'Nazi Grandma' sent to jail again for Holocaust denial

Has the unbiased institute examined the extensive ICRC reports from the actual time of the internment of Jewish and other people in German concentration camps?
Here is your chance to dig into it:

The Jews And The Concentration Camps: A Factual Appraisal By The Red Cross.

There is one survey of the Jewish question in Europe during World War Two and the conditions of Germany’s concentration camps which is almost unique in its honesty and objectivity, the three-volume Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on its Activities during the Second World War, Geneva, 1948.

This comprehensive account from an entirely neutral source incorporated and expanded the findings of two previous works: Documents sur l’activité du CICR en faveur des civils détenus dans les camps de concentration en Allemagne 1939-1945 (Geneva, 1946),
and
Inter Arma Caritas: the Work of the ICRC during the Second World War (Geneva, 1947).

The team of authors, headed by Frédéric Siordet, explained in the opening pages of the Report that their object, in the tradition of the Red Cross, had been strict political neutrality, and herein lies its great value.

The ICRC successfully applied the 1929 Geneva military convention in order to gain access to civilian internees held in Central and Western Europe by the Germany authorities.

By contrast, the ICRC was unable to gain any access to the Soviet Union, which had failed to ratify the Convention. The millions of civilian and military internees held in the USSR, whose conditions were known to be by far the worst, were completely cut off from any international contact or supervision.

The Red Cross Report is of value in that it first clarifies the legitimate circumstances under which Jews were detained in concentration camps, i.e. as enemy aliens. In describing the two categories of civilian internees, the Report distinguishes the second type as “Civilians deported on administrative grounds (in German, “Schutzhäftlinge”), who were arrested for political or racial motives because their presence was considered a danger to the State or the occupation forces” (Vol. 111, p. 73). These persons, it continues, “were placed on the same footing as persons arrested or imprisoned under common law for security reasons.” (P.74).

The Report admits that the Germans were at first reluctant to permit supervision by the Red Cross of people detained on grounds relating to security, but by the latter part of 1942, the ICRC obtained important concessions from Germany. They were permitted to distribute food parcels to major concentration camps in Germany from August 1942, and “from February 1943 onwards this concession was extended to all other camps and prisons” (Vol. 111, p. 7. The ICRC soon established contact with camp commandants and launched a food relief programme which continued to function until the last months of 1945, letters of thanks for which came pouring in from Jewish internees.

Red Cross Recipients Were Jews
The Report states that “As many as 9,000 parcels were packed daily. From the autumn of 1943 until May 1945, about 1,112,000 parcels with a total weight of 4,500 tons were sent off to the concentration camps” (Vol. III, p. 80). In addition to food, these contained clothing and pharmaceutical supplies. “Parcels were sent to Dachau, Buchenwald, Sangerhausen, Sachsenhausen, Oranienburg, Flossenburg, Landsberg-am-Lech, Flöha, Ravensbrück, Hamburg-Neuengamme, Mauthausen, Theresienstadt, Auschwitz, Bergen-Belsen, to camps near Vienna and in Central and Southern Germany. The principal recipients were Belgians, Dutch, French, Greeks, Italians, Norwegians, Poles and stateless Jews” (Vol. III, p. 83).

In the course of the war, “The Committee was in a position to transfer and distribute in the form of relief supplies over twenty million Swiss francs collected by Jewish welfare organisations throughout the world, in particular by the American Joint Distribution Committee of New York” (Vol. I, p. 644). This latter organisation was permitted by the German Government to maintain offices in Berlin until the American entry into the war.
The ICRC complained that obstruction of their vast relief operation for Jewish internees came not from the Germans but from the tight Allied blockade of Europe. Most of their purchases of relief food were made in Rumania, Hungary and Slovakia.

The ICRC had special praise for the liberal conditions which prevailed at Theresienstadt up to the time of their last visits there in April 1945. This camp, “where there were about 40,000 Jews deported from various countries was a relatively privileged ghetto” (Vol. III, p. 75). According to the Report, “‘The Committee’s delegates were able to visit the camp at Theresienstadt (Terezin) which was used exclusively for Jews and was governed by special conditions. From information gathered by the Committee, this camp had been started as an experiment by certain leaders of the Reich … These men wished to give the Jews the means of setting up a communal life in a town under their own administration and possessing almost complete autonomy. . . two delegates were able to visit the camp on April 6th, 1945. They confirmed the favourable impression gained on the first visit” (Vol. I, p . 642).

The ICRC also had praise for the regime of Ion Antonescu of Fascist Rumania where the Committee was able to extend special relief to 183,000 Rumanian Jews until the time of the Soviet occupation. The aid then ceased, and the ICRC complained bitterly that it never succeeded “in sending anything whatsoever to Russia” (Vol. II, p. 62). The same situation applied to many of the German camps after their “liberation” by the Russians. The ICRC received a voluminous flow of mail from Auschwitz until the period of the Soviet occupation, when many of the internees were evacuated westward. But the efforts of the Red Cross to send relief to internees remaining at Auschwitz under Soviet control were futile. However, food parcels continued to be sent to former Auschwitz inmates transferred west to such camps as Buchenwald and Oranienburg.

No Evidence Of Genocide

One of the most important aspects of the Red Cross Report is that it clarifies the true cause of those deaths that undoubtedly occurred in the camps toward the end of the war. Says the Report: “In the chaotic condition of Germany after the invasion during the final months of the war, the camps received no food supplies at all and starvation claimed an increasing number of victims. Itself alarmed by this situation, the German Government at last informed the ICRC on February 1st, 1945 … In March 1945, discussions between the President of the ICRC and General of the S.S. Kaltenbrunner gave even more decisive results. Relief could henceforth be distributed by the ICRC, and one delegate was authorised to stay in each camp …” (Vol. III, p. 83).

Clearly, the German authorities were at pains to relieve the dire situation as far as they were able. The Red Cross are quite explicit in stating that food supplies ceased at this time due to the Allied bombing of German transportation, and in the interests of interned Jews they had protested on March 15th, 1944 against “the barbarous aerial warfare of the Allies” (Inter Arma Caritas, p. 7.

By October 2nd, 1944, the ICRC warned the German Foreign Office of the impending collapse of the German transportation system, declaring that starvation conditions for people throughout Germany were becoming inevitable.

In dealing with this comprehensive, three-volume Report, it is important to stress that the delegates of the International Red Cross found no evidence whatever at the camps in Axis occupied Europe of a deliberate policy to exterminate the Jews. In all its 1,600 pages the Report does not even mention such a thing as a gas chamber. It admits that Jews, like many other wartime nationalities, suffered rigours and privations, but its complete silence on the subject of planned extermination is ample refutation of the Six Million legend. Like the Vatican representatives with whom they worked, the Red Cross found itself unable to indulge in the irresponsible charges of genocide which had become the order of the day. So far as the genuine mortality rate is concerned, the Report points out that most of the Jewish doctors from the camps were being used to combat typhus on the eastern front, so that they were unavailable when the typhus epidemics of 1945 broke out in the camps (Vol. I, p. 204 ff) –

Incidentally, it is frequently claimed that mass executions were carried out in gas chambers cunningly disguised as shower facilities. Again the Report makes nonsense of this allegation. “Not only the washing places, but installations for baths, showers and laundry were inspected by the delegates. They had often to take action to have fixtures made less primitive, and to get them repaired or enlarged” (Vol. III, p. 594).

Not All Were Interned

Volume III of the Red Cross Report, Chapter 3 (I. Jewish Civilian Population) deals with the “aid given to the Jewish section of the free population,” and this chapter makes it quite plain that by no means all of the European Jews were placed in internment camps, but remained, subject to certain restrictions, as part of the free civilian population.
This conflicts directly with the “thoroughness” of the supposed “extermination programme”, and with the claim in the forged Höss memoirs that Eichmann was obsessed with seizing “every single Jew he could lay his hands on.”

In Slovakia, for example, where Eichmann’s assistant Dieter Wisliceny was in charge, the Report states that “A large proportion of the Jewish minority had permission to stay in the country, and at certain periods Slovakia was looked upon as a comparative haven of refuge for Jews, especially for those coming from Poland.
Those who remained in Slovakia seem to have been in comparative safety until the end of August 1944, when a rising against the German forces took place.
While it is true that the law of May 15th, 1942 had brought about the internment of several thousand Jews, these people were held in camps where the conditions of food and lodging were tolerable, and where the internees were allowed to do paid work on terms almost equal to those of the free labour market” (Vol. I, p. 646).

Not only did large numbers of the three million or so European Jews avoid internment altogether, but the emigration of Jews continued throughout the war, generally by way of Hungary, Rumania and Turkey. Ironically, post-war Jewish emigration from German-occupied territories was also facilitated by the Reich, as in the case of the Polish Jews who had escaped to France before its occupation. “The Jews from Poland who, whilst in France, had obtained entrance permits to the United States were held to be American citizens by the German occupying authorities, who further agreed to recognize the validity of about three thousand passports issued to Jews by the consulates of South American countries” (Vol. I, p. 645).

As future U.S. citizens, these Jews were held at the Vittel camp in southern France for American aliens. The emigration of European Jews from Hungary in particular proceeded during the war unhindered by the German authorities. “Until March 1944,” says the. Red Cross Report, “Jews who had the privilege of visas for Palestine were free to leave Hungary” (Vol. I, p. 64. Even after the replacement of the Horthy Government in 1944 (following its attempted armistice with the Soviet Union) with a government more dependent on German authority, the emigration of Jews continued.

The Committee secured the pledges of both Britain and the United States “to give support by every means to the emigration of Jews from Hungary,” and from the U.S. Government the ICRC received a message stating that “The Government of the United States … now specifically repeats its assurance that arrangements will be made by it for the care of all Jews who in the present circumstances are allowed to leave” (Vol. I, p . 649).

Biedermann agreed that in the nineteen instances that “Did Six Million Really Die?” quoted from the Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on its Activities during the Second World War and Inter Arma Caritas (this includes the above material), it did so accurately.


http://www.fromthetrenchesworldrepo...ross-records-show-holocaust-was-a-fraud/38006
-------------------
May this be enlightening to some still beclouded minds as to the legitimacy of the Red Cross Reports.

 

Why should I waste more of my time with someone so thoroughly indoctrinated by specious Holocaust lore that they're reduced to playing evasive denial tactics like "Heads-I-win-Tails you lose" as the sole basis of their arguments?

Assertions like

& dismissal of Independent Media simply make you look desperate, poorly informed & silly.

I lived, worked & studied in Germany in the 1970s were I became fluent in the German language & worked, drank & shared meals with countless German WW 2 Veterans, rented apartments from WW 2 War Widows & learned more about 1900s German history on both a personal and scholarly level than you'll ever know & learned it from original sources in German you can't even read.

Re:

Only in that I've read the salient excerpts from it in German and recognized the innumerable, glaring forgeries that you couldn't tell from a McDonald's Menu but blindly accept as ironclad truths as per the tenets of your crassly exploited & profit driven Holocaustian Cult.


Please note that the topic, here, has to do with Frau Haverbeck's right to Free Speech.

The fact that myths surrounding "The Holocaust®" are so fragile that any open & honest examination / discussion of them is forbidden. That unique travesty is a tacit admission of the fraudulence of the common Holocaustian dogma as the Truth welcomes open discussion & thorough examination.

It is noteworthy that Billions[1] of people around the world share sentiments close to or similar to Frau Haverbeck & dismiss profit-driven Holocaustian lore as:
"... a lie, a myth, a hoax, a conspiracy by those with a political or ideological agenda.”[2]

I wouldn't be surprised if millions more Independent Thinkers concur with much of what Frau Haverbeck says & writes but fear being slandered by epithets so popularly employed by Hasbara Trolls: "14. Classic insults: Anti-semite, Neo- Nazi, White Supremacist, Holocaust denier" [3]

You're welcome to believe or espouse any fraud, falsehood & Cult dogma you like but, fortunately, in the US we can still freely & easily debunk them without fear of being incarcerated.





[1] ”THE WORLD IS FULL OF HOLOCAUST DENIERS”
http://www.theatlantic.com/internat...he-world-is-full-of-holocaust-deniers/370870/

EXCERPT “ Only 54 percent of the world's population has heard of the Holocaust.

This is the most staggering statistic in a new survey by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of more than 53,000 people in over 100 countries, conducted by First International Resources. But that figure speaks to only those who have heard of it: Only a third of the world's population believe the genocide has been accurately described in historical accounts. Some said they thought the number of people who died has been exaggerated; others said they believe it's a myth. Thirty percent of respondents said it's probably true that "Jews still talk too much about what happened to them in the Holocaust."
- Hindus were most likely to believe that the number of Holocaust deaths has been exaggerated.

- people younger than 65 were much more likely to say they believe that facts about the Holocaust have been distorted



[2] “Did the Holocaust Exist?”
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/at...ary-number-of-people-say-no-or-not-even-aware


[3] “A Guide To HASBARA(*)TROLLS”
https://whitewraithe.wordpress.com/a-guide-to-hasbara-trolls/

Hasbara Troll attributes
1. Supreme point of view
2. The Hasbara troll knows best
3. Condescending & Patronising
4. Socialist (Smart and ‘caring&#8217
5. Do not have to be Jewish but Pro-Israel
6. Internet experts
7. Narcissistic
8. Provocative
9. Dis-ruptive
10. Like to ask the questions, not answer questions
11. Control freaks
12. Inflamed by anyone being critical of Israel
13. ‘Moral’ Guardians
14. Classic insults: Anti-semite, Neo- Nazi, White Supremacist, Holocaust denier
15. Adept with social networks well trained on IT"
CONTINUED

 

No. I'm talking about the three volume report of 1948. You can look for it yourself

 

Yes and I even Grau a link to it..

 

I should asking myself a similar question. But then again I don't really like it when people simply deny the mass murder of innocent people and then say it was all part of some propaganda effort.

Not really what that means but I'm certain my arguments don't come from coin flipping.

Seems as if I've got under your skin.

Well that's meaningless and I can read German as I've already said to you before.

I haven't been to Mc Donalds since I was little.

You're the one that went off topic.

This is really just sad. Have you ever spoken with a survivor?

No. That link from the Atlantic is from a survey of 53,000 people. Maybe you should stick to reading German.

Shrugs shoulders. Its a bit irrelevant

That's been done quite a bit on this thread

That's unfortunate.

The same tired old detritus that you keep posting again and again

Btw just because some people think that the holocaust didn't happen doesn't mean that it didn't. The truth isn't conquered by perception.

 

But, but, but...

 

=unbiased institute;1066750840]

For there to have been the "systematic execution of 6 Million Jews", which is standard Holocaust® dogma, there would have had to have been a detailed Plan for the logistics, schedules, financing etc.

Where is it?

“To the present day a written order by Hitler regarding the destruction of the European Jewish community has not been found, and, in all probability, this order was never given.”
- Walter Laqueur, Was niemand wissen wollte: Die Unterdruckung der Nachrichten uber Hitlers Endlösung (What Nobody Wanted to Know: The Suppression of News About Hitler’s “Final Solution”), (Berlin-Vienna, 1981), p.190

AND:

"What became known in high Nazi circles as the Fuehrer Order on the Final Solution apparently was never committed to paper -- at least no copy of it has yet been unearthed in the captured Nazi documents. " William Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (New York: Fawcett Crest, 1960), p.1256.

"Heads-I-win; Tails-you-lose" is the same delusional notion you've displayed by saying that all sources other than the ones you cite are flawed, including Kellerstrom, & only your Holocaustian sources are valid

.


That's not the same as fluency in German, its various dialects & the language in the WW 2 era

Yes, I've spoken to countless survivors. One Russian woman even claimed that the Germans treated her better than any of the Allies. Others complained about typhus and an occasional cruel Camp commander (who was demoted & removed) but the bulk of complaints were about the brutal Kapos which were other Inmates.
You must know that not all the inmates were simply innocent individuals but also included pedophiles, murderers, rapists etc

It's still widely accepted biggest flaw was being a product of the ADL.

Drop the sarcasm. It only reveals your desperation, hostility & infantilism.

.

Same delusional "Heads-I-win......."

The Truth welcomes close examination, public denial & open debate. Your Holocaustian Cult abhors close examination, public denial & open debate, ergo....

Billions of people around the world are more than "some" & a growing number of younger people reject your overblown Holocaustian Cult.

 

You do know the Nazi's burned a lot of the evidence and also considering that these camps were under the military jursidiction it really wouldn't have been necessary for a lot of financial requistions.

I think Eichmann's testimony speaks for itself

That doesn't even make sense as an analogy as coin tossing indicates and element of chance.

You mean Kollerstrom don't you? I should point out that even he believes that the holocaust happened although he believes that 1M died instead of 6M

So....The Red Cross are invalid even though you yourself cited them as evidence and the national archives at Kew are also invalid apparently?

Sure whatever.

Can you prove this and exactly how many?

And anybody else that the Nazi's didn't like which included homosexuals, gypsy's and even communists.

And its still just a poll of 53,000 and not billions as you believe

After you
.

Well you do keep posting the same stuff. The only difference between this and previous threads is that you dropped the notion that asserts that the Red Cross didn't believe that the Germans led a policy of extermination which has been proven to be untrue.

I've answered your queries and countered your statements

No they don't. Particularly if you base that assertion on a small survey.

 

AW... the poor man still looks horrified! I'm sure it was not a pleasant experience being transported to a strange place, a strange country. Many inmates likely didn't understand the German language and what they were ordered to do or not to do. Especially for the children it must have been traumatizing. Apparently, he was in his late teens when he was deported. Perhaps he heard the adults say things about the smoke, jokingly, but he understood and remembered it in earnest.

 

If you're naive enough to believe that one country with very limited resources under constant bombardment, fighting a 3 Front War could devote the manpower, fuel, & resources to shuttle 6 Million people from camp to camp just to kill them via elaborate methods, what you'll believe or disbelieve is really meaningless especially in light of the following facts:


• Zyklon B is a buzz word for the claimed Nazi mass murder, but all non-anecdotal evidence proves that this chemical was merely used as a pesticide in order to improve the inmates’ health and reduce, not increase, camp mortality.

1. Zyklon B applied in delousing chambers formed chemical compounds detectable to this day. No such compounds can be found, but ought to be expected, in the claimed homicidal gas chambers.

2. The UK’s intelligence decrypts prove that the German camp authorities were desperately trying to save their inmates’ lives.

3. “Six Million Jews threatened or killed”: read 167 quotes from newspapers with that “news” spanning from 1900 to 1945, with a peak after World War ONE! Yes, one, not two!

4. Germany has paid compensation to millions of Nazi victims, and Israel has implicitly admitted that many million Jews survived the Holocaust.

5. A British archaeological team looked for traces of the claimed 800,000 victims of the Treblinka camp—and came back empty-handed.

The list of facts refuting Holocaustian dogma are endless

_ _ _ _ _

You still haven't addressed the topic of this thread & that is Frau Haverbeck's right to Free Speech.

Do you support or oppose her right to debunk Holocaustian dogma?

 

What link.

Anything reported by the Red Cross after the WW 2 is as unreliable as the Victors' displays of "Human skin Lampshades", "Human Fat soap", "shrunken heads".

Please note:

George Orwell once wrote: “Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.”


““History is written by the victors.”
― Walter Benjamin
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/97949-history-is-written-by-the-victors




“History is written by the victors.” Winston Churchill
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/w/winstonchu380864.html

 

Germany didn't have that limited resources except towards the end of the war.
Also it wouldn't have taken much in the way of "resources" as the camps were often built by slave labour and there was nothing elaborate about gassing as it was very efficient particularly when Zyklon B was used. Unfortunately

Except they aren't facts are they?

No its not. It was used to murder people in the camps.

Based on Leuchtner research which was found to be flawed

This is why I referred you to the national archives at Kew

And?

That doesn't mean anything

That's blatantly untrue. In fact they used a GPR to locate the mass graves which they couldn't detect before because they couldn't disturb the graves

Yes I'm sure you could go on the internet and find any number of things

So? This entire thread is about holocaust denialism

I don't really care to be honest.

 

https://archive.org/details/ReportOfTheInternationalCommitteeOfTheRedCrossOnItsActivitiesDuring
http://www.politicalforum.com/weste...c-who-served-auschwitz-begins-germany-11.html

That's arbitrary and paradoxical even though you yourself used the Red Cross as a source
Please note:

I'm very familiar with Orwell. I still remember reading 1984 when I was 13/14

Now you're being pretentious

 

Well that's why they held a conference to determine how to accelerate it. Considering they had been shooting people en masse in eastern Europe.

Again that is untrue. He was only drugged during his capture not before or during the trial.

Eichmann and Demjanjuk were the only Nazi's who were tried in Israel.

Don't have to. I used to toss coins quite a bit and it never always lands on heads ergo there is an element of chance.

Why are you dodging the issue? Kollerstom believed that 1M instead of 6M died and you did use him as a source

No you didn't. I should also point out that the Red Cross only got to send packages to a small fraction of the inmates and they never got to see extermination camps like Teblinka until after the war.

Likewise as I was asking you how many survivors did you interview and can you prove that you did so?

That's also untrue. And if that's really the case then why is is that the Red Cross still to this day continues to affirm that the Nazi's led a policy of extermination?

 

This is the first time I've read of a Holocaustian finally admit that they're not willing to be honest and you haven't been. Your distortions, puerile outright dismissal of salient realities and complete lack of knowledge concerning 20th Century German history has been obvious from the beginning.

Go waste the time of someone else but please advise them that:

before you waste hours of their time.

 

I have been very honest with you and others on this thread.
I said that I don't care that much about the trial. Please try and pay attention instead of just reading what you want to read

Either you haven't read my posts and my links or you're lying.

Why do you keep suggesting things clearly apply to yourself?

 

If you had simply read the original report which I gave you the link to then we wouldn't be having this dialogue

I have not been dishonest in any way shape or form and I dare you to prove that. I have not been evasive in the slightest and when it comes to being juvenile then I suggest that you reflect upon your action as you have not been very obliging.

Advise them with what? Its not a full sentence.

It isn't my fault if you backtrack on your statements and use contradictory as well as fabricated sources


Grau I'm sorry that you feel this agitated but the facts do speak for themselves and people were intentionally murdered by the Nazi government during the war and did so on an industrial scale.

 

I have read that report a long time ago & came to the same conclusion articulated in the excerpt I've already cited:

“OFFICIAL INTERNATIONAL RED CROSS RECORDS RELEASED”
http://www.renegadetribune.com/inte...ort-confirms-holocaust-six-million-jews-hoax/

EXCERPT “In dealing with this comprehensive, three-volume Report, it is important to stress that the delegates of the International Red Cross found no evidence whatsoever of ‘gas chambers’.

The original 1946 edition did not even talk of ‘extermination’ or ‘death camps’ but after the emotional impact of the Nuremberg trials the Red Cross felt compelled to introduce into the expanded 1948 Report several, very cursory references to ‘death camps’ (Vol. 1 p. 641) and ‘extermination camps’ (Vol. I p. 645).
However, no means of’extermination’ is indicated.

In all its 1,600 pages the three-volume Report does not even mention such a thing as a
‘gas chamber’. It acknowledges that Jews, like many other wartime nationalities, suffered rigours and privations, but’ its complete silence
on the subject of’gassings’ is ample refutation of the ‘Holocaust’ legend.”CONTINUED

Advise your readers of what you wrote earlier: "I don't care to be honest" aka "I'm not willing to be truthful"

When you keep repeating falsehoods like I use "fabricated sources" but claim that only your's are truthful it reminds me of of my time working on an Emergency Psychiatric Unit for a large inner-City

Occasionally, I would play cards with some of the psychiatric patients and remember one mild but delusional little, old lady who would "win" every hand, no matter who had the highest cards.
I only went through the motions because it was a non threatening way to get to better understand the workings of the minds of the patients I was treating.

I vividly remember complimenting her on her card playing ability to which she replied:
"Don't feel badly, I keep winning because all my cards are "trump cards".

That's precisely what it feels like when I attempt to debate equally delusional Hasbara Trolls only they are less honest than that deluded, little old lady all of whose cards were "trump cards" in her mind.

That's what I meant by your "Heads I win- Tails you Lose" mentality that is endemic to tactics used by Hasbara Trolls

No, I don't feel agitated, but feel like I'm back on that Psychiatric unit attempting to debate one of the patients all of whose cards are "trump cards"

Over the last few days I've posted countless credible sources debunking Holocaustian dogma which you simply dismiss under the delusional notion that only your "cards" are "trump cards"

Before you cite the Nuremberg kangaroo Trial you should know what American judge, Justice Wenersturm, President of one of Tribunals has to say about the criminally fraudulent process:

"“LEGAL PRINCIPLES IGNORED”

EXCERPT “The real background of the Nuremberg Trials was exposed by the American judge, Justice Wenersturm, President of one of Tribunals.

He was so disgusted by the proceedings that he resigned his appointment and flew home to America, leaving behind a statement to the Chicago Tribune which ennumerated point by point his objections to the Trials (cf Mark Lautern, Das Letzte Wort über Nürnberg, p. 56).

Points 3 -8 are as follows:

3. The members of the department of the Public Prosecutor, instead of trying to formulate and reach a new guiding legal principle, were moved only by personal ambition and revenge.

4. The prosecution did its utmost in every way possible to prevent the defence preparing its case and to make it impossible for it to furnish evidence.

5. The prosecution, led by General Taylor, did everything in its power to prevent the unanimous decision of the Military Court being carried out i.e. to ask Washington to furnish and make available to the court further documentary evidence in the possession of the American Government.

6. Ninety per cent of the Nuremberg Court consisted of biased persons who, either on political or racial grounds, furthered the prosecution's case.

7. The prosecution obviously knew how to fill all the administrative posts of the Military Court with "Americans" whose naturalisation certificates were very new indeed, and who, whether in the administrative service or by their translations etc., created an atmposhere hostile to the accused persons.

8. The real aim of the Nuremberg Trials was to show the Germans the crimes of their Führer, and this aim was at the same time the pretext on which the trials were ordered . . .

Had I known seven months earlier what was happening at Nuremberg, I would never have gone there."

He observed that not even ten per cent of the Americans employed at the Nuremberg courts were actually Americans by birth.”CONTINUED [1]







[1] Did Six Million Really Die?
By Richard E. Harwood


#5

THE NUREMBERG TRIALS

 

Well clearly you didn't because there are multiple instances where it states quite clearly that Germany led a policy of extermination.
Even if we discount the report then the Red Cross today affirms quite clearly that the Holocaust occured and even authors whom you cite believe the same although they contest the numbers

I never wrote that. I said that I don't care that much about Haverbrook

I find this and the other "quote" to be incredibly offensive and just simply a lie.

Because you do and they are secondary sources and stictly speaking I have never claimed that only mine are truthful.
Also there is the double standards which you apply to sources. I mean you write in one post that the Red Cross didn't find any evidence and then in another that the Red Cross can't be trusted because they were under allied control.

Now you're just being insulting

Then that's double Dutch to me

No you haven't. You've certainly repeated that you have sources but it doesn't mean that they are credible or accurate.

I have never cited the Nuremberg trials. I consider them to a separate issue so I have no idea why you have introduced that into the discussion

 

I see the usual suspects continue to spout the same tired long old debunked arguments. Considering that the evidence is overwhelmingly against the ridiculous global jewish conspiracy theories apparently involving literally MILLIONS of people which is at the heart of holocaust denialism, it would seem that their intellectual bankruptcy is rivaled only by their bigotry.