Nuremberg Trials or Nuremberg Lynch Mob

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
You have imaginary enemies and they seem to be related to Jews in some form or another.
How about the ones who fly off at any reference to Jews at all, is that not the 'same illness' or is that just a way to stop any/all discussion.

For my own case I got the Nazi Jew Hater label a few years back (this place). Most of the members don't mind bring up my views on the Holocaust on any thread I visit, that's fine (sort of), that doesn't make my views wrong or historically inaccurate.
What imaginary enemies do they see?
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
The war crimes trials of Israel will be held in Jeruselem, if there's enough buildings left standing. The stage is already set for total war. Guess who everyones favourite target will be? There isn't much can be done to stop it. To bad things could have been different with partners for peace.
 

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
Yes the losers are on trial and so they should have been. In fact there should have been a
lot more shot, including the Mayors and councils that cooperated with the Nazi regime and
they knew what was going on. In addition, we should have put on trial those in occupied
countries that collaborated. My dad was telling me the worst in his experience were in the
country of Belgium. He said the Canadians rode the backs of the convoy trucks with their
rifles and if anyone wrote down the numbers of their units they shot them right in the street.

Those were not war crimes they were reality, if the Nazis committed these crimes and they
did they should have been executed when caught and not all of them were. The other part of
the commentary is that, many were hired by the United States other allies in the west and
even the Russians. That part of your post is unfortunately true, many were spared but then
many of the industrialists in the west like Ford, Old Man Kennedy and others were anti Semites.
The Churches, and politicians, foreign diplomats and others were part of the biggest crime in
history including the bankers and they got away with it. Even today we are connected to this
madness, as the present Pope was a member of the Hitler Youth. The current church has in
fact carried on like nothing ever happened.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
Yes the losers are on trial and so they should have been. In fact there should have been a
lot more shot, including the Mayors and councils that cooperated with the Nazi regime and they knew what was going on.
So when did we drop those high moral standards that we now support any invasion anywhere the US says? How very Nazi like of us. The details in the Nuremberg Trials don't point to one thing being honorable unless you hold Kangaroo Courts as the best justice system around.

In addition, we should have put on trial those in occupied countries that collaborated. My dad was telling me the worst in his experience were in the country of Belgium. He said the Canadians rode the backs of the convoy trucks with their
rifles and if anyone wrote down the numbers of their units they shot them right in the street. Those were not war crimes they were reality, if the Nazis committed these crimes and they did they should have been executed when caught and not all of them were.
I'm pretty sure they were, it's called targeting civilians, it was a war-crime that was not prosecuted. Again a practice the Allies used that made the on par with any of the hard-line Nazis. It may explain your morals though, only your side gets to kill civilians with impunity.

The other part of the commentary is that, many were hired by the United States other allies in the west and
even the Russians. That part of your post is unfortunately true, many were spared but then
many of the industrialists in the west like Ford, Old Man Kennedy and others were anti Semites.
Try to get the family names right, Bush was the Nazi collaborator, JFK was making speeches about all the back-room deals going down all over the place so I doubt his dad was part of that circle which would include the then US President when you consider the way Pearl Harbor was used as the pretext to entering the war as a combatant. The instigators, Rothschild assets.
The Churches, and politicians, foreign diplomats and others were part of the biggest crime in history including the bankers and they got away with it.
Actually the biggest crime was the Rothschild plan to acquire the Holy Land as a posession. They were even willing to 'arrange' two WW's to achieve that goal. Since every nation involved is still paying off the money taht those wars cost I would classify that as the biggest crime that never got prosecuted.

Even today we are connected to this madness, as the present Pope was a member of the Hitler Youth. The current church has in
fact carried on like nothing ever happened.
Ever ask yourself why you would fight a war that cost many citizens their lives and the 'hire' the worst of the Nazis SS Officers to run your new secret police services? Win the war and then give the losers the keys to the Nation in that the SS was the power in Germany over the 'normal soldier' who did all the grunt work. We lost the war as that group has lead to all sorts of **** worldwide, even today they are the real power brokers as that is who does the bidding of the World Banks rather than the citizens of the US. It is all apparently a smoke and mirror show. What did the Jews hope to get out of this action described below.

Holocaust-Referenz : Die "jüdischen Kriegserklärungen": Daily Express, englischer Originaltext

The Zionist War on Nazi Germany

(in part)
Hitler's March 28, 1933 speech ordering a boycott against Jewish stores and goods was in direct response to the declaration of war on Germany by the worldwide Jewish leadership.



That same spring of 1933 there began a period of private cooperation between the German government and the Zionist movement in Germany and worldwide to increase the flow of German-Jewish immigrants and capital to Palestine.



Growing anti-Semitism in Germany and by the German government in response to the boycott played into the hands of the Zionist leaders. Prior to the escalation of anti-Semitism as a result of the boycott the majority of German Jews had little sympathy for the Zionist cause of promoting the immigration of world Jewry to Palestine. Making the situation in Germany as uncomfortable for the Jews as possible, in cooperation with German National Socialism, was part of the Zionist plan to achieve their goal of populating Palestine with a Jewish majority.


"For all intents and purposes, the National Socialist government was the best thing to happen to Zionism in its history, for it "proved" to many Jews that Europeans were irredeemably anti-Jewish and that Palestine was the only answer: Zionism came to represent the overwhelming mjaority of Jews solely by trickery and cooperation with Adolf Hitler." [1]


____________________

Sources:
[1] Barnes Review, "The Jewish Declaration of War on Nazi Germany, The Economic Boycott of 1933"
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
Your version of the trials goes how???

A double standard

In conducting the Nuremberg trials, the Allied governments themselves violated international law. For one thing, their treatment of the German defendants and the military prisoners who testified violated articles 56, 58 and others of the Geneva convention of July 1929. (note 23)
Justice -- as opposed to vengeance -- is a standard that is applied impartially. At Nuremberg, though, standards of "justice" applied only to the vanquished. The four powers that sat in judgment were themselves guilty of many of the very crimes they accused the German leaders of committing. (note 24) Chief US prosecutor Robert Jackson privately acknowledged in a letter to President Truman that the Allies (note 25)
have done or are doing some of the very things we are prosecuting the Germans for. The French are so violating the Geneva Convention in the treatment of [German] prisoners of war that our command is taking back prisoners sent to them [for forced labor in France]. We are prosecuting plunder and our Allies are practicing it. We say aggressive war is a crime and one of our allies asserts sovereignty over the Baltic States based on no title except conquest.
In violation of the first Nuremberg count of "planning, preparation, initiating or waging a war of aggression," the Soviet Union attacked Finland in December 1939 (and was expelled from the League of Nations as a result). A few months later the Red Army invaded Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, and ruthlessly incorporated them into the Soviet Union. The postwar French government violated international law and the Nuremberg charge of "maltreatment of prisoners of war" by employing large numbers of German prisoners of war as forced laborers in France. In 1945 the United States, Britain and the Soviet Union jointly agreed to the brutal deportation of more than ten million Germans from their ancient homes in eastern and central Europe, a violation of the Nuremberg count of "deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population." (note 26)
While Allied prosecutors charged the defendants with a "crime against peace" in planning the German invasion of Norway in 1940, the British government eventually had to admit that Britain and France were themselves guilty of the same "crime" in preparing a military invasion of Norway, code-named "Stratford," before the German move. And in August 1941, Britain and the Soviet Union jointly invaded and occupied Iran, a neutral nation. (note 27)
Given this record, it is hardly surprising that the four governments that organized the Nuremberg trial of 1945-1946 included no definition of "aggression" in the Tribunal's Charter. (note 28)
Mikhail Vozlenski, a Soviet historian who served as a translator at the Nuremberg Tribunal in 1946, later recalled that he and the other Soviet personnel felt out of place there because the alleged crimes of the German leaders were "the norm of our life" in the Soviet Union. (note 29) The Soviet role in the proceedings, which the United States fully supported, moved American diplomat and historian George F. Kennan to condemn the entire Nuremberg enterprise as a "horror" and a "mockery." (note 30)
Nuremberg's double standard was condemned at the time by the British weekly The Economist. It pointed out that whereas both Britain and France had supported the expulsion of the Soviet Union from the League of Nations in 1939 for its unprovoked attack against Finland, just six years later these same two governments were cooperating with the USSR as a respected equal at Nuremberg. "Nor should the Western world console itself that the Russians alone stand condemned at the bar of the Allies' own justice," the Economist editorial went on. It continued: (note 31)
... Among crimes against humanity stands the offence of the indiscriminate bombing of civilian populations. Can the Americans who dropped the atom bomb and the British who destroyed the cities of western Germany plead "not guilty" on this count? Crimes against humanity also include the mass expulsion of populations. Can the Anglo-Saxon leaders who at Potsdam condoned the expulsion of millions of Germans from their homes hold themselves completely innocent?... The nations sitting in judgment [at Nuremberg] have so clearly proclaimed themselves exempt from the law which they have administered.
An official with the postwar US military occupation administration in Germany commented: "What good are the high-flown morals enunciated at Nuremberg if the Americans have agreed to such things as deportation in documents which bear official signatures, and which, therefore, give the Allies the legal right to do the things which at Nuremberg they described as immoral?" (note 32)
If the Nuremberg Tribunal's standards had been applied to the victors of the Second World War, American General and supreme Allied commander in Europe Dwight Eisenhower would have been hanged. At the end of the war Eisenhower ordered that German prisoners in American military custody were no longer to be treated according to the Geneva Convention on the treatment of prisoners of war. This violation of international law removed masses of Germans from the protection of the International Red Cross (ICRC), and condemned hundreds of thousands of them to slow death by starvation and disease. (note 33)
Perhaps nothing better illustrates the essentially unfair character of the Nuremberg proceedings than the treatment of Rudolf Hess, Hitler's deputy. He was sentenced to life imprisonment even though he alone of leading figures of the countries involved in the Second World War risked his life in a dangerous but fruitless effort to conclude peace between two of the warring nations. British historian A.J.P. Taylor once succinctly summed up the injustice of the Hess case and, by implication, of the entire Nuremberg enterprise: (note 34)
Hess came to this country in 1941 as an ambassador of peace. He came with the ... intention of restoring peace between Great Britain and Germany. He acted in good faith. He fell into our hands and was quite unjustly treated as a prisoner of war. After the war, we should have released him. Instead, the British government of the time delivered him for sentencing to the International Tribunal at Nuremberg ... No crime has ever been proved against Hess ... As far as the records show, he was never at even one of the secret discussions at which Hitler explained his war plans.
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
The Nuremberg Trials were military tribunals. The charges against the chief Nazi architects of death and destruction were:

1. Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of a crime against peace
2. Planning, initiating and waging wars of aggression and other crimes against peace
3. War crimes
4. Crimes against humanity

I agree with holding people responsible for their actions through a fair and impartial process. These trials were victor's justice similar to a lynching, not fair nor impartial. However fair and impartial trials probably would have found most if not all of these people guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Sometimes lynch mobs do lynch guilty people.

If the Germans had won, some Allied Leaders like Bomber Harris probably would have faced victor's justice too:
Sir Arthur Harris, 1st Baronet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bomber Harris own words prove he deliberately committed war crimes:
"the aim of the Combined Bomber Offensive...should be unambiguously stated [as] the destruction of German cities, the killing of German workers, and the disruption of civilized life throughout Germany."

"the destruction of houses, public utilities, transport and lives, the creation of a refugee problem on an unprecedented scale, and the breakdown of morale both at home and at the battle fronts by fear of extended and intensified bombing, are accepted and intended aims of our bombing policy. They are not by-products of attempts to hit factories."
Once the war was over, the Allies executed or imprisoned most of the Nazis leaders including Harris's Nazi equivalent, Goering. Bomber Harris moved to South Africa and kept a low profile for years.

To be fair, Britain was on the front line of a total war and faced Nazi invasion/occupation. But at the end of the war, the Nazi Germans were in a similar desperate situation. However, nothing can justify or excuse the deliberate extermination of people because of who they are. Those crimes were committed out of greed, lust for power, hate and malice.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

If we held our current and recent leaders to the same standard of justice as the Nuremberg Trials, many of them would also be found guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The Iraq war was an aggressive war of expansion and a crime against peace. I doubt any Nazis would have been forgiven if they claimed they started their aggressive war of expansion based on faulty intel.

PM Harper unshakably supports Israel's war crimes and their crime against humanity blockade of humanitarian aid. Even the Nazis didn't block humanitarian food and medical aid.

Israel has constructed a series of concentration camps eerily similar to the ones built by the Nazis. Maybe one day the Israelis will start exterminating their undesirables or maybe they won't. But just like the Nazis, the Israeli government awards rights based on who people are, not what they did. Israel's leaders are walking on the same path as the Nazis. They even have a similar policy to determine level of Jewishness. Master Race vs God's Chosen People... fundamentally its about one group of people oppressing another group. In the case of Nazi Germany, those policies led to the mass extermination of millions of people. It remains to be seen how far Israel will take their policies of hate and discrimination. Each day, Israel seems to hit a new low on the slippery path toward mass extermination..

It seems we learned little as a result of WW II and the Holocaust. Our leaders are still motivated by greed and lust for power, just like the Nazis. We (people in general) are just as easily manipulated by fear and hate into supporting unprovoked wars and rounding people up and putting them in concentration camps as the Germans were back in 1930's.
 
Last edited:

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
That's because you support the Nazis and admire them.
I would ask you to compare the logic of that statement, but that might not get any worthwhile results. If I have objection to the way the trials were run why would I be in support of a group that doing a lot worse to people than running a crooked court. If you think this would be the way the STL will be run you might be right, the same 'group' is behind the investigation in an attempt to smear Hezbollah for an assignation in Lebanon in '05. The temptation will be there but too much exposure to the details makes an true investigation possible. The views like the one below would be headlines on the same day they were attempted.

(in part)
The problem of evidence

The victorious Allies thoroughly scoured Germany for every scrap of paper that might be used to incriminate the defeated regime. Never before or since have a nation's records been so completely ransacked. In addition to official government papers, including countless secret documents tracing Germany's wartime Jewish policy, the Allies confiscated the records of the National Socialist Party and its affiliated organizations, as well as those of numerous private business firms, institutions and individuals. The sheer quantity of paper seized is staggering. For example, the records of the German Foreign Office confiscated by US officials amounted to some 485 tons of paper. (note 35)
From this mountain of paper, US military personnel alone selected some two thousand documents considered most incriminating for use in the main Nuremberg trial. The tons of confiscated records were later shipped to the United States. It is estimated that in the US National Archives alone, more than one million pages of documents on the Third Reich's Jewish policy are on file. Many hundreds of these Nuremberg documents have since been published, most notably by the U.S. government in the 42-volume "blue series" record of the main Nuremberg trial, the 15-volume "green series" record of the "second string" Nuremberg trials, and in the 11-volume "red series." (note 36)
It is as if governments hostile to the United States were to seize the top secret files of the Pentagon and CIA, and then selectively publish the most embarrassing and incriminating documents from the vast collection.
In the years since the Nuremberg trials, historians of many different countries have carefully sifted through the German records, including countless documents that were not available to the Nuremberg prosecutors. Historians have been able to compare and cross-check the records of different ministries and agencies, as well as numerous private diaries and papers. (note 37)
And yet, out of this great mass of paper, not a single document has ever been found that confirms or even refers to an extermination program. A number of historians have commented on this remarkable "gap" in the evidence. French-Jewish historian Leon Poliakov, for example, noted in his best-known Holocaust work:
The archives of the Third Reich and the depositions and accounts of its leaders make possible a reconstruction, down to the last detail, of the origin and development of the plans for aggression, the military campaigns, and the whole array of procedures by which the Nazis intended to reshape the world to their liking. Only the campaign to exterminate the Jews, as regards its conception as well as many other essential aspects, remains shrouded in darkness.
No documents of a plan for exterminating the Jews have ever been found, he added, because "perhaps none ever existed." (note 38)
At Nuremberg, the German documents were in the custody of the Allied prosecutors, who did not permit defense attorneys to make their own selections of the material. Historian Werner Maser has pointed out that at Nuremberg "thousands of documents which seemed likely possibly to incriminate the Allies and exonerate the defendants suddenly disappeared... There is much evidence that documents were confiscated, concealed from the defense or even stolen in 1945." Other important documents suddenly "disappeared" when specifically requested by defense attorneys. Officials at the National Archives in Washington have confirmed to this writer on several occasions that the originals of numerous Nuremberg documents remain "lost" to this day. The Tribunal refused to allow in evidence several collections of German and captured foreign documents published during the war as German Foreign Office "White Books." Most of the 1,809 affidavits prepared by the Nuremberg defense have never been made public. (note 39)
Among the documents that the defense was not permitted to bring to light was the secret supplement to the GermanSoviet treaty of August 23, 1939, which divided eastern Europe into German and Soviet spheres of influence. (note 40)
After the Nuremberg Tribunal pronounced its sentence, Foreign Minister von Ribbentrop pointed out some of the obstacles put up in his particular case: (note 41)
The defense had no fair chance to defend German foreign policy. Our prepared application for the submission of evidence was not allowed ... Without good cause being shown, half of the 300 documents which the defense prepared were not admitted. Witnesses and affidavits were only admitted after the prosecution had been heard; most of them were rejected... Correspondence between Hitler and Chamberlain, reports by ambassadors and diplomatic minutes, etc., were rejected. Only the prosecution, not the defense, had access to German and foreign archives. The prosecution only searched for incriminating documents and their use was biased. It knowingly concealed exonerating documents and withheld them from the defense.
The Charter of the International Military Tribunal permitted the use of normally inadmissible "evidence." Article 19 specified that "The Tribunal shall not be bound by technical rules of evidence... and shall admit any evidence which it deems to have probative value." Article 21 stipulated: (note 42)
The Tribunal shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge but shall take judicial notice thereof. It shall also take judicial notice of official governmental documents and reports of the United [Allied] Nations, including acts and documents of the committees set up in the various allied countries for the investigation of war crimes, and the records and findings of military and other Tribunals of any of the United [Allied] Nations.
On the basis of these articles, the Tribunal accepted as valid the most dubious "evidence," including hearsay and unsubstantiated reports of Soviet and American "investigative" commissions. For example, the Tribunal accepted an American congressional report that "proved" gas chamber killings at Dachau, and a Polish government report (submitted by the US) that "proved" killings by steam at reblinka. (note 43) (No reputable historian now accepts either of these stories.)
In addition, the Tribunal validated Soviet reports about Auschwitz and Majdanek (documents USSR-8 and USSR-29), which explained in detail how the Germans killed four million at Auschwitz and another one-and-a-half million at Majdanek. (These days, no reputable historian accepts either of these fantastic figures.)
German guilt for the killing of thousands of Polish officers in the Katyn forest near Smolensk was similarly confirmed by Nuremberg document USSR-54. This detailed report by yet another Soviet "investigative" commission was submitted as proof for the charge made in the joint indictment of the four Allied governments. As a Soviet prosecutor explained: "We find, in the Indictment, one of the most important criminal acts for which the major war criminals are responsible was the mass execution of Polish prisoners of war shot in the Katyn forest near Smolensk by the German fascist invaders." (note 44) (Interestingly, two of the eight members of the Soviet Katyn Commission were also members of the Soviet Auschwitz commission: Academician N. Burdenko and Metropolitan Nikolai.) It wasn't until 1990 that the Soviet government finally acknowledged that the Katyn massacre was carried out, not by a German unit, as "proven" at Nuremberg, but by the Soviet secret police. (note 45)
It is sometimes claimed that the evidence presented by the prosecution to the Nuremberg Tribunal was so incontrovertible that none of the defense attorneys ever disputed the authenticity or accuracy of even a single prosecution document. (note 46) This is not true. Not only did defense lawyers protest against the prosecution use of spurious documents, but some of the most important Nuremberg documents are now generally acknowledged to be fraudulent. (note 47)
For example, defense attorney Dr. Boehm protested to the Tribunal that Nuremberg document 1721-PS, which purportedly confirms attacks by stormtroopers against Jewish synagogues in November 1938, is a clumsy forgery. He went on to explain his reasons at some length. (note 48)
Several Nuremberg documents based on the purported "death bed confession" of Mauthausen commandant Franz Ziereis, are demonstrably fraudulent. (Nuremberg documents 1515-PS, 3870-PS, and NO-1973.) These documents supposedly prove systematic killings of hundreds of thousands of people by gassing and other means at Mauthausen and Hartheim. (note 49)
Almost forty years after the Tribunal handed down its verdicts, Nuremberg document USSR-378 was definitively exposed as a fraud. It is a purported record of numerous private conversations with Hitler by Hermann Rauschning, a former National Socialist official in Danzig. In brutal language, the Führer supposedly revealed his most intimate thoughts and secret plans for world conquest. Rauschning's "memoir" was published in 1939 in Britain under the title Hitler Speaks, and in the United States in 1940 as The Voice of Destruction. It was this US edition that was accepted in evidence at Nuremberg as proof of the "guiding principles of the Nazi regime."
Chief British prosecutor Sir Hartley Shawcross and his Soviet colleagues cited numerous quotations from it. Defendant Baldur von Schirach contested its authenticity, but defense attorney Pelckmann (who did not know any better) accepted this "evidence" as authentic. (note 50) In 1983 Swiss historian Wolfgang Hänel established that the "memoir" is entirely fraudulent. Rauschning never had even a single private meeting with Hitler. (note 51)
Another fraudulent Nuremberg document is the so-called "Hossbach protocol" (document 386-PS), a purported record of a high-level 1937 conference at which Hitler supposedly revealed his secret plans for aggressive conquest. US Nuremberg prosecutor Sidney Alderman called it "one of the most striking and revealing of all the captured documents," and told the Tribunal that it removed any remaining doubts about the guilt of the Germans leaders for their crimes against peace. It was largely on the basis of this document that Göring was condemned to death. (note 52)
Similarly spurious is Nuremberg document L-3 (US-28), supposedly a record of a bellicose speech by Hitler to armed forces commanders on August 22, 1939. It contains a widelycited quotation attributed to Hitler, "Who talks nowadays of the extermination of the Armenians?" (note 53)
Jewish historian Lucy Dawidowicz, author of The War Against the Jews, acknowledged that "There are also Holocaust documents that are outright falsification and some that purvey myth rather than historical fact." (note 54)
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Information is not knowledge.

Exactly, you'll agree then that popular histories are not knowledge. Winston revises the history of previous weeks months and days to more comfortably mesh with the present and the projected future. In our age history must reflect what will be not what has past which would , in most cases, be very difficult to make agreeable with policy expressions and public observations.
 
Last edited:

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
I would ask you to compare the logic of that statement, but that might not get any worthwhile results. If I have objection to the way the trials were run why would I be in support of a group that doing a lot worse to people than running a crooked court. If you think this would be the way the STL will be run you might be right, the same 'group' is behind the investigation in an attempt to smear Hezbollah for an assignation in Lebanon in '05. The temptation will be there but too much exposure to the details makes an true investigation possible. The views like the one below would be headlines on the same day they were attempted.

(in part)
Jewish historian Lucy Dawidowicz, author of The War Against the Jews, acknowledged that "There are also Holocaust documents that are outright falsification and some that purvey myth rather than historical fact." (note 54)



Background:

The Operation Reinhard death camps were an integral part of the so-called "final solution of the Jewish question". Since the Nazis had taken power in 1933, they had gradually isolated the Jewish community in Germany and Austria, and deprived them of their rights as citizens, and their property3. Now four pivotal events occurred.
First, with the outbreak of World War II, and the subsequent conquest of Poland, large parts of Scandinavia and much of the Soviet Union, there had been a tremendous number of Jews who fell under Nazi control. At the same time, Himmler had begun his project to depopulate large areas of Poland of Poles and Jews, and repopulate them with ethnic Germans. The Jews had to be moved somewhere.4 Second, the war had truly become a world war with the attack on Pearl Harbor and the subsequent declaration of war by Germany on the United States in December 1941. Hitler had threatened more than once that if the war became global, the Jews would pay the price. Although mass shootings had begun by the Einsatzgruppen in July 1941, it would appear that an ultimate decision to kill all the Jews was made by Hitler around this time.

http://holocaust-history.org/operation-reinhard/

Next read this and get back to us.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/imt.asp

Never mind the stupid liberal thinking of today, no wonder the world is in the position it is today. You want to know what happened read from those who were there.
 
Last edited:

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB

Never mind the stupid tliberal hinking of today, no wonder the world is in the position it is today. You want to know what happened read from those who were there.
Are you saying these 'facts' are not 'facts'?

'DEATH CAMPS' BEHIND THE IRON CURTAIN

It is true that in 1945, Allied propaganda did claim that all the concentration camps, particularly those in Germany itself, were "death camps", but not for long. On this question, the eminent American historian Harry Elmer Barnes wrote: "These camps were first presented as those in Germany, such as Dachau, Belsen, Buchenwald, Sachsenhausen and Dora, but it was soon demonstrated that there had been no systematic extermination in those camps. Attention was then moved to Auschwitz, Treblinka, Belzec, Chelmno, Jonowska, Tarnow, Ravensbrück, Mauthausen, Brezeznia and Birkenau, which does not exhaust the list that appears to have been extended as needed" (Rampart Journal, Summer 1967). What had happened was that certain honest observers among the British and American occupation forces in Germany, while admitting that many inmates had died of disease and starvation in the final months of the war, had found no evidence after all of "gas chambers". As a result, eastern camps in the Russian zone of occupation such as Auschwitz and Treblinka gradually came to the fore as horrific centres of extermination (though no one was permitted to see them), and this tendency has lasted to the present day. Here in these camps it was all supposed to have happened, but with the Iron Curtain brought down firmly over them, no one has ever been able to verify such charges. The Communists claimed that four million people died at Auschwitz in gigantic gas chambers accommodating 2,000 people -- and no one could argue to the contrary. What is the truth about so-called "gas chambers"? Stephen F. Pinter, who served as a lawyer for the United States War Department in the occupation forces in Germany and Austria for six years after the war, made the following statement in the widely read Catholic magazine Our Sunday Visitor, June 14th , 1959: "I was in Dachau for 17 months after the war, as a U.S. Department Attorney, and can state that there was no gas chamber at Dachau. What was shown to visitors and sightseers there and erroneously described as a gas chamber was a crematory. Nor was there a gas chamber in any of the other concentration camps in Germany. We were told that there was a gas chamber at Auschwitz, but since that was in the Russian zone of occupation, we were not permitted to investigate since the Russians would not allow it. From what I was able to determine during six postwar years in Germany and Austria, there were a number of Jews killed, but the figure of a million was certainly never reached. I interviewed thousands of Jews, former immates of concentration camps in Germany and Austria, and consider myself as well qualified as any man on this subject." This tells a very different story from the customary propaganda. Pinter, of course, is very astute on the question of the crematory being represented as a gas chamber. This is a frequent ploy because no such thing as a gas chamber has ever been shown to exist in these camps, hence the deliberately misleading term a "gas oven", aimed at confusing a gas chamber with a crematorium. The latter, usually a single furnace and similar to the kind of thing employed today, were used quite simply for the cremation of those persons who had died from various natural causes within the camp, particularly infectious diseases. This fact was conclusively proved by the German archbishop, Cardinal Faulhaber of Munich. He informed the Americans that during the Allied air raids on Munich in September 1944, 30,000 people were killed. The archbishop requested the authorities at the time to cremate the bodies of the victims in the crematorium at Dachau. But he was told that, unfortunately, this plan could not be carried out; the crematorium, having only one furnace, was not able to cope with the bodies of the air raid victims. Clearly, therefore, it could not have coped with the 238,000 Jewish bodies which were allegedly cremated there. In order to do so, the crematorium would have to be kept going for 326 years without stopping and 530 tons of ashes would have been recovered.
CASUALTY FIGURES REDUCED

The figures of Dachau casualties are typical of the kind of exaggerations that have since had to be drastically revised. In 1946, a memorial plaque was unveiled at Dachau by Philip Auerbach, the Jewish State-Secretary in the Bavarian Government who was convicted for embezzling money which he claimed as compensation for non-existent Jews. The plaque read: "This area is being retained as a shrine to the 238,000 individuals who were cremated here." Since then, the official casualty figures have had to be steadily revised downwards, and now stand at only 20,600 the majority from typhus and starvation only at the end of the war. This deflation, to ten per cent of the original figure, will doubtless continue, and one day will be applied to the legendary figure of six million as a whole. Another example of drastic revision is the present estimate of Auschwitz casualties. The absurd allegations of three or four million deaths there are no longer plausible even to Reitlinger. He now puts the number of casualties at only 600,000; and although this figure is still exaggerated in the extreme, it is a significant reduction on four million and further progress is to be expected. Shirer himself quotes Reitlinger's latest estimate, but he fails to reconcile this with his earlier statement that half of that figure, about 300,000 Hungarian Jews were supposedly "done to death in forty-six days" - a supreme example of the kind of irresponsible nonsense that is written on this subject.

THE IMPOSTURE OF 'GAS CHAMBERS'

Rassinier entitled his first book The Lies of Odysseus in commemoration of the fact that travellers always return bearing tall stories, and until his death he investigated all the stories of extermination literature and attempted to trace their authors. He made short work of the extravagant claims about gas chambers at Buchenwald in David Rousset's The Other Kingdom (New York, 1947); himself an inmate of Buchenwald, Rassinier proved that no such things ever existed there (Le Mensonge d'Ulysse, p. 209 ff) Rassinier also traced Abbe Jean-Paul Renard, and asked him how he could possibly have testified in his book Chaines et Lumieres that gas chambers were in operation at Buchenwald. Renard replied that others had told him of their existence, and hence he had been willing to pose as a witness of things that he had never seen (ibid, p. 209 ff). Rassinier also investigated Denise Dufournier's Ravensbrück.- The Women's Camp of Death (London, 1948) and again found that the authoress had no other evidence for gas chambers there than the vague "rumours" which Charlotte Bormann stated were deliberately spread by communist political prisoners. Similar investigations were made of such books as Philip Friedman's This was Auschwitz: The Story of a Murder Camp (N.Y., 1946) and Eugen Kogon's The Theory and Practice of Hell (N.Y., 1950), and he found that none of these authors could produce an authentic eye-witness of a gas chamber at Auschwitz, nor had they themselves actually seen one. Rassinier mentions Kogon's claim that a deceased former inmate, Janda Weiss, had said to Kogon alone that she had witnessed gas chambers at Auschwitz, but of course, since this person was apparently dead, Rassinier was unable to investigate the claim. He was able to interview Benedikt Kautsky, author of Teufel und Verdammte who had alleged that millions of Jews were exterminated at Auschwitz. However, Kautsky only confirmed to Rassinier the confession in his book, namely that never at any time had he seen a gas chamber, and that he based his information on what others had "told him". The palm for extermination literature is awarded by Rassinier to Miklos Nyizli's Doctor at Auschwitz, in which the falsification of facts, the evident contradictions and shameless lies show that the author is speaking of places which it is obvious he has never seen (Le Drame des Juifs européen, p. 52). According to this "doctor of Auschwitz", 25,000 victims were exterminated every day for four and a half years, which is a grandiose advance on Olga Lengyel's 24,000 a day for two and a half years. It would mean a total of forty-one million victims at Auschwitz by 1945, two and a half times the total pre-war Jewish population of the world. When Rassinier attempted to discover the identity of this strange "witness", he was told that "he had died some time before the publication of the book." Rassinier is convinced that he was never anything but a mythical figure. Since the war, Rassinier has, in fact, toured Europe in search of somebody who was an actual eye-witness of gas chamber exterminations in German concentration camps during World War Two, but he has never found even one such person. He discovered that not one of the authors of the many books charging that the Germans had exterminated millions of Jews had even seen a gas chamber built for such purposes, much less seen one in operation, nor could any of these authors produce a living authentic witness who had done so. Invariably, former prisoners such as Renard, Kautsky and Kogon based their statements not upon what they had actually seen, but upon what they "heard", always from "reliable" sources, who by some chance are almost always dead and thus not in a position to confirm or deny their statements. Certainly the most important fact to emerge from Rassinier's studies, and of which there is now no doubt at all, is the utter imposture of "gas chambers". Serious investigations carried out in the sites themselves have revealed with irrefutable proof that, contrary to the declarations of the surviving "witnesses" examined above, no gas chambers whatever existed in the German camps at Buchenwald, Bergen-Belsen, Ravensbrück, Dachau and Dora, or Mauthausen in Austria. This fact, which we noted earlier was attested to by Stephen Pinter of the U.S. War Office, has now been recognised and admitted officially by the Institute of Contemporary History at Munich. However, Rassinier points out that in spite of this, "witnesses" again declared at the Eichmann trial that they had seen prisoners at Bergen-Belsen setting out for the gas chambers. So far as the eastern camps of Poland are concerned, Rassinier shows that the sole evidence attesting to the existence of gas chambers at Treblinka, Chelmno, Belzec, Majdanek and Sobibor are the discredited memoranda of Kurt Gerstein referred to above. His original claim, it will be recalled was that an absurd 40 million people had been exterminated during the war, while in his first signed memorandum he reduced the number to 25 million. Further reductions were made in his second memorandum. These documents were considered of such dubious authenticity that they were not even admitted by the Nuremberg Court, though they continue to circulate in three different versions, one in German (distributed in schools) and two in French, none of which agree with each other. The German version featured as "evidence" at the Eichmann Trial in l961. Finally, Professor Rassinier draws attention to an important admission by Dr. Kubovy, director of the World Centre of Contemporary Jewish Documentation at Tel-Aviv, made in La Terre Retrouvée, December 15th, 1960. Dr. Kubovy recognised that not a single order for extermination exists from Hitler, Himmler, Heydrich or Göring (Le Drame des Juifs européen, p. 31, 39).


EMIGRATION: THE FINAL SOLUTION

Prof. Rassinier is emphatic in stating that the German Government never had any policy other than the emigration of Jews overseas. He shows that after the promulgation of the Nuremberg Race Laws in September 1935, the Germans negotiated with the British for the transfer of German Jews to Palestine on the basis of the Balfour Declaration. When this failed, they asked other countries to take charge of them, but these refused (ibid, p. 20). The Palestine project was revived in 1938, but broke down because Germany could not negotiate their departure on the basis of 3,000,000 marks, as demanded by Britain, without some agreement for compensation. Despite these difficulties, Germany did manage to secure the emigration of the majority of their Jews, mostly to the United States. Rassinier also refers to the French refusal of Germany's Madagascar plan at the end of 1940. "In a report of the 21st August, 1942, the Secretary of State for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Third Reich, Luther, decided that it would be possible to negotiate with France in this direction and described conversations which had taken place between July and December 1940, and which were brought to a halt following the interview with Montoire on 13th December 1940 by Pierre-Etienne Flandin, Laval's successor. During the whole of 1941 the Germans hoped that they would be able to re-open these negotiations and bring them to a happy conclusion" (ibid, p . 108). After the outbreak of war, the Jews, who, as Rassinier reminds us, had declared economic and financial war on Germany as early as 1933, were interned in concentration camps, "which is the way countries all over the world treat enemy aliens in time of war ... It was decided to regroup them and put them to work in one immense ghetto which, after the successful invasion of Russia, was situated toward the end of 1941 in the so-called Eastern territories near the former frontier between Russia and Poland: at Auschwitz, Chelmno, Belzec, Majdanek, Treblinka etc ... There they were to wait until the end of the war for the re-opening of international discussions which would decide their future" (Le Véritable Proces Eichmann, p. 20). The order for this concentration in the eastern ghetto was given by Göring to Heydrich, as noted earlier, and it was regarded as a prelude to "the desired final solution," their emigration overseas after the war had ended.
ENORMOUS FRAUD

Of great concern to Professor Rassinier is the way in which the extermination legend is deliberately exploited for political and financial advantage, and in this he finds Israel and the Soviet Union to be in concert. He notes how, after 1950, an avalanche of fabricated extermination literature appeared under the stamp of two organisations, so remarkably synchronised in their activities that one might well believe them to have been contrived in partnership. One was the "Committee for the Investigation of War Crimes and Criminals" established under Communist auspices at Warsaw, and the other, the "World Centre of Contemporary Jewish Documentation" at Paris and Tel-Aviv. Their publications seem to appear at favourable moments in the political climate, and for the Soviet Union their purpose is simply to maintain the threat of Nazism as a manoeuvre to divert attention from their own activities. As for Israel, Rassinier sees the myth of the Six Million as inspired by a purely material problem. In Le Drame des Juifs européen (P. 31, 39). he writes: " ... It is simply a question of justifying by a proportionate number of corpses the enormous subsidies which Germany has been paying annually since the end of the war to the State of Israel by way of reparation for injuries which moreover she cannot be held to have caused her either morally or legally, since there was no State of Israel at the time the alleged deeds took place; thus it is a purely and contemptibly material problem. "Perhaps I may be allowed to recall here that the State of Israel was only founded in May 1948 and that the Jews were nationals of all states with the exception of Israel, in order to underline the dimensions of a fraud which defies description in any language; on the one hand Germany pays to Israel sums which are calculated on six million dead, and on the other, since at least four-fifths of these six million were decidedly alive at the end of the war, she is paying substantial sums by way of reparation to the victims of Hitler's Germany to those who are still alive in countries all over the world other than Israel and to the rightful claimants of those who have since deceased, which means that for the former (i.e. the six million), or in other words, for the vast majority, she is paying twice."



THE WARSAW GHETTO

In terms of numbers, Polish Jewry is supposed to have suffered most of all from extermination, not only at Auschwitz, but at an endless list of newly-discovered "death camps" such as Treblinka, Sobibor, Belzec, Majdanek, Chelmno and at many more obscure places which seem suddenly to have gained prominence. At the centre of the alleged extermination of the Polish Jews is the dramatic uprising in April 1943 of the Warsaw Ghetto. This is often represented as a revolt against being deported to gas ovens; presumably the alleged subject of Hitler and Himmler's "secret discussions" had leaked out and gained wide publicity in Warsaw. The case of the Warsaw Ghetto is an instructive insight into the creation of the extermination legend itself. Indeed, its evacuation by the Germans in 1943 is often referred to as the "extermination of the Polish Jews" although it was nothing of the kind, and layers of mythology have tended to surround it after the publication of sensational novels like John Hersey's The Wall and Leon Uris' Exodus. When the Germans first occupied Poland, they confined the Jews, not in detention camps but in ghettos for reasons of security. The interior administration of the ghettos was in the hands of Jewish Councils elected by themselves, and they were policed by an independent Jewish police force. Special currency notes were introduced into the ghettos to prevent speculation. Whether this system was right or wrong, it was understandable in time of war, and although the ghetto is perhaps an unpleasant social establishment, it is by no means barbaric. And it is certainly not an organisation for the destruction of a race. But, of course, it is frequently said that this is what the ghettos were really for. A recent publication on the Warsaw Ghetto made the brazen assertion that concentration camps "were a substitute for the practice of cramming the Jews into overcrowded ghettos and starving them to death." It seems that whatever security system the Germans used, and to whatever lengths they went to preserve a semblance of community for the Jews, they can never escape the charge of "extermination". It has been established already that the 1931 Jewish population census for Poland placed the number of Jews at 2,732,600, and that after emigration and flight to the Soviet Union, no more than 1,100,000 were under German control. These incontrovertible facts, however, do not prevent Manvell and Frankl asserting that "there had been over three million Jews in Poland when Germany began the invasion" and that in 1942 "some two million still awaited death" (ibid, p. 140). In reality, of the million or so Jews in Poland, almost half, about 400,000 were eventually concentrated in the ghetto of Warsaw, an area of about two and a half square miles around the old mediaeval ghetto. The remainder had already been moved to the Polish Government-General by September 1940. In the summer of 1942, Himmler ordered the resettlement of all Polish Jews in detention camps in order to obtain their labour, part of the system of general concentration for labour assignment in the Government-General. Thus between July and October 1942, over three quarters of the Warsaw Ghetto's inhabitants were peacefully evacuated and transported, supervised by the Jewish police themselves. As we have seen, transportation to camps is alleged to have ended in "extermination", but there is absolutely no doubt from the evidence available that it involved only the effective procurement of labour and the prevention of unrest. In the first place, Himmler discovered on a surprise visit to Warsaw in January 1943 that 24,000 Jews registered as armaments workers were in fact working illegally as tailors and furriers (Manvell and Frankl, ibid, p. 140); the Ghetto was also being used as a base for subversive forays into the main area of Warsaw. After six months of peaceful evacuation, when only about 60,000 Jews remained in the residential ghetto, the Germans met with an armed rebellion on 18th January, 1943. Manvell and Frankl admit that "The Jews involved in planned resistance had for a long time been engaged in smuggling arms from the outside world, and combat groups fired on and killed S.S. men and militia in charge of a column of deportees." The terrorists in the Ghetto uprising were also assisted by the Polish Home Army and the PPR -- Polska Partia Robotnicza, the Communist Polish Workers Party. It was under these circumstances of a revolt aided by partisans and communists that the occupying forces, as any army would in a similar situation, moved in to suppress the terrorists, if necessary by destroying the residential area itself. It should be remembered that the whole process of evacuation would have continued peacefully had not extremists among the inhabitants planned an armed rebellion which in the end was bound to fail. When S.S. Lieutenant-General Stroop entered the Ghetto with armoured cars on 19th April, he immediately came under fire and lost twelve men; German and Polish casualties in the battle, which lasted four weeks, totalled 101 men killed and wounded. Stubborn resistance by the Jewish Combat Organisation in the face of impossible odds led to an estimated 12,000 Jewish casualties, the majority by remaining in burning buildings and dug-outs. A total, however, of 56,065 inhabitants were captured and peacefully resettled in the area of the Government-General. Many Jews within the Ghetto had resented the terror imposed on them by the Combat Organisation, and had attempted to inform on their headquarters to the German authorities.


This would be a much shorter read and it does come with many references, that isn't the case with the 'official version'. Where do they cover the torture that is mentioned, I 'm curious what term they used for it back then. What does the US call it today when somebody is sent to one of the black prisons? 'Enhanced interrogation' or some other bull**** term?

Did Six Million Really Die? (book)
 

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
No, just that those who tried at Nuremberg had no defense because the evidence was overwhelming against them. They were not innocents who didn't deserve what happened to them. The Holocaust happened and no one should make light of it today, not many did when the world found out about it.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Are you saying these 'facts' are not 'facts'?

Did Six Million Really Die? (book)

Hmmm, IHR?

I know you like wikiality and accept it verbatim...

Institute for Historical Review - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not only does the IHR (Your source) deny the Holocaust. They deny key aspects of Nazism, and the mass murder of other cultural and religious groups. Groups that you have used to bash the focus on the Jewish holocaust. You really should choose your sources more carefully.

Your source has been impeached.
 
Last edited:

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
I agree with holding people responsible for their actions through a fair and impartial process. These trials were victor's justice similar to a lynching, not fair nor impartial. However fair and impartial trials probably would have found most if not all of these people guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Sometimes lynch mobs do lynch guilty people.
.

Perhaps we should have had fellow Nazi Germans try them?

Those trials were more than fair. Twelve men hung as compared to the millions that died at their orders is quite fair.

The victors had every right to judge them.

I would ask you to compare the logic of that statement, but that might not get any worthwhile results.

You would ask me to "compare the logic of that statement" but that might not get any "worthwhile results'?

The question you ask has abosultely no logic.

Compare it to what?

Instead of cutting and pasting Nazi Propaganda you should learn to phrase a question properly.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
No history is knowledge. No book is knowledge. History is information. Knowledge is what you have if you digest information and understand it.


What!