That was the reality. Judge Jackson, handling the prosecution of Nuremberg's
most important trials was a man with presidential ambitions who needed
a high profile carved out of a self-serving stage: The Nuremberg Trials
were to be the launching pad of his presidential race. The Nuremberg court
was not selected from, or composed of, judges of the neutral Swiss, or
the neutral Swedes, or some more distant African, Asian or Latin American
countries. American civilian judges to a large extent made up the core
of the Allied judges--not military career officers, who might have had
some understanding and compassion for what the military leaders and the
civilian government under extreme war time conditions lived through. They
could have undoubtedly had a greater appreciation of why some of the wartime
measures were undertaken by Germany in the desperate days of the war. The
"liberal country club" experienced set of small town American
judges could not.
Furthermore, the Allied victors blatantly carried on their war against
the Germans by other means long after the shooting had stopped--not by
bombs and bullets but this time by falsely diagnosing psychologists or,
worse, by giving torturers a free hand: cynical and brutal investigators
who could, and frequently did, mistreat, beat, whip, starve, suffocate
and mutilate their prisoners into giving confessions and statements which
were as cruelly extracted as were the confessions from witches during the
disgusting witchcraft trials of the Dark Ages.
The injustice of the Nuremberg Trials was testified to not only by Harlan
Fiske Stone, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, but
also Iowa Supreme Court Justice Charles F. Wennerstrum, a man of the Midwest,
who sat on one of the tribunals trying lesser alleged Nazi war criminals
after the war.
Wennerstrum pointed out in a celebrated and controversial interview given
to a reporter of the Chicago Daily Tribune that frequently the interrogators
and some of the prosecutors were Jews who had fled Nazi Germany and came
back in Allied uniforms to torment and seek revenge on the National Socialists
who had wanted to expel the Jews from European living space because they
considered them harmful to the war effort and to Western European civilization.
Here is how the article described the lot that came to post-war Germany
to settle private scores, as seen through Justice Wennerstrum's eyes, after
he quit in disgust:
"If I had known seven months ago what I know today," (Wennerstrum) told friends as he packed to leave for America, "I would never have come here. . . The initial war crimes trial here was judged and prosecuted by Americans, Russians, British and French with much of the time, effort and expenses devoted to whitewashing the Allies and placing the sole blame for World War II upon Germany.
"What I have said of the nationalist character of the tribunals," the judge continued, "applies to the prosecution. The high ideals announced as the motives for creating these tribunals has not been evident.
"The prosecution has failed to maintain objectivity aloof from vindictiveness, aloof from personal ambitions for convictions. It has failed to strive to lay down precedents which might help the world to avoid future wars.
The entire atmosphere here is unwholesome. Linguists were needed. the Americans are notably poor linguists. Lawyers, clerks, interpreters and researchers were employed who became Americans only in recent years, whose backgrounds were embedded in Europe's hatreds and prejudices. . . (emphasis added) (Chicago Daily Tribune, 23 February 1948)
In other words, the Allies supplied the interrogators, most of them
Jews--as some of the victims, who had had a lifetime of experience in dealing
with Jews and thus recognized them, have stated. Those of us who are German
and can speak German can easily discern the ethnicity of some of the accusers
by their mere accents and patterns of speech, even in radio broadcasts
and newsreels.
Most of the evidence in the trials was "documentary," selected
by the Allies from the large tonnage of captured records. The document
selection was made by the prosecution. The defense had access only to those
documents which the prosecution considered material to the case and were
made available to the defense. The Allies could choose to release or to
hide and/or destroy any documents which did not fit their post-war strategy
or plans at Nuremberg. The Allies admitted elsewhere that their propaganda
Ministries and Intelligence Services had previously forged Nazi stamps,
Nazi passes, Nazi passports, orders, ID cards etc. which fooled the Nazis
many times because they were so perfect and over which the Allied propagandists
gloat to this day. It does not take a great leap of the imagination to
think what these same Allied Government agencies, their personnel and forgers
of documents could do now with all the captured genuine German document-producing
facilities, the captured type writers, rubber stamps and tons of letter
heads of all sizes and description and of any National Socialist organization
you care to mention.
Even setting aside questionable "documentary" evidence, let's
look at some of the accused's "testimony"--how it was extracted,
and what it really means.
Like vile exclamation marks, at the heart of the Nuremberg Tribunal stand
certain words: "Genocide" "Gas chamber." "Six
million." These words, and the value judgment concepts they connote,
were derived largely from the admissions and affidavit of one man, Rudolf
Hoess, the one-time war-time Kommandant at Auschwitz.
Rudolf Hoess was the Allies' most important witness to the "Holocaust."
His affidavit and his testimony were quoted extensively both by the prosecution
and in the judgment of the IMT at Nuremberg, as well as by the press. It
was his testimony which laid the foundation and validated the claim of
the ". . . extermination of millions of people by gas at Auschwitz."
Hoess's "confession" is heavily relied upon by historians like
Raul Hilberg and others as a primary documentary source to this day.
It is true that Hoess witnessed at Nuremberg to horrendous "atrocities,"
and he also confirmed the "truth" under oath of an affidavit
which he agreed to sign for the prosecution. In it, he confessed to having
given orders for the gassing of millions of victims. The affidavit, by
the way, was in English, a language he did not speak or understand, according
to family members.
We now know from the book "Legions of Death" that Rudolf Hoess
was beaten almost to death by Jewish members of the British Field Police
Force upon capture and badly mistreated thereafter until he gave this very
devastating "testimony" and "affidavit" used by the
Allies propagandists ever since. You be the judge. Here is an excerpt from
this book by Rupert Butler, published by Hamlyn Paperbacks, page 235:
At 5 PM on 11 March 1946, Frau Hoess opened her front door to six intelligence specialists in British uniform, most of them tall and menacing and all of them practiced in the more sophisticated techniques of sustained and merciless investigation.
No physical violence was used on the family: it was scarcely necessary. Wife and children were separated and guarded. Clarke's tone was deliberately low-key and conversational.
He began mildly: "I understand your husband came to see you as recently as last night."
Frau Hoess merely replied: "I haven't seen him since he absconded months ago"
Clarke tried once more, saying gently but with a tone of reproach: "You know that isn't true." Then all at once his manner had changed and he was shouting: "If you don't tell us, we'll turn you over to the Russians and they'll put you before a firing squad. Your son will go to Siberia."
It proved more than enough. Eventually, a broken Frau Hoess betrayed the whereabouts of the former Auschwitz Kommandant, the man who now called himself Franz Lang. Suitable intimidation of the son and daughter produced precisely identical information.
When they found Hoess, here is how the capture played out. Clarke, one of the participants, recalls it vividly:
"He was lying on top of a three-tier bunker wearing a new pair of silk pyjamas. We discovered later that he had lost the cyanide pill most of them carried. Not that he would have had much chance to use it because we had rammed a torch (flashlight) into his mouth."
Hoess screamed in terror at the mere sight of the British uniforms.
Clarke yelled: "What is your name?"
With each answer of "Franz Lang," Clarke's hand crashed into the face of the prisoner. The fourth time that happened, Hoess broke and admitted who he was.
The admission suddenly unleashed the loathing of the Jewish sergeants in the arresting party whose parents had died in Auschwitz following an order signed by Hoess.
The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pyjama ripped from his body. He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where it seemed to Clarke the blows and screams were endless.
Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: "Call them off, unless you want to take back a corpse."
A blanket was thrown over Hoess and he was dragged to Clarke's car, where the sergeant poured a substantial slug of whiskey down his throat. Then Hoess tried to sleep.
Clarke thrust his service stick under the man's eyelids and ordered in German: "Keep your pig eyes open, you swine." . . .
The party arrived back at Heide around three in the morning. The snow was swirling still, but the blanket was torn from Hoess and he was made to walk completely nude through the prison yard to his cell. It took three days to get a coherent statement out of him.
This statement, tortured and terrorized out of him, was the one we are
all familiar with--the "proof" for the so-called "gassing
of the Jews."
Historians today are finally admitting that Hoess is a totally unreliable
witness--and is it any wonder? He spoke of a concentration camp "Wolzek"
which does not even exist. He swore that 2,500,000 people were gassed and
burned at Auschwitz and a further half million died of disease, for a total
dead of three million. The Toronto Sun of July 18, 1990 claimed 1.5 million.
The Washington Post, on the same date, also mentioned 1.5 million. Quoted
from an article by Krzyszlov Leski, we have the following:
Poland has cut its estimate of the number of people killed by the Nazis in the Auschwitz death camp from 4 million to just over 1 million.
The vast majority of the dead are now accepted to have been Jews, despite claims by the former Polish communist government that as many Poles perished in Hitler's largest concentration camp. . .
The new study could rekindle the controversy over the scale of Hitler's final solution."
Shevach Weiss, a death camp survivor and Labor Party member of the Israeli Parliament, expressed disbelief at the revised estimates, saying: "It sounds shocking and strange." . . .
Shmuel Krakowsky, head of research at Israel's Yad Vashem memorial for Jewish victims of the Holocaust, said the new Polish figures were correct.
"The 4 million figure was let slip by Capt. Rudolf Hoess, the death camp's Nazi commander. Some have bought it, but it was exaggerated." . . .
But the Polish authorities said accurate estimates of the number killed could only be made by studying German documents seized by the Soviet Union. But Moscow has refused to return the archives.
A most convenient excuse! In 1989 I organized a write-in campaign to
persuade the then-Soviet Leader Gorbachev to release the Auschwitz Death
Registers captured in 1945 when the Red Army took over the Auschwitz complex.
A few months afterwards this actually happened. Gorbachev released these
all-important documents to the Red Cross, which showed in minute detail
why people had died in Auschwitz, the cause and time of death, their birth,
address etc.
74,000 names of people who had died were listed, of which only approximately
30,000 were Jews, along with an almost equal number of Poles and members
of other nationalities.
The incredibly shrinking Holocaust! The "millions" that we have
heard about for half a century and that we hear and read about still today
all started with the "testimony" beaten out of poor Hoess on
that horrible night in defeated Germany.
Historian Christopher Browning finally had to admit in a recent Vanity
Fair article that Hoess was an unreliable witness. Browning stated that
". . . Hoess was always a very weak and confused witness. The revisionists use him all the time for this reason, in order to try and discredit the memory of Auschwitz as a whole." (Holocaust Revisionism Source Book, 1994, p. 1)
But does that invalidate the Revisionist claims or their strategy? Not
at all. On the contrary. After all, Hoess's testimony was used as the skeleton
on which the entire Holocaust myth about mass gassings was constructed
in the first place. Revisionists have concentrated on Hoess precisely because
he is probably the most important source for Holocaust historians' conclusions
on and exaggerations about the Holocaust. Raul Hilberg, who wrote the "Bible"
of the "Holocaust," The Destruction of the European Jews,
(Holmes & Meier, Revised Edition, 1985 ) relies on Hoess's testimony
heavily, and Hoess was the primary witness relied upon by the Nuremberg
Tribunal in their judgment regarding the "extermination of the Jews,"
even though he told the court of having been savagely tortured.
What's more, Hoess's treatment by the Allies and the total unreliability
of his "evidence" are not unusual. We don't know how many of
the accused at the Nuremberg trials were badly mistreated, since references
in the trial transcripts to their mistreatment was expunged from the record.
(Read this again! Material damaging to the Allies was expunged from the
Nuremberg trial transcripts!)
An example is Streicher's testimony. Streicher was reported in the London
Times as having testified that he was tortured, whipped, spat on, and forced
to drink from a latrine. (Streicher Opens His Case, The Times, April 27,
1946). His testimony was later expunged from the record of the trial with
the active participation of the prosecution, the president of the Tribunal,
and even his own defense lawyer!
Other traces of the brutal treatment of the Nuremberg prisoners, however,
have survived. One of these witnesses was Gauleiter Sauckel's reference
to threats to his family, which did remain in the transcript. During his
testimony in May of 1946, Sauckel testified that he signed a document,
even though he did not know what was in that document, after his family
of 10 children was threatened with deportation to Russia.
And finally, it must not be forgotten that t his is the only judicial proceeding
conducted in the name of civilized nations where there was no appeal mechanism
to a parallel or higher authority for a review of the proceedings or any
verdicts that this so-called international military tribunal arrived at.
Their judgments over the leadership of Europe's most populous state, against
whom they had just fought a murderous, near genocidal war, were final and
deadly.
Keep all that in mind as you read, watch and listen to all the emotional
hype in the mass media on television and radio of these days. And for what?
The Jewish leader Nahum Goldman spells it out for you in his astounding
book, The Jewish Paradox, Pages 123-125, admitting to the mother
of all frauds. In his own words, at the conclusion of the agreement Goldman
obtained from Dr. Adenauer, the German Quisling State's first Allied-appointed
chancellor,
". . . the Germans will have paid out a total of 80 billion. . . Without the German reparations that started coming through during its first ten years as a state, Israel would not have half of its present infrastructure: All the trains in Israel are German, the ships are German, and the same goes for electrical installations and a great deal of Israel's industry . . . and that is setting aside the individual pensions paid to survivors. Israel today receives hundreds of millions of dollars in German currency each year . . . In some years the sums of money received by Israel from Germany has been as much as double or treble the contribution made by collections from international Jewry. Nowadays, there is no longer any opposition to the principle. (emphasis added)
Not anywhere you look!
After the Nuremberg Trials and Proceedings are stripped of the hyperbole
and smoke screens which surrounds them, it can be put quite bluntly:
The Allies did it all. The Allies fought a war on foreign shores--in part
to establish the State of Israel. The Allies lent a willing hand to political
ambitions that grew out of the Zionist camp. By means of the Nuremberg
trials, the Allies helped the establishment and financing of Israel. So
as to secure Israel, the Allies and their personnel became accusers, researchers,
interrogators, prosecutors, judges and executioners--all in one! The Allies
supplied the "experts" who sifted through the German documents,
which were all totally in Allied control, highlighting incriminating documents,
discarding exonerating evidence. These investigators were told only to
"find" incriminating documents against the hapless accused, as
I was told by the American scholar Charles Weber, Ph.D., who had been one
of these Allied researchers, and who testified at my own trials. These
researchers were told were told to ignore the documents that might have
spared the lives of the accused German leaders. When all was said and done,
there was not even an appeal.
U.S. Chief Justice Harlan Fiske Stone, speaking of the American Chief Prosecutor,
Jackson, finally had this to say, as mentioned in the Viking Press hard
cover, cited before, p. 746 :
"Jackson is away conducting his high grade lynching party in Nuremberg," he remarked. "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."
Some sanctimonious fraud!
Some record for the Allies to be "proud of"--to have helped manufacture
such a sick, perverted Marxist/Zionist inspired legal farce that would
condemn to death the leaders of the only military effort ever undertaken
to stop the "evil empire" from bringing to us all their "hate
law" ideology.
Are now the chickens coming home to roost? That's how America and the "free
world" have showed their gratitude to the defenders of Europe and
Western Civilization: by hanging brave and honest men who tried so valiantly
for so long to stop the decadence and the hypocrisy of what we now call,
shuddering, ". . . the coming New World Order"!
I bow my head in reverence to those who were judicially murdered at Nuremberg.
They were the world's martyrs, not villains. Not one of them would have
been condemned to death in a fair trial. Not one! Let's not forget they
sacrificed an entire nation, and in the end themselves, to save Western
civilization. They were defeated by thugs in robes and gangsters in uniform
and by the conspiracies hatched by shysters from the ghettos and shtetls
of Eastern Europe.