg:



Here a devastating high level condemnation of this farce:



More prominent rejections:



'Revenge' is too soft a word if you really understand what happened before and during WW2. WW2 was organized both by the USSR and USA, both preying on Europe and enabled by foolish acting British and French, who thought that Europe could be pushed back into the 1919 Versailles order, with Germany crippled. Now entire Europe was crippled. Nuremberg finished the job of intended destruction of Europe by the 2 global parvenues USSR and USA.

You think that the prosecution was honest enough to let all aspects of WW2 discussed? Of course not:



And finally Thomas Dodd, former US Senator and top American Nuremberg prosecutor:



Well, well, straight from the horses mouth.

It was a setup from the start. But now that we have the internet Anglosphere will not survive as a political entity in it's present form as a consequence of the historic truth coming out. And there are lot of people waiting to fill in the power vacuum that will result from it.

It's called victors justice, my dear Franz Liebkind.

I can't think of anyone (aside from the sort scum who inhabit forums such as stormfront etc) who wouldn't agree that most of Defendants deserved a good length of rope. However, their guilt was proven beyond doubt - incriminating documents, confessions, evidence in chief from a multitude victims etc. At least they got the semblence of a trial & an opportuinity to make their peace with their maker (which is far less than the millions of people they butchered got)

 

[ddt]

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v09/v09p353_Brecht.html

http://www.cwporter.com/innocent.htm

You do have other sources than the IHR and other professional liars?

Unfortunately for you the entire Nuremberg trial is going to be analysed top to bottom using the internet this time.

What about making one single point about what was wrong with the trial that affected the outcome. Was the evidence wrong? Did any of the defendants ever claim that?

That will prove to be disastrous for the Anglo/Soviet case. It was one big scam; even an American investigation team admitted that nearly all Germans were tortured ('testicles kicked beyond repair' was the standard Anglo procedure).

Evidence?

Look at the human material running the show:

Judge Iola T. Nikitchenko, who presided at the Tribunal's solemn opening session, was a vice-chairman of the supreme court of the USSR before and after his service at Nuremberg. In August 1936 he had been a judge at the infamous Moscow show trial of Zinoviev and Kamenev.

The Jews admitted that in essence it was their trial:

You do realize the absurdity of these two statements directly next to each other? Nikitchenko was responsible for convicting the two Jews on the Politburo, but the Jews were running the show.

 

[9/11-investigator]

What about making one single point about what was wrong with the trial that affected the outcome. Was the evidence wrong? Did any of the defendants ever claim that?

It is difficult making statements about evidence when dangling from a rope, would you not think?

You do realize the absurdity of these two statements directly next to each other? Nikitchenko was responsible for convicting the two Jews on the Politburo, but the Jews were running the show.

Not really. First of all these 2 jewish bolsheviks were certainly not tried because they were Jews, right? For the rest we have discussed earlier that although Bolshevism was the result of a pure Jewish coup in 1917, the Jews had lost their grip on the USSR by the time of this Moscow trial. But no problem, they still had the USA (until today for a couple of years more) and I assume that when Thomas Dodd said that 75% of the Nuremberg staff was jewish, that most of them originated from Anglosphere, correct me if I am wrong. See, no contradictions.

 

[ddt]

It is difficult making statements about evidence when dangling from a rope, would you not think?

They didn't dangle from a rope until after their conviction.

Not really. First of all these 2 jewish bolsheviks were certainly not tried because they were Jews, right? For the rest we have discussed earlier that although Bolshevism was the result of a pure Jewish coup in 1917,

This claim has thoroughly been debunked in an earlier thread.

the Jews had lost their grip on the USSR by the time of this Moscow trial. But no problem, they still had the USA (until today for a couple of years more) and I assume that when Thomas Dodd said that 75% of the Nuremberg staff was jewish, that most of them originated from Anglosphere, correct me if I am wrong. See, no contradictions.

(a) for me to believe the claim that Thomas Dodd said that, you have to come up with something more trustworthy than a denier (=liar) blog
(b) please list the whole staff and give evidence of 75% of them being Jewish.
(c) the UK and US were 2 of the 4 nations pursuing the IMT. For 75% you'd need French and/or SU staff. But we already knew that liars deniers were poor at arithmetic.

 

[uke2se]

Could you confine your hate to a single thread, Nein11? The forum is starting to smell.

 

[9/11-investigator]

This claim has thoroughly been debunked in an earlier thread.

There was not even an attempt to seriously debunk this, Jews responsible for the largest social deaster in human history, communism:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6665096&postcount=3755
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6733092&postcount=3898

(a) for me to believe the claim that Thomas Dodd said that, you have to come up with something more trustworthy than a denier (=liar) blog
(b) please list the whole staff and give evidence of 75% of them being Jewish.
(c) the UK and US were 2 of the 4 nations pursuing the IMT. For 75% you'd need French and/or SU staff. But we already knew that liars deniers were poor at arithmetic.

Here we go, it was in a letter Sept. 25, 1945, from Thomas Dodd to his son Chris:

http://www.projo.com/news/mcharlesbakst/SE_BAKST_COLUMN_30_09-30-07_CR78R0C.1efbfe6.html

Link to philosemetic site.

Now ddt has to admit (to himself) that IMT was a Jewish operation. Am curious with what arguments he is going to try to lie himself out of this mess as he certainly will. Ddt as we remember refused to reveal his identity since he deemed this 'irrelevant'. Duck. Quack. Waddle.

 

[9/11-investigator]

Could you confine your hate to a single thread, Nein11? The forum is starting to smell.

It was ddt who invited me here. But your 'love' does not smell of roses either, my 'swedish' friend.
But don't worry, I have so many yellow cards for whatever reason, that I expect that your ordeal soon will be over and you will be 'saved by the bell' and you can tell each other what you want to hear. It will be boring but safe.

 

[ddt]

This claim has thoroughly been debunked in an earlier thread.

There was not even an attempt to seriously debunk this, Jews responsible for the largest social deaster in human history, communism:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6665096&postcount=3755
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6733092&postcount=3898

There was a previous thread on this with another brownshirt called "Uninvolved". I also note that uk2se responded to you by pointing you to the relevant wikipedia page. Robert Wilton was a liar.

Here we go, it was in a letter Sept. 25, 1945, from Thomas Dodd to his son Chris:

http://www.projo.com/news/mcharlesbakst/SE_BAKST_COLUMN_30_09-30-07_CR78R0C.1efbfe6.html

Link to philosemetic site.

You know more than I do of the Providence Journal? First time I hear of the paper...

Now ddt has to admit (to himself) that IMT was a Jewish operation. Am curious with what arguments he is going to try to lie himself out of this mess as he certainly will. Ddt as we remember refused to reveal his identity since he deemed this 'irrelevant'. Duck. Quack. Waddle.

You failed on points (b) and (c). I'm still waiting for a full list of staff names and evidence of 75% of them being Jewish. But well, we already know how you are with evidence. You haven't been able to trace down a single Dutch Jew you claim hasn't been murdered at Auschwitz or Sobibor.

It was ddt who invited me here. But your 'love' does not smell of roses either, my 'swedish' friend.
But don't worry, I have so many yellow cards for whatever reason, that I expect that your ordeal soon will be over and you will be 'saved by the bell' and you can tell each other what you want to hear. It will be boring but safe.

I didn't invite you hear, I just pointed you to this thread in the hope it would preempt having the same inane discussion with another brownshirt (i.e., with you). I do invite you though, to divulge your full name and address; that would make yellow cards here a much smaller worry of yours.

 

[uke2se]

It was ddt who invited me here. But your 'love' does not smell of roses either, my 'swedish' friend.
But don't worry, I have so many yellow cards for whatever reason, that I expect that your ordeal soon will be over and you will be 'saved by the bell' and you can tell each other what you want to hear. It will be boring but safe.

No, it will be free of your particular brand of hate. Have a nice vacation.

 

[TSR]

.
And yet again, niney ignores the fact the comments made about torture related to the *Malmedy* trial and so are off topic for *this* thread.


Zie also ignores that a later Senate subcommittee specifically repudiated the accusations of torture, and completely rejected the allegations of Judge Van Roden.


.

 

[Raymondo]

Hitler only had one,as the song says.

As usual - not true. Adf.

 

[dudalb]

What does the OP Mean by Guilt?
The the Nazis as a whole were guilty of up to that point unimaginable crimes on a scale unheard of? Or the Guilt of the individual defendents?
The First:Yeah, you bet that was proven by the evidence introduced in the trial.
The Second:For the most part yes, although I might quibble with a couple of the verdicts. (Julius Striecher for instance. He was one of the most disgusting human beings who ever lived,but I don't think he had commited a crime worthy of the Death Penalty;others who did a lot more in the actual crimes got off a lot easier).

 

[dudalb]

As usual - not true. Adf.

It's called humor, pal.
And I think I know where this new guy is heading, and it ain't pretty....


But that little song was certainnly wrong about Goebbles having no b....s at all, as the constant stream of scandels about his activities shows.....

 

[Revdude]

What does the OP Mean by Guilt?
The the Nazis as a whole were guilty of up to that point unimaginable crimes on a scale unheard of? Or the Guilt of the individual defendents?
The First:Yeah, you bet that was proven by the evidence introduced in the trial.
The Second:For the most part yes, although I might quibble with a couple of the verdicts. (Julius Striecher for instance. He was one of the most disgusting human beings who ever lived,but I don't think he had commited a crime worthy of the Death Penalty;others who did a lot more in the actual crimes got off a lot easier).

I don't agree at all!
How was guilt proven at the Nuremberg Trial?
What evidence are you talking about?
The movie?
Witness testimonies?
Judicial Notice?

None of the above constitutes any real evidence as each can be manipulated to achieve a desired outcome.

So what evidence has convinced you?

I don't know much about Streicher, but I understand he was a schoolteacher and public speaker. He published a newspaper as well.

What makes him "one of the most disgusting human beings who ever lived"?

 

[TSR]

None of the above constitutes any real evidence as each can be manipulated to achieve a desired outcome.

.
Any evidence *can* be manipulated.

Up to you to show that it *was*.

Ball's in your court, Ace.
.

 

[Revdude]

.
Any evidence *can* be manipulated.

Up to you to show that it *was*.

Ball's in your court, Ace.
.

Didn't say it *was*, said it could be.
Reasonable doubt exists.
So back to my question to dudalb.

What evidence are you talking about, that was so convincing to you?