Difference between revisions of "Nuremberg Trials"
m (link to Doctors' trial) |
|||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|image_caption=Defendants in the dock at Nuremberg | |image_caption=Defendants in the dock at Nuremberg | ||
|wikipedia=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_trials | |wikipedia=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_trials | ||
| + | |spartacus=http://spartacus-educational.com/2WWnuremberg.htm | ||
|start=20 November 1945 | |start=20 November 1945 | ||
|end=1 September 1946 | |end=1 September 1946 | ||
}} | }} | ||
| + | The '''Nuremberg Trials''' were an application of the [[legal process]] to the senior officials of the Nazi German government. | ||
{{SMWQ | {{SMWQ | ||
|text=What the Americans and the British did at Nuremberg was deeply flawed but Nonetheless truly astonishing. They insisted – much to the surprise of the [[Nazi]] defendants and perhaps of humanity – that the de jure world of law and institutions really mattered; that the “[[Kellogg-Briand Pact]]s” and “[[Hague Convention]]s” of the world, if you will, would have the final say and the last laugh over the cynical de facto world of business-as-usual. At Nuremberg, evidence of pre-meditated aggressive intent was no longer ignored, nor jadedly accepted as an open secret. It was publicly denounced and criminally punished. | |text=What the Americans and the British did at Nuremberg was deeply flawed but Nonetheless truly astonishing. They insisted – much to the surprise of the [[Nazi]] defendants and perhaps of humanity – that the de jure world of law and institutions really mattered; that the “[[Kellogg-Briand Pact]]s” and “[[Hague Convention]]s” of the world, if you will, would have the final say and the last laugh over the cynical de facto world of business-as-usual. At Nuremberg, evidence of pre-meditated aggressive intent was no longer ignored, nor jadedly accepted as an open secret. It was publicly denounced and criminally punished. | ||
| Line 20: | Line 22: | ||
Justice [[Robert H. Jackson]], chief prosecutor of the Nuremberg Trials, introduced the concept of the [[Supreme crime]]. | Justice [[Robert H. Jackson]], chief prosecutor of the Nuremberg Trials, introduced the concept of the [[Supreme crime]]. | ||
| − | == | + | ==The Doctors' trial== |
| − | + | {{FA|Doctors' trial}} | |
| + | ==Hypocrisy== | ||
| + | Even as the the allies were conducting the [[Doctors Trial]], US doctors were carrying out [[Guatemala syphilis experiment|similarly murderous medical research]] in [[Guatemala]], fact that would not emerge until [[2005]]. [[Operation Paperclip]] was resettling Nazi scientists in [[USA]]. And in deepest secrecy, the medical and [[biological warfare]] experts from the Japanese [[Unit 731]] were sharing their gruesomely attained knowledge with their US colleagues. | ||
{{SMWDocs}} | {{SMWDocs}} | ||
| + | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
{{reflist}} | {{reflist}} | ||
| − | |||
Latest revision as of 07:45, 11 December 2021
 Defendants in the dock at Nuremberg | |
| Date | 20 November 1945 - 1 September 1946 |
|---|---|
| Subpage | •Nuremberg Trials/Doctors' trial |
The Nuremberg Trials were an application of the legal process to the senior officials of the Nazi German government.
“What the Americans and the British did at Nuremberg was deeply flawed but Nonetheless truly astonishing. They insisted – much to the surprise of the Nazi defendants and perhaps of humanity – that the de jure world of law and institutions really mattered; that the “Kellogg-Briand Pacts” and “Hague Conventions” of the world, if you will, would have the final say and the last laugh over the cynical de facto world of business-as-usual. At Nuremberg, evidence of pre-meditated aggressive intent was no longer ignored, nor jadedly accepted as an open secret. It was publicly denounced and criminally punished.”
Amy Baker Benjamin [1]
Contents
Origins
The legal basis for the trial was established by the London Charter, agreed upon by the four so-called Great Powers on 8 August 1945, which restricted the trial to "punishment of the major war criminals of the European Axis countries".
Procedure
Some 200 German war crimes defendants were tried at Nuremberg, and 1,600 others were tried under the traditional channels of military justice. A second set of trials of lesser war criminals was conducted under Control Council Law No. 10 at the U.S. Nuremberg Military Tribunals (NMT), which included the Doctors' Trial and the Judges' Trial.
Legacy
Justice Robert H. Jackson, chief prosecutor of the Nuremberg Trials, introduced the concept of the Supreme crime.
The Doctors' trial
- Full article: Doctors' trial
- Full article: Doctors' trial
Hypocrisy
Even as the the allies were conducting the Doctors Trial, US doctors were carrying out similarly murderous medical research in Guatemala, fact that would not emerge until 2005. Operation Paperclip was resettling Nazi scientists in USA. And in deepest secrecy, the medical and biological warfare experts from the Japanese Unit 731 were sharing their gruesomely attained knowledge with their US colleagues.
Group
| Group | Start | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Erlangen Nuremberg University | 1742 | Closely connected to the large engineering company Siemens |
Related Documents
| Title | Type | Publication date | Author(s) | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Document:Impact and Future of Holocaust Revisionism | review | 1 January 2005 | Robert Faurisson | A comprehensive review of research into the Official Narrative of "The Holocaust" and the legislation, court cases and other events that publication of this research precipitated, between about 1970 and 2005. |
| Document:The new alliance between anti-vaxxers and the far right is a deadly threat | Article | 1 August 2021 | Paul Mason | "Though they claim to be “peaceful”......by setting themselves up as the victims of genocide, the anti-vaxxers give themselves permission to threaten violence.....Those behind the “crime” are said to include governments and the World Economic Forum (WEF)" because the real fascists are the ones that oppose oppressive government mandates and forced injections. |
| File:Israeli Founding Myths.pdf | Book | 1995 | Roger Garaudy | Described by the author as "...the History of a Heresy". It presents evidence-based criticisms of official narratives that remain absolute taboo in the West, most notably on The Holocaust, Zionism, and the Nuremberg Tribunal |
| File:Not Guilty at Nuremberg.pdf | book | 1996 | Carlos Porter | Long suppressed and ignored German defense evidence from the post-WWII Nuremberg trials. A very useful work of reference for those researching Victors' Justice in general and the Nuremberg Tribunals in particular |
