9. The Nuremburg Trials 1945 to 1949
Posted on March 1, 2021
9. The Nuremberg Trials 1945 to 1949:
The Nuremberg Trials were held in the German City of Nuremberg from 1945 to 1949.
These Trials were held by the victorious Allies ( France, Britain, USA and Soviet Russia ) with the Germans as defendants.
They were the worst sort of show trials with the main Judge being Nikitchenko, who had presided over Stalins’ show trials of 1936 to 1938 in the Soviet Union. The Court came up with ridiculous findings like Jews being turned in to lampshades and even soap, these claims are now discredited and even the Jews admit they were untrue.
The Chief Justice of the United States Harlan Fiske Stone called the Nuremberg trials a fraud. He said:
“Chief US prosecutor Jackson is away conducting his high-grade lynching party in Nuremberg,” he wrote. “I don’t mind what he does to the Nazis, but I hate to see the pretense that he is running a Court and proceeding according to common law. This is a little too sanctimonious a fraud to meet my old-fashioned ideas.”
The Nuremberg Trials – the ultimate Soviet show trial held under the Allies.
Associate Supreme Court Justice William O Douglas charged that the Allies were guilty of “substituting power for principle” at Nuremberg. “I thought at the time and still think that the Nuremberg trials were unprincipled,” he wrote. “Law was created ex post facto to suit the passion and clamor of the time.”
According to British General Montgomery, the Germans had only one sin : They lost the war.
President John F Kennedy in his book, Profiles in Courage, criticized Nuremberg as a show trial.
Out of 139 German witnesses who testified that the Holocaust had occurred, the British Medical Officer recorded that 137 had “damage to their testicles that is beyond repair”. A number of Germans had died under interrogation by the Allies. There was also the threat of sending Peoples’ families to Soviet Gulags.
(aswith 2,400 of 3,000 court staff)
The more I read about the Nuremburg ‘Trials’? I’m shocked at the raw brutality. I know FDR, supposedly the great War Hero President, darling of the Democrats, surrounded himself with Jewish advisers. Or ‘minders’, as the cynics allege. Morgenthau’s sterilization plans for the Germans were unspeakable. But simply to ‘hand over’ the entire proceedings to this lynch mob? THERE is your true ‘day of infamy’.
What kind of ‘Trial’ crushes the accused’s TESTICLES??
“Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole Truth, so help me God, and, by the way, say bye-bye to your testicles??”
The insight into the mindset of the Jews is chilling. These people are crazy. Demonic. Utterly evil, full of rage and hatred. And their recent complete hijacking of the United States (following decades of steady 5th column infiltration of all the top agencies) bodes ominously for the future. And STILL… tens of millions of ‘Christian’, ‘Zionist’ Americans slumber peacefully on.
“Yet a little sleep, a little slumber. A folding of the hands to sleep.”
The Nuremburg Trials and the use of ‘hearsay’ evidence
The Nuremburg ‘Trials’, the biggest legal farce of the 20th century, that flew in thousands of eager-to-the-spoils Jews from all around the world?
The Nuremburg Trials, orchestrated, staffed, crudely choreographed by the #TalmudicMafia, and set against a background of muh wailing and tears? Shrunken heads and human skin lamp shades?
Kangaroo Court on steroids?
Using torture, the crushing of prisoners’ genitalia, threats to prisoners’ families?
Forcing people like the Auschwitz Commandant to sign a confession in English, which he did not speak?
With all the other utterly absurd travesties of even elemental ‘Justice’, I’d say their massive use of ‘hearsay evidence’ was just one more hopping-barking hilarity, among a shamelessly organised Armada.
Of galloping Kangaroos.
Anecdotal fallacy/Volvo fallacy
Hearsay Evidence – FindLawhttps://www.findlaw.com › criminal › criminal-procedure
Feb 12, 2019 Hearsay Defined Hearsay is defined as an out-of-court statement, made in court, to prove the truth of the matter asserted. These out-of-court statements do not have to be spoken words, but they can also constitute documents or even body language.
Last edited by Francis Meyrick on March 31, 2021, 8:31 am |