Nuremberg Trials 1

http://www.holocaustdenialvideos.com
Contrary to popular belief all the defendants pled not guilty.

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• nazi
• jew
• treblinka
• belzec
• sobibor
• war
• crimes
• holocaust
• denial
• revisionism
• shoa
• israel
• julius
• streicher
• der
• stuermer
• poland
• warsaw
• genocide
• national
• socialism
• germany
• robert
• jackson
• yankel
• wiernik
• death
• camp
• samuel
• rajzman
• ss
• ushmm
• raul
• hilberg
• rudulf
• hoess
• hess
• spandau
• yitzak
• arad

[shelman23]

Another ignorant idiot.

[Hochdorff]

That's not a "believe". It's not something theological, it's a historical fact.

[lynchie3000]

@ijhammer

The Irving vs. Lipstadt trial took place 55 years after the end of the war you pillock.

[ijhammer]

@ijhammer well suffer from incomplete researches and quite likely will not be the example of professional work which any of the prosecuting nations would normally wish to sponsor."

Justice Jackson

[ijhammer]

@ijhammer no procedures had been established, no tribunal was in existence, no usable courthouse stood here, none of the hundreds of tons of official German documents had been examined, no prosecuting staff had been assembled, nearly all of the present defendants were at large, and the four prosecuting powers had not yet joined in common cause to try them. I should be the last to deny that the case may

[ijhammer]

@ijhammer "limited events seldom commence a trial within a year of the event in litigation. Yet less than 8 months ago today the courtroom in which you sit was an enemy fortress in the hands of German SS troops. Less than 8 months ago nearly all our witnesses and documents were in enemy hands. The law had not been codified,

[ijhammer]

@lynchie3000 bullshit, the trial took place 8 months after the war ended, justice jackson specifically stated in the opening statement that it will be sloppy and lack evidence because of the short time period

[ThreeWordsFirstWord]

@streptococcus43 here here

[lynchie3000]

@streptococcus43

"The consequence of the absence of any overt documentary evidence of gas chambers at these camps, coupled with the lack of archaeological evidence, means that reliance has to be placed on eye witness and circumstantial evidence”

- Justice Gray, Judgement, Irving vs. Lipstadt trial

The greatest holocaust experts, backed by teams of researchers prepared for the trial for over 2yrs, but they couldn't produce any "overt documentary" or archaeological evidence for the gas chambers.

[streptococcus43]

mmmmmm No

To your pseudo intellectual "research" over google you forgot to mention a few things. So I'll help you:

7,690,000 results in google for "Holocaust survivors"d

6,620,000: results in google for the phrase "PhD in Holocaust"d

45,200,000 results for "Books on Holocaust"d

1,320,000 results for "Holocaust deniers are idiots" d

6,630,000 results for Nati's exermination of jews" d

17,500for academic articles

Denying that a certain atrocity took place is almost as severe as comitting it.

[2011VMICadet]

The tribunals were not tasked with proving what happened, it was common knowledge what had happened, many officers and witnesses involved in the proceedings had just fought the war, many of them had seen it first hand. Countless witnesses were brought in, not to prove the existence of camps, but to provide evidence against the individual defendants.

Essentially, not only were the defendants on trial but so was natural law. Is justice and "good" universal? Should it be? Focus on that.

[2011VMICadet]

I'm not surprised the camps themselves were not discussed very much at all. You have to realize that the proceedings dealt specifically with several things. The first thing was the legal positivism versus natural law mindset, which would (and did) set the basis and authority for which they could be convicted. The second major factor was proving each person's guilt in the situation with said justification. They had to prove they were not only involved but capable of conviction.