The Counterfeit Courts Designed To Deliver Vindictive Reprisals Vs. Justice Are Now The Basis Of International Laws Today Killing Free Speech & Nations: Nuremberg Farce Quote #42

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.

These trials are important to understand because they were subsequently used to formulate new international laws and international criminal courts that govern us today. As the most objective encyclopedia of our times, Wikipedia, states: “The typification of the crimes and the constitution of the court represented a juridical advance that would be used afterwards by the United Nations for the development of a specific international jurisprudence in matters of war crime, crimes against humanity, war of aggression, as well as for the creation of the International Criminal Court.”

We will use this image again and again until people grasp the sustained global impact of this Kangaroo Court on their home nation, its history, its future, and the highly selective application of “war crimes” and “genocide” crimes.

 

Let us consider who really edits Wikipedia and why so many factual aspects of WWII and the Nuremberg trials are being hidden from you. Such as the man the “Nazi’s” murdered but miraculously appeared in the gallery to watch his murderer’s trial, or that Warren Buffet’s father was disgusted by the trials… sorry Wikipedia, we have thousands of quotes to debunk the Nuremberg trials and their ever changing rules and procedures.

 

Hon. Lydio Machado Bandeira de Mello, Dr. Juris.

Brazilian educator, jurist and author of more than 40 works on law and philosophy

Professor of Criminal Law, University of Minas Gerais, 1952-1971; Professor of Comparative Criminal Law, 1959-1971.

 

“I disapprove of everything which was done in that counterfeit court in which the victorious side in the war arrogated to itself the roles of accusing party, indicting part, and judge against individuals pre-selected from the losing side of the war. No trial ought to be held contrary to the fundamental norms of procedural penal law dictated and established by the consensus of men of good will.

There is a basic rule for a fair and valid judgment, based on human rights, namely: Nobody may be judged by a court interested in the condemnation of the accused. Therefore, no court set up by the victors of a war has sufficient moral capacity for judging persons pre-selected as scapegoats among the losers of the war. The victor has hatred towards the defeated who were provoked to fight him, and usually he committed the same crimes as his adversary. If the victor would hang his own war criminals, together with those of the defeated nations, then one could speak of justice. However, even so, it would be usurping the role that should fall to a super-national or world state. Without the existence of a world state, of a world penal code, of a world code of penal procedure, of a super-national judiciary power, and of an army capable of imposing discipline and obedience to the Law on recalcitrant nations, the term ‘war crime’ has no legal meaning. Acts of law are acts of defiance of the law, of disobedience to reason, and today a warring people kills multitudes of civilians (in the majority, women and children) and destroys irreplaceable property acquired by generation after generation. And today’s weapons are so atrocious, so ingeniously invented to destroy and to burn, that Dante would regard the verses of his Inferno as inadequate to express the indescribable torments that such weapons bring about.

A nation that spreads over another a sheet of inevitably deadly gasses or eradicates entire cities from the earth by the explosion of atomic bombs, does not have the right to judge anyone for war crimes; it has already committed the greatest atrocity, equal to no other atrocity; it has killed—amidst unspeakable torments—hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

Let us consider the existence of a world state and a world penal code, and then the designation ‘War Crime’ takes on legal meaning: a ‘War Crime’ would be any act of major atrocity, of unnecessary cruelty, of patent inhumanity, prohibited by the world penal code. And such offense may have been committed both by officials or soldiers of a victorious side and by officials or soldiers of a defeated side. However, even so, defendants would have the right to justify their acts before a world court which would judge them impartially, invoking, in their favor, the same causes impeditive of condemnation that a criminally indicted citizen can invoke in his own national courts. He would have the right: (a) to deny the allegations; (b) to contest or invalidate the evidence brought against him; (c) to allege and prove the bias of the judge; (d) to prove that he acted in lawful defense of his country (or of his troops) with the requisites of lawful defense which the world penal code would establish; (e) to prove that he acted in a state of necessity, i.e. that he practiced a considerably lesser evil in order to avoid a considerably greater evil; (f) to prove that he acted in compliance with an order from higher authority to which he could not refuse obedience, because it was invested with the requisites established by law.

When a group of victorious nations seizes and condemns for war crimes individuals pre-selected among the leaders and mentors of the defeated nations, this is not a judgment—it is a reprisal.”

Quote from the book Doenitz at Nuremberg: A Re-Appraisal edited by H. K. Thompson, Jr. and Henry Strutz, 2^nd edition, Torrance, CA: Institute for Historical Review, 1993.

 

Editor’s Comment:

A Small Sample Of ‘War Crimes’ By The Allied Nations Prior, During & Post-WWII That Have Never Been Tried By An International Criminal Court:

‘All Children Under The Age Of 5 Must Die!’ The British Empire’s Holocaust Hypocrisy: The Shocking Reality Of The Second Anglo-Boer War Scorched Earth Policy. British & Commonwealth nations participated in this Holocaust to serve the Rothschilds.

Prior and post-WWII, the Ukraine, occupied by the Soviets, became an ‘open-air’ death camp. This was reported in the international media. More than 10 million and possibly up to 18 million civilians perished cruelly in the forced Holodomors of 1921, 1932 and 1946.

Read: A Blank Check & Forked Tongues: How Britain & Poland Started WWII & Blamed Hitler & Germans and Poland Seeks Compensation From Germany For WWII Atrocities: Should They Be Saying Sorry Instead?

“…on May 3, 1945, of the ‘Hamburg-South’ passenger steamship Cap Arcona and the steamship Thielbek, both carrying concentration camp prisoners on board who believed that they were saved, but who were now bombed in the Neustadt Bay by Allied air planes. On the Cap Arcona alone, more than 5,000 perished – ship personnel, concentration camp inmates, and SS guards.” The well-known sinking of the great British liner Titanic on April 15, 1912, took “only” 1,523 lives. CODOH

 

“Nearly a month after the bomb had been dropped on Hiroshima, a city described as a graveyard upside down, 80,000 people had died & many of the 13,000 extremely injured survivors were dying in horrific pain each day”. Source & Images.

Mass graves of executed Poles found in and around Katyn Forest were blamed on Germany by the Allies. It is obvious the Allies had to hide their own crimes in order to prosecute Germans “legally”.

The waves of bombing over Dresden, a civilian refugee city, were staggered to ensure emerging rescue workers were massacred. Later the Allied planes mowed down anything moving, shooting not just children but also Zoo animals released by their caretakers in the hope they may survive.

“I’d rather be 10 years in a German camp than one day in a Polish one.” Günther Wollny, who had been an inmate in both Auschwitz and Zgoda. The end of WWII marked what is known as ‘History’s Most Terrifying Peace’. Ethnic German women and children were subjected to starvation, rape and torture in Allied-Run Concentration Camps. More than 2 million were raped in occupied territories. 95% of babies born in Berlin died under America’s watch in the Summer of 1945. More than 1 million disarmed German POWs were murdered by means of starvation, exposure, and illness under Eisenhower’s policy designed to disregard Geneva Conventions.

 

 

“Genrikh Yagoda,” the greatest Jewish murderer of the 20th Century, the GPU’s deputy commander and the founder and commander of the NKVD. Yagoda diligently implemented Stalin’s collectivization orders and is responsible for the deaths of at least 10 million people. His Jewish deputies established and managed the Gulag system. Read more here.

These crimes committed by the Allied nations are just the tip of the iceberg. The victors not only re-wrote history, they exonerated themselves by re-writing the norms of procedural penal law to apply internationally and nationally across the west. The west no longer enjoys the great and hard earned traditions of legal ‘norms’. Instead national and international laws not only change rapidly, but they expand almost daily in terms of their insidious reach into our lives, traditions and national interests.

This is how the survivors of the USS Liberty attack in 1967 came to be treated as badly as any forensic historian who dared question the Holocaust evidence.

 

The eyewitness testimony of the USS Liberty Survivors, though consistent with physical evidence, are disparaged. The men are persecuted even today. Meanwhile Holocaust survivor testimonies that are categorically impossible survive the rigorous tests of science and incredulity, infect our law schools today.

 

It is one thing to lose a free pension, quite another to be at risk of paying it back. Trillions of dollars today in WWII reparations and claims rely on the establishment’s narrative of WWII not being challenged. Reminiscent of the 2008 “Too Big To Fail” mantra.

 

This is a partial list. Even Wikipedia admits to many additional ALLIED NATIONS, who fought against Germany, being subjected to indirect legal, social and economic oppression for questioning any aspect of WWII that does not suit one group of people. The same group of people who refuse to acknowledge any other provable Holocaust of any other peoples. As George Orwell wrote “some animals are more equal than others”. Your various ancestors who suffered much, are definitively less equal and by default, so are you and the implications are revolutionary.

 

Read: Why The Holocaust Story Was Invented    Then ask yourself, who decided that a tiny portion of the planet has the capacity to move almost 4 Billion non-ethnic people from a land mass many times the size of Europe? And why?

See page 112 on the EU Report delightfully titled: STUDY ON THE FEASIBILITY OF ESTABLISHING A MECHANISM FOR THE RELOCATION OF BENEFICIARIES OF INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION

But you won WWII and massacred the “Nazi’s”? Why exterminate the Allied nations now?

“We are all consequences of immigration”… Really?

No wonder paid Wikipedia censors are working over time! Winning WWII was not supposed to make ethnic Europeans second class citizens in their own homelands… or was it?

Learn more Germany’s War: The Origins, Aftermath & Atrocities of WWII