The Nuremberg Show Trials

Robert Jackson, the chief US prosecutor at the Nuremberg Tribunal of 1945-46, privately acknowledged in a letter to President Truman, that the Allies “…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 labour 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.”

Germans were executed or imprisoned for policies that the Allies themselves had implemented, sometimes on a far greater scale.  German military and political leaders were executed based on a hypocritical double standard, which meant that these executions were essentially acts of judicial murder. As Mark Weber wrote, “If the standards of Nuremberg had been applied impartially, most other Allied military and political leaders would also have been hanged.”

Oswald Spengler, the German historian and philosopher, once observed that people learn history through ‘political education.’  In every society, history is determined by those who control political and cultural life, including the educational system and the mass media. This is why, in today’s society, all the death and suffering during and after WWII of non-Jews, Poles, Russians and others, and especially Germans is all but ignored and why, instead, more than seven decades after the end of the war, Jewish death and suffering and above all, what is popularly known as the ‘Holocaustâ„¢’ is given such prominent attention in our classrooms, documentaries and movies and by our manipulated and controlled political leaders.

The Nuremberg Trials were instigated in order to eliminate anyone in authority that was aware of the pact signed between the Zionists and Hitler in 1933 – but primarily to widely publicize and promote the Holocaustâ„¢ myths and legends by eliciting widespread sympathy for Jews and with a view to expediting the imminent foundation of the ‘illegal’ state of Israel.

When the trials began at Nuremberg, there were many ‘irregularities.’  For example, the accusers (including Soviet judges with long experience in Stalinist methods of the dispensation of ‘justice’) doubled as jurors and the court was as a result, never impartial from the outset.  The accused were in fact deemed guilty before the proceedings began and the evidence presented was solely to provide ‘proof’ of guilt.  The rules of evidence stated that the defence was not permitted to argue that the Allies had committed the same acts of which they were being accused. 

Even so, the Germans were never tried for the indiscriminate bombing of civilians, because the Allies did not want to draw attention to the fact that they had themselves instigated this particular ‘crime against humanity.’ And the highly creative charge of ‘waging a war of aggression’ was never defined, because no definition would cover the German invasion of Poland and France without also covering the Allied invasions of Poland, Scandinavia and several other countries also.

By arbitrarily declaring the captured German military officers to be civilians, the Allies made them eligible for trial as “criminals.”  The purpose of the trials was not to see justice done or to determine guilt but to give the Allies a propaganda victory…