After Germany’s defeat in WWII, the Nuremberg and later trials were organized primarily for political purposes rather than to dispense impartial justice. Wears War brings to you each week a quote from the many fine men and women who were openly appalled by the trials. All of these people were highly respected and prominent in their field, at least until they spoke out against the trials.



Paul Rassinier, a member of the French resistance and survivor of Buchenwald and Dora concentration camps during World War II, wrote in regard to estimates of Jewish losses at the Nuremberg trial:


      The mechanism of this operation, which is so crude that it stares you in the face and which is found in all of the figuring of all of these people, is quite simple: in 1945, during the post-war turmoil, the Jewish communities of every country were supposedly invited to state very quickly what their losses had been so that Justice Jackson could take them into account in his speech for the prosecution at the Nuremberg Trial where such figures were prefaced with the expression: “it is estimated in full cognizance….”

It was another one of the machiavellianisms of Nuremberg that every time that the prosecution brought forth an accusation for which they would not or could not give the source they used the expression “in full cognizance” or “from an assured source”—that was generally the case when the source was Jewish—and it was up to the accused to prove their innocence. At Nuremberg it was not up to the prosecution to prove guilt since the Allies recognized early that their adherence to the Anglo-American jurisprudential presumption of “innocent until proven guilty” would deny them the “convictions” which they sought.

Image: Paul Rassinier and his book The Drama of the European Jews (Das Drama der Juden Europas). He came to the following conclusion:
During the last 15 years, outside of Soviet-occupied territories, when someone named a witness who claimed to have himself attended the gassings, I went there immediately to record his testimony. And each time the same thing happened: with my file in hand, I asked so many precise questions to the witness, that he finally declared that a good friend, unfortunately deceased, whose testimony could not be questioned, told him about the matter. In this way, I have laid back thousands of kilometers across Europe.


Source: Rassinier, Paul, The Holocaust Story and the Lies of Ulysses, Costa Mesa, CA: The Institute for Historical Review, 1978, pp. 343, 384.