Editor’s Comment: To grasp the absurd and unjustifiable treatment of Monika Schaefer one must understand the Nuremberg Tribunal was never completely mothballed. Its principles live on today and are designed to entrap people exercising the human right of free speech. Control the rules of a trial, and you control the outcome.
The Nuremberg Tribunal is a significant event in Western history. Here the rules were invented retrospectively to fit newly created definitions of ‘crime’. The unique (i.e. previously unheard of) definitions strayed so far from the Western concept of Blind Justice, that more than 70 years later, they are required to be upheld by increasingly draconian and globally over-reaching measures. These measures contravene multiple basic Human Rights recognized internationally, including by the UN.
German Historian Udo Walendy concerning the London Decree at the Nuremberg Trials wrote in 1999:
The London Decree, which is nothing less than the basic de facto law of contemporary Germany, is in its entire outline a general power of attorney for the victors, clothed in juridical terms, for imposing punishment on the defeated German people, from death, imprisonment and extradition to defamation, and for establishing the “collective guilt” of the German people. When in Part 6 new types of crimes (“crime against humanity” and “crime against peace”) were retroactively introduced, the wording “participation in a conspiracy” allows the prosecution of any German soldier or worker who had been fighting for Germany.
Western nations today are required to assume collective guilt for participation in a growing list of historical 'conspiracies' and crimes against humanity.
A German baby guilty of WWII. An English baby guilty of Colonialism. An American baby guilty of Slavery. That their ancestors would have suffered and survived through many historical events not of their own making is ignored.
32 survivors children were studied out of the offspring of more than 3,375,000 survivors receiving reparations 20 years after WWII. By 1994, 4.39 million survivors were approved for reparations*. Has rigorous Western scientific methodology also adopted the Nuremberg principles?
The arbitrary definition of an organization of the defeated enemy as “criminal” and the penal incrimination of each member of the organization, regardless of whether or not he himself committed a crime, is a measure which future generations will condemn as itself a crime against humanity.
Part 19, which releases the tribunal from any rule of evidence, and Part 21, according to which the tribunal shall not demand evidence for “self-evident” facts but bear them in mind, ex officio, not only disdain all justice, but also demonstrate that the authorities of the “civilized nations” knew which miscarriages of justice they needed to carry out the desired vengeance. If one moreover considers the use of the formula “self-evident facts” in the tribunal proceedings, the shamelessness of the new international law becomes altogether evident.
The whole arrangement then was named “new natural law” set up by the “civilized and peace-loving nations” as opposed to the “unlawful Nazi state,” supposedly uniquely “criminal” and supported by “criminal organizations.” Incidentally, the General Assembly of the United Nations approved the London Decree as well as the verdicts of the Nuremberg Tribunal. This characterizes the degree to which under the victorious powers the definition of natural law and the international organizations deriving from it start from unjust prerequisites and insofar can guarantee neither justice nor peace.
Source: Walendy, Udo, The Brainwashing of the German Nation, Washington, D.C.: The Barnes Review, 2003, pp. 9-10.
The Nuremberg frenzy for guaranteeing mass guilty verdicts though not obvious in the ‘majestic’ court room photos, is none the less, self-evident fact:
“You know how I have despised anti-Semitism. You know how strongly I feel toward those who preach intolerance of any kind. With that knowledge — you will understand when I tell you that this staff is about seventy-five percent Jewish. Now my point is that the Jews should stay away from this trial — for their own sake. For — mark this well — the charge ‘a war for the Jews’ is still being made and in the post-war years it will be made again and again. The too large percentage of Jewish men and women here will be cited as proof of this charge. Sometimes it seems that the Jews will never learn about these things. They seem intent on bringing new difficulties down on their own heads. I do not like to write about this matter —it is distasteful to me — but I am disturbed about it. They are pushing and crowding and competing with each other and with everyone else.”
Sept. 25, 1945, letter Published JTA 9, October 2007.
It is in this context, a legal environment formed in possibly the most hostile & prejudicial court cases known in the western world, that Monika Schaefer finds herself at the mercy of today. That a Canadian, an ordinary woman who plays her violin for a living, can be imprisoned in a foreign nation without the slightest protest by her own Government should give you cause for pause. One expected such behavior from tin-pot despots like Mugabe. However, you are now being conditioned to accept it in First World nations. If we continue to acquiesce quietly, what will life be like for our descendants in a world of PC thought crime? Probably like life under a tin-pot despot.
*Reparations Numbers from: Repeated Claims of 6 million