My introduction and aftermath of Nuremburg Trials

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
User42
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 11:52 am

My introduction and aftermath of Nuremburg Trials

Postby User42 » 7 years 1 month ago (Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:42 pm)

I have recently gotten intrigued by revisionism after the arrest of the Hungarian man a few months back from reading news stories about it and the comments in the stories. I grew up in Canada and was occasionally exposed to the mainstream stories about the Holocaust and I do recall the Ernst Zundel trials when they occurred but never dug too deep into the specifics, I just recall being curious as to why this subject was so protected. In recent years I have visited the Auschwitz camps because I happened to be in the area on business so I decided to go since I heard so much about it. I was pretty ambivalent on the entire subject until I watched the Cole video that I was directed to from one of the comments on the news story. I'm a pretty logical guy with a background in science (majored in Chemistry) and computer programming and I must say that there is no way I can buy into the mainstream Holocaust story. I have used holocausthandbooks as a good reference for materials to watch and read. Anyway that is my intro.

My question about Nuremburg is if there is one good specific basic resource that lists or shows what was "proven" during these trials that has since been academically proven to be false. There is a lot of information out there and I have kind of gotten lost in it and haven't really gotten into the Nuremburg trials nor do I want to get into them that much but am looking for some facts about the sham that it seems to have been. For example, was Dachau implied to have been an extermination camp at these trials only to be later proven that it wasn't? I'm not sure if Dachau was or wasn't specifically but that is the kind of thing that I am curious about when it comes to Nuremburg. Any help would be appreciated.

User avatar
Kladderadatsch
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 255
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 11:08 am

Re: My introduction and aftermath of Nuremburg Trials

Postby Kladderadatsch » 7 years 1 month ago (Wed Sep 26, 2012 9:56 am)

User42, I don't know about "academically proven to be false." Depends on what you mean by "academically." Since anything with so much as a whiff of "revisionism" in it is potentially career-ending for someone employed in the ivory tower, even those "academic" historians who know about the falsehoods and the whoppers in the Nuremberg record are not likely to go out of their way to prove the point. Safer just to pass over the embarrassing parts in silence . . .

But if by "academic" you mean just sourced and documented, then your friendly neighborhood revisionist has lots of interesting stuff for you. For example, you asked about Dachau . . .

From Porter's Not Guilty at Nuremberg, pp. 16-7:

In the final judgment of one of the most important Dachau Trials (Trial of Martin Gottfried
Weiss and Thirty-Nine Others, Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals, volume XI, p. 15,
published by the United Nations), the following sentence appears:

"In the Mathausen Concentration Camp case . . . the facts were basically the same - though
the casualty figures were much higher as mass extermination by means of a gas chamber was
practiced ---"

Is this an admission that no gas chamber existed at Dachau? According to Law Reports of
Trials of War Criminals, no Dachau trial ever "proved" the existence of a gas chamber at
Dachau.

At Nuremberg, a "certified true copy" of the judgment of the Trial of Martin Gottfried Weiss
and Thirty Nine Others was introduced into evidence with that sentence deleted as Document
3590-PS (V 199 <<228>>) along with 3 other documents alleging mass extermination by
gassing at Dachau (Document 3249-PS, V 172-173 <<198>, XXXII 60; Document 2430-PS,
XXX 470; and 159-L, XXXVII 621).


There are a bunch of leads to follow up on here. I just took a few, namely the "3 other documents alleging mass extermination by gassing at Dachau (Document 3249-PS, V 172-173 <<198>, XXXII 60; Document 2430-PS, XXX 470; and 159-L, XXXVII 621)." These documents are all available online as part of the IMT "Major War Criminals" records,

http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/ ... inals.html

The roman numerals refer, of course, to the various volumes of the record.

3249-PS, V 172-173 <<198>, XXXII 60 (the document itself is in v. XXXII, and is discussed in v. V)
2430-PS, XXX 470
159-L, XXXVII 621

I looked these up in turn, and sure enough, the claim of mass-gassings is there. The most detailed and explicit reference is in 159-L, "ATROCITIES AND OTHER CONDITIONS IN CONCENTRATION CAMPS IN GERMANY" which was published as a Report of a Special Committee to the 79th Congress of the United States . . . so you know it's true, right? :lol:

EXECUTION AT DACHAU

A distinguishing feature of the Dachau Camp was the gas chamber for the execution of prisoners and the somewhat elaborate facilities for execution by shooting.

The gas chamber was located in the center of a large room in the crematory building. It was built of concrete. Its dimensions were about 20 by 20 feet, and the ceiling was some 10 feet in height! In two opposite walls of the chamber were airtight doors through which condemned prisoners could be taken into the chamber for execution and removed after execution. The supply of gas into the chamber was controlled by means of two valves on one of the outer walls, and beneath the valves was a small glass-covered peephole through which the operator could watch the victims die. The gas was let into the chamber through pipes terminating in perforated brass fix- tures set into the ceiling. The chamber was of size sufficient to exe- cute probably a hundred men at one time.

The room in which the gas chamber stood was flanked on both ends by warerooms in which the bodies were placed after execution to await cremation. The size of each room was approximately 30 by 50 feet. At the time we visited the camp these warerooms were piled high with dead bodies. In one of the rooms the bodies were thrown in an irregular heap. In the other room they were neatly stacked like cordwood. The irregular pile of bodies was perhaps 10 feet high, covering most of the floor space. All of them were naked.

IMT, XXXVII, p.621


Has this been "academically proven to be false"? I don't know. But then, as Porter notes, the "Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals" (a kind of digest of the trial procedings) itself admits that during the trials themselves the gassing claim was never really "proven" to be true--just alleged, and then left hanging there as a free-floating slander in the public mind. Why prove something if you don't need to?

And ever since Martin Broszat declared, in August 1960, that "Neither in Dachau nor in Bergen-Belsen nor in Buchenwald were Jews or other prisoners gassed," it's pretty much been a moot point anyway. Even our "academic" historians admit that the story was a lie. They just prefer not to use that word. And they'd much prefer it if we all forgot about the matter entirely.
Der grosse Kladderadatsch war da.

-- D. Eckart Der Bolschewismus von Moses bis Lenin, "Er"

User42
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 11:52 am

Re: My introduction and aftermath of Nuremburg Trials

Postby User42 » 7 years 1 month ago (Wed Sep 26, 2012 11:01 am)

Thanks Kladderadatsch, that's some good material there. It was poor wording but what I meant by academically proven is anything that was allegedly "proven" at Nuremburg but has since been declared as false even by the majority of supporters of the mainstream Holocaust story. I'm curious as to how extensive that list is.

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3357
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: My introduction and aftermath of Nuremburg Trials

Postby Hektor » 7 years 1 month ago (Wed Sep 26, 2012 1:47 pm)

I haven't established a list, but it is worthwhile to browse through the transcripts. They are available online.
The Nuremberg Trials / IMT were of course fishy right from the beginning given that the powers that fought against and occupied Germany were holding it over their recently crushed enemy. Even, if some participants wanted to be fair, the whole climate at the trial + the bogus atrocity stories circulating through the media would actually be a pretext to get something quite skewed out of it. Some of the accusations were however dropped, as there were actually too much evidence against them. That is btw. not so unusual for show trials as many think.

Lohengrin
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 148
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 7:34 pm

Re: My introduction and aftermath of Nuremburg Trials

Postby Lohengrin » 7 years 1 month ago (Wed Sep 26, 2012 3:49 pm)

User42 "My question about Nuremburg is if there is one good specific basic resource that lists or shows what was "proven" during these trials that has since been academically proven to be false."
In Nuremberg (IMT) nothing, repeat Nothing is proven about the three main points of the Jewish holocaust-Version: Nothing about any "Hitler Command" about "murdering all Jews", Nothing about "Gas Chambers", and also Nothing about "Six Million". Nothing.

This is the simple Truth about the IMT, nothing more and nothing less.

Of course, there were all kinds of crazy and monstruously allegations, declarations and "confessions", but all and only of the kind "stories told". Nothing concrete, nothing forensic, nothing what can be called "proof" by normal forensic and court standards. It was all and only stories, stories, stories.

Nevertheless, in his Conclusion for the IMT on 26th July 1946, British Main Prosecutor Hartley Shawcross said, that “more than six million Jews were killed by the Germans, …in an industrial mass operation in Gas Chambers and Ovens in Auschwitz, Dachau(!), Treblinka, Buchenwald(!), Majdanek en Oranienburg(!)”. (Trial of the Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal (IMT Blue Series”), 1947-1949, Vol. 19, p. 434.) The utter nonsense of it is since then irrefutable ascertained.

It is this kind of citations, where all "scholars", "historians", journalistst, etc. are referring to speaking of "proof"; NOT TO THE FACTS !

User avatar
borjastick
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2514
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:52 am
Location: Europe

Re: My introduction and aftermath of Nuremburg Trials

Postby borjastick » 7 years 1 month ago (Thu Sep 27, 2012 2:14 am)

Don't forget that the general standard in this show trial was very low. In the opening statements and rules of the IMT it was declared that the normal rules of burden of proof shall not apply here. I am not certain of the exact wording but this is pretty close and the meaning was clear.

This a crystal clear case of say what you want without fear of criticism or the need to back up what you say. In other words you can say what you want, make up any outrageous lies and claims and we WILL believe you. Total bollocks.
'Of the four million Jews under Nazi control in WW2, six million died and alas only five million survived.'

'We don't need evidence, we have survivors' - israeli politician

User avatar
Kingfisher
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1673
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:55 pm

Re: My introduction and aftermath of Nuremburg Trials

Postby Kingfisher » 7 years 1 month ago (Thu Sep 27, 2012 4:04 am)

Two extracts from Mark Turley's book From Nuremberg to Nineveh are available on Inconvenient History. http://www.inconvenienthistory.com/columnists/mark-turley.php.
They are not precisely what you are looking for but they are a very good overview of what was wrong with Nuremberg.

The full book can be purchased from Amazon or as an ebook for just 1GBP from http://www.lulu.com/shop/mark-turley/from-nuremberg-to-nineveh/ebook/product-18603549.html

Mortimer
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 422
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 2:27 am

Re: My introduction and aftermath of Nuremburg Trials

Postby Mortimer » 7 years 1 month ago (Sat Sep 29, 2012 10:24 pm)

User42 wrote:Thanks Kladderadatsch, that's some good material there. It was poor wording but what I meant by academically proven is anything that was allegedly "proven" at Nuremburg but has since been declared as false even by the majority of supporters of the mainstream Holocaust story. I'm curious as to how extensive that list is.

Carlos Porter has compiled the more absurd holocaust claims that were used at Nuremberg in his book MADE IN RUSSIA THE HOLOCAUST. The entire book is available free online. www.cwporter.com/intro.htm
There are 2 sides to every story - always listen or read both points of view and make up your own mind. Don't let others do your thinking for you.

User avatar
Armor105
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 140
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 3:42 pm
Contact:

Re: My introduction and aftermath of Nuremburg Trials

Postby Armor105 » 6 years 11 months ago (Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:54 pm)

User42 wrote:Thanks Kladderadatsch, that's some good material there. It was poor wording but what I meant by academically proven is anything that was allegedly "proven" at Nuremburg but has since been declared as false even by the majority of supporters of the mainstream Holocaust story. I'm curious as to how extensive that list is.


I think gassings at Dachau were allegedly "proven" at Nuremburg but the majority of supporters of the mainstream Holocaust story now admit it was balderdash.

"Neither in Dachau nor in Bergen-Belsen nor in Buchenwald were Jews or other prisoners gassed. The gas chamber in Dachau was never entirely finished or put "into operation." Hundreds of thousands of prisoners who perished in Dachau and other concentration camps in the Old Reich were victims, above all, of the catastrophic hygienic and provisioning conditions: according to official SS statistics, during the twelve months from July 1942 through June 1943 alone, 110,812 persons died of disease and hunger in all of the concentration camps of the Reich."

- Dr. Martin Broszat, from a letter that appeared in the Hamburg weekly Die Zeit under the headline "Keine Vergasung in Dachau." It appeared in the German edition of August 19, 1960, and in the US edition of August 26, 1960 (p. 14).

Martin Broszat (August 14, 1926 – October 14, 1989) was a German historian specializing in modern German social history whose work has been described by The Encyclopedia of Historians as indispensable for any serious study of the Third Reich

- Wiki
Rom 13:12 The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light.


User avatar
Armor105
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 140
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 3:42 pm
Contact:

Re: My introduction and aftermath of Nuremburg Trials

Postby Armor105 » 6 years 11 months ago (Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:55 pm)

borjastick wrote:Don't forget that the general standard in this show trial was very low. In the opening statements and rules of the IMT it was declared that the normal rules of burden of proof shall not apply here. I am not certain of the exact wording but this is pretty close and the meaning was clear.


Article 19: 'The Tribunal shall not be bound by technical rules of evidence'.

Article 21: 'The Tribunal shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge, but shall take judicial notice thereof.'


-International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg Trials, articles 19, 21.
Rom 13:12 The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light.


User avatar
Haldan
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1371
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 9:56 pm
Location: <secret>
Contact:

Re: My introduction and aftermath of Nuremburg Trials

Postby Haldan » 6 years 11 months ago (Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:45 pm)

Another programmer ! Welcome aboard User42 :P

I sort of lol'd at the exclamation mark in the text (159-L) posted by Kladderadatsch, this part:
Document 159-L
[...]Its dimensions were about 20 by 20 feet, and the ceiling was some 10 feet in height!


Why use an exclamation mark like so? Just looked wrong haha :wink:

-haldan
<?php if ($Holocaust == false ) {deny_repeatedly(); } else { investigate(); } ?>
Homage to Catalin Haldan

User avatar
Balsamo
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:44 pm

Re: My introduction and aftermath of Nuremburg Trials

Postby Balsamo » 6 years 11 months ago (Fri Nov 30, 2012 8:00 pm)

hi datsh (you gave the permission :wink: )

And ever since Martin Broszat declared, in August 1960, that "Neither in Dachau nor in Bergen-Belsen nor in Buchenwald were Jews or other prisoners gassed," it's pretty much been a moot point anyway. Even our "academic" historians admit that the story was a lie.


That is all he said. And except some lunies, since Dauchau was an earlier prison, mainly political, Bergen Belsen a very bad camp except for Jews (except in the End, it was where priviledged Jews were put...No uniform, no need to work, etc) and Buchenwald was more or less like Dachau...there is nothing to argue, but that is the reason why some rev sites declare that no gassing happened in the west, which being translated into no one were killed in western camps, etc...

I have a lot of problem with Nurenberg and the IMT, mainly because how and why it was done. But don't think that this was unoticed right from the start. The more recent international Tribunal for Yougoslavia shares a lot of the defaults of its ancestry...proofs unreliable, biased judgements, ok...buut would you conclude nothing happend in the former yougoslavia in the 90's ?

Bob
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2012 5:49 am

Re: My introduction and aftermath of Nuremburg Trials

Postby Bob » 6 years 11 months ago (Fri Nov 30, 2012 8:45 pm)

Balsamo wrote:
And ever since Martin Broszat declared, in August 1960, that "Neither in Dachau nor in Bergen-Belsen nor in Buchenwald were Jews or other prisoners gassed," it's pretty much been a moot point anyway. Even our "academic" historians admit that the story was a lie.


That is all he said. And except some lunies, since Dauchau was an earlier prison, mainly political, Bergen Belsen a very bad camp except for Jews (except in the End, it was where priviledged Jews were put...No uniform, no need to work, etc) and Buchenwald was more or less like Dachau...there is nothing to argue, but that is the reason why some rev sites declare that no gassing happened in the west, which being translated into no one were killed in western camps, etc...


Can you provide me with an example of such a site which translates this as “no one were killed in western camps”?

Balsamo wrote:I have a lot of problem with Nurenberg and the IMT, mainly because how and why it was done. But don't think that this was unoticed right from the start. The more recent international Tribunal for Yougoslavia shares a lot of the defaults of its ancestry...proofs unreliable, biased judgements, ok...buut would you conclude nothing happend in the former yougoslavia in the 90's ?


If I understand your analogy correctly, some revisionist claimed that because of the “show” nature of the Nuremberg Trial or because of problems described by you = nothing happened in the former Third Reich? As far as I know, regarding the Nuremberg Trial, revisionists have problems with particular things - gassings, extermination plan, six million, soap...and etc.

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3357
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: My introduction and aftermath of Nuremburg Trials

Postby Hektor » 6 years 11 months ago (Sat Dec 01, 2012 10:54 am)

Bob wrote:
Balsamo wrote:
And ever since Martin Broszat declared, in August 1960, that "Neither in Dachau nor in Bergen-Belsen nor in Buchenwald were Jews or other prisoners gassed," it's pretty much been a moot point anyway. Even our "academic" historians admit that the story was a lie.


That is all he said. And except some lunies, since Dauchau was an earlier prison, mainly political, Bergen Belsen a very bad camp except for Jews (except in the End, it was where priviledged Jews were put...No uniform, no need to work, etc) and Buchenwald was more or less like Dachau...there is nothing to argue, but that is the reason why some rev sites declare that no gassing happened in the west, which being translated into no one were killed in western camps, etc...

Can you provide me with an example of such a site which translates this as “no one were killed in western camps”?
....

The court historians said on a stage that the "Altreich"-camps, which would be the Western camps, were never used to gas people.
http://de.metapedia.org/wiki/Quelle/Kei ... _in_Dachau
They did however re-adjust that statement on later stages.

Bob
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2012 5:49 am

Re: My introduction and aftermath of Nuremburg Trials

Postby Bob » 6 years 11 months ago (Sat Dec 01, 2012 12:45 pm)

My question was related to Balsamo´s claim that "but that is the reason why some rev sites declare that no gassing happened in the west, which being translated into no one were killed in western camps, etc...

I asked him for obvious reasons, I never saw anybody to translate this "no gassing in Dachau and etc.” as “no one were killed in western camps” because - no gassing vs. nobody was killed - are two different things so i am waiting for Balsamo to provide me with some example when somebody translated it in this way.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot] and 1 guest