Other nuremberg trials

It was an opportunity — it goes without saying — that these would-be conquerors, these executioners, these ethnic cleansers, never gave their victims, the living or the dead. And for this sin of adherence to the rule of law and notions of fairness, the Allies have been criticized for seventy-five years and counting. Following World War II, there were dozens of war crimes trials, held by various forums in various places around the globe.

Of the two, the Nuremberg tribunal is by far the more famous, the recipient of many gallons of ink and a handful of movies. It had the advantage of being first.

While the IMT has come in for some criticism, it never really makes a dent, since the Nazis — and their manifest crimes — are hard to defend which is not to say they do not have defenders, then and now. The Tokyo Trials, on the other hand, are an entirely different story. Featuring eleven nations, instead of four, dealing with explosive issues such as race and colonialism, and attempting to make sense of the swirling, ever-changing cliques in Japanese politics, the IMTFE was fated for controversy.

It was also fated for obscurity. While Nuremberg eventually got a big Hollywood movie — featuring Spencer Tracey — its forgotten younger sibling faded from public memory, with scholarly opinion picking at its rotting corpse. More importantly, it is one of the few accounts that actually speaks up for the tribunal, despite its limitations, flaws, and compromises.

In that sense, while The Other Nuremberg is not a great book, it is an important one for students of both WWII and legal history, all the more so because Brackman actually attended large portions of the trials. There were twenty-eight total defendants, the most famous being Hideki Tojo. Ultimately, twenty-five were convicted, while two died before judgment, and one was declared incompetent.

For all the whinging about unfairness, only seven of those convicted were executed; of those who went to the gallows, all had been convicted of conventional war crimes such crimes having been recognized throughout history, flatly contradicting the notion they were punished for things they did not know were illegal. Of the surviving prisoners, all were free and clear by , having served sentences that would make many non-violent drug offenders in America quite envious.

Brackman knew he could not hope to cover the whole of the vast proceedings in a single four-hundred page book. After all, there are thousands and thousands and thousands of pages of testimony, and once you get through that, there are thousands of pages of legal opinions summarizing and commenting on that evidence.

The Other Nuremberg is broken down into manageable chapters covering the judges, the prosecution, and the defense, mixing thematic discussions into the overall chronology. Brackman also dives into some of the elements of the trial that he found most fascinating, especially Japanese atrocities in China. This does not cure that deficit, but it is a helpful reminder that I have more reading to do.

For instance, there is the odd, American-led reticence to delve into Japanese bacteriological warfare, likely connected to the American desire to learn the dark secrets that had been discovered. The biggest mark against the trials was the decision not to indict the Emperor who, it is more and more apparent, deserved to be indicted. Even the defendants, fighting for their lives, circled the wagons around Hirohito. As unfortunate as this is, though, it is not a flaw of the trials, per se, but rather a decree from on high, with MacArthur deciding that he needed the Emperor as part of his reconstruction plan.

When you are trying the leaders of a sovereign nation, politics are involved by their very nature. While Brackman is supportive of the Tokyo Trials, there are time I wish he had done a better job defending them. For instance, he does not engage with IMTFE opponents who claim the trials were illegitimate because the Allies did things that were just as bad — or worse — as the Japanese.

No matter how debatable the Allied tactics — and they were debatable — they were undertaken in response to a war that was thrust upon them. This is an important point, because it turns out your parents were wrong: it does matter who started it. The aforementioned Justice Pal voted to acquit all the defendants, and issued his thousand-page dissent, greatly coloring subsequent views of the IMTFE. Here, Brackman does good work by damningly demonstrating that Pal noted his intention to acquit — and to write a dissent — before the trial started.

Then he absented himself for long periods of the trial to spend time with his sick wife. Chinese Justice Mei Ju-ao, whose country lost millions of dead, was certainly aghast that Pal would compare the atomic bombings — meant to end the war — to the barbaric rapes and murders in Nanking that were meant for nothing more than the infliction of human misery. In law school, when I studied both military tribunals rather extensively, under a moderately-respected international law professor, I was very much overawed with the cold logic and sharp erudition of these arguments.

Having had time to grow up, and think about things a bit more, I see them now as little more than elites protecting elites. Strip away the finery, and you are left with this as a proposal: that making war is always a legitimate tool of the state, no matter what.

There are no consequences to waging war, no matter how predatory, how vicious. That is to say, there are no consequences as long as your position on the board is king, queen, knight, bishop, or rook. Despite being overshadowed by Nuremberg, the Tokyo Trials remain important, if for no other reason than they are a vast repository of eyewitness testimonials. It represents a first draft of a massive history. If you read some of the transcripts, you will be shocked.

You will find within those grim pages the testimony of a Filipino woman who described being torn open by a gang rape in Manila; you will find a railway official in Nanking who counted five-hundred corpses along a single boulevard, before he just stopped counting; you will find the gaunt survivors of the slave-labor camps in Burma, which masqueraded as prisoner-of-war sites, explaining how they somehow survived.

The list of murders, sexual assaults, sexual exploitation, torture, and beheadings just goes on and on. To deny the legitimacy of the Tokyo Trials, which — in the end — tried only a fraction of a fraction of those responsible, is in a way to deny the existence of these horrors.

The best rebuttal to this came on July 26, , by the much-maligned Nuremberg prosecutor Robert Jackson. He begged of the widow, as they beg of you: "Say I slew them not. The intention was to track down, investigate and prosecute them all according to the rigours of a normal criminal trial. In May the plan to split the prosecution of the Nazi leaders from all others was confirmed.

The British Army of the Rhine BAOR was to pursue all suspected war criminals in northwest Germany, which it then occupied as part of the post-war carve up of the country. From the very beginning the British response to their task was confused. London became the base for preparations and British forces were crucial in coordinating the Allied trial.

Huge efforts were made to gather evidence and put together a comprehensive legal case against the main Nazis now in custody. In April, the War Office sent out a tiny unit of lawyers and interpreters that was hopelessly insufficient for the job. Lt Col Leo Genn a famous actor who also happened to be a lawyer was assigned to investigate the crimes uncovered at Bergen-Belsen. He was sent to Germany with a handful of investigators to obtain evidence from thousands of malnourished and typhus-suffering survivors of the camp.

Genn soon reported that he would need 20 such units if he were to do the task justice. When his unit discovered that Kramer along with many of the guards and inmates had also been at Auschwitz and in charge of the gassing of Jews in their hundreds of thousands, the nature of the case was transformed.

They were not only unearthing the criminal behaviour of a few German individuals: they were also preparing a trial about a whole system of genocide. No one in Whitehall seemed to fully understand. The pressure was acute on Genn and his team to complete his work quickly. A high-profile trial was required to reassure the public that the Nazis were getting their just deserts.

With the Nuremberg proceedings taking longer to arrange than predicted, a trial of the Bergen-Belsen accused was politically necessary. Genn obliged. Quite at odds with the testimony of survivors, who recounted their experiences of concentration camps in graphic detail, the lawyers for defence and prosecution all British officers gave proceedings a strange academic air.

They would argue about the minutiae of legal process for hours. Should they rely on written statements of witnesses who had disappeared or died?

Did the court have jurisdiction? Were the charges lawful? When the verdict was finally reached, 11 accused, including Kramer, were convicted and sentenced to death. But many, even long serving camp guards, were acquitted.

The Soviets were disgusted at the result. They complained that the trial had failed to condemn the Nazi state and its barbarous nature. Instead, they said, only a few individuals, a tiny fraction of those who had voluntarily served in the camp, had been punished. Others at home in Britain were equally unimpressed.

The trial had been too long, too caught up with legal niceties. If all other cases were dealt with in the same way, they would take decades to complete. It was a ridiculous demand, one founded on a political desire to be rid of the whole enterprise as quickly as possible.

Their biggest problem was the lack of resources — they simply did not have the manpower or technical support to rush through so many prosecutions. For each, building a case against hundreds of individuals that would stand up in court was highly demanding. And there were so many other examples of terrible crimes they were uncovering that they found themselves pulled in every direction.

Unsurprisingly, the target was never reached. But there were growing suspicions that the investigators had shifted their priorities from pursuing those responsible for the most awful atrocities, to solving lesser crimes and those involving the killing of British servicemen and women — which could be concluded quickly and easily.

Some cases were indeed brought that hardly seemed to warrant prosecution. The Klever trial, for instance, was a minor affair when matched against the Belsen and Auschwitz cases and the many camps known about within the British zone.

Double-Vaccinated infected with Covid have also died. Reduces circulation of the virus This gene-therapy still permits the spread of the virus as it offers zero immunity to the virus. Reduces transmission of the virus This gene-therapy still permits the transmission of the virus as it offers zero immunity to the virus.

No person should be forced to take a medical experiment without informed consent. Countries are using lockdowns, duress and threats to force people to take this vaccine or be prohibited to participate in free society under the mandate of a Vaccine Passport or Green Pass. During the Nuremberg trail, even the media was prosecuted and members were put to death for lying to the public amongst many of the doctors and Nazis found guilty of Crimes Against Humanity. As listed above, the gene-therapy does not meet the criteria of a vaccine and does not offer immunity to the virus.

There are other medical treatments that yield fruitful results against Covid such as Ivermectin, Vitamin D, Vitamin C, Zinc and boosted immune systems for flu and colds. This gene-therapy skipped Animal testing and went straight to human trials. In mRNA research that Pfizer used a candidate study on mRNA with rhesus macaques monkeys using BNTb2 mRNA and in that study all the monkeys developed pulmonary inflammation but the researchers considered the risk low as these were young healthy monkeys from the age of Despite this alarming development Pfizer proceeded to develop their mRNA for Covid without animal testing.

In the EU over 7, deaths and , vaccine injuries have been reported. This is a grievous violation of this code. See 4, based on fact-based medical data this gene-therapy is causing death and injury. Past research on mRNA also shows several risks that have been ignored for this current trial gene-experiment. A study on Sars-Cov spike proteins showed they cause inflammation, immunopathology, blood clots and impede Angiotensin 2 expression.

This experiment forces the body to produce this spike-protein inheriting all these risks. The vaccine injuries, deaths and adverse side-effects of mRNA gene-therapy far exceed this risk. Yet, this has been ignored for human use by the CDC knowing fully the risk of new deadlier variants emerge from leaky vaccinations.

There were no preparations made. This gene-therapy was approved under an Emergency Use only act, skipped animal and human trials and forced on a misinformed public. Politicians, media and actors claiming that this is a safe and effective vaccine are not qualified. Propaganda is not medical science. Many retail outlets such as Walmart, drive-through vaccine centers are not qualified to administer experimental medical gene-therapies to the uninformed public.

Despite the outcry of over 85, doctors, nurses, virologists, epidemiologist the experiment is not being ended. Hopefully this new Nuremberg Trial will put an end to this crime against humanity. It is clear in the statistical reporting data that this experiment is resulting in death and injury yet all the politicians, drug companies and so called experts are not making any attempt to stop this gene-therapy experiment from inflicting harm on a misinformed public.

What can you do to help put an end to this crime against humanity? Share this information. Make your politicians, media, doctors, nurses informed that if they are complicit in this crime against humanity they too are subject to the laws set forth in the Geneva Convention and Nuremburg code and can be tried, found guilty and put to death.

Legal proceedings are moving forward, evidence has been collected and a large growing body of experts are sounding the alarm. Visit the Covid Committee website at: [link to corona-ausschuss. Crimes against humanity affect us all.

They are a crime against you, your children, your parents, your grandparents, your community and your country and your future. In a media release dated 1 October , the Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews announced that all workers on the authorised worker list will be required to be vaccinated against COVID in order to be able to work onsite. All authorised workers need to receive their first vaccine dose by 15 October and will need to be fully vaccinated by 26 November. All authorised workers who do not comply with the vaccination requirement will not be permitted to attend their place of employment but will have to work from home or lose their jobs.

This requirement has potentially severe consequences for the human rights of workers in Victoria. The Charter Act lists a number of human rights that the Victorian Parliament seeks to protect and promote, which are largely based on the rights enshrined in international human rights instruments such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ICCPR. Please take care! What does diplomatic immunity mean?

Gates is the most dangerous. If he gets off, he will continue his demonic ideas like the chips in people. Gates needs to be taken out. And Jacinda Adern and each on of her labor members who pushed by coersion, manipulation, bribe or force the injection.

For every NZer who took it to do the right thing and have ended up dead or with adverse physical ailments as a result of the injection. For every NZer who has lost their job, businesses, practises and years of livelihood. And more importantly, for those who have lost their lives, lost familiies. By the time this even gets started too many people will already have got their vaccination… this will come too late….

Who will be enforcing these charges? It will be a massive hanging as there are so many criminally implicated! I hope this happens sooner than later, everybody is being forced to be Vaccinated, many against their will. My step daughters entire class is being jabbed tomorrow, 16, 17 year olds.

The truth always comes out: Fauci, HHS officials discuss using new virus from China to enforce universal vaccines in footage from Oct. Corbett divides the available solutions into four main categories:. The Corbett Report show notes6 also list a variety of resources. Another resource is The Solari Report, where you can download a variety of forms, including:. A family financial disclosure form, to ensure that a vaccine injury or death does not translate into financial destruction of the whole family.

An employer disclosure form that informs your employer of the many laws and ethical principles they are breaking and demands they take financial responsibility for any injury you might incur as a result of their mandate. A school disclosure form that informs the school of the many laws and ethical principles they are breaking and demands they take financial responsibility for any injury you might incur as a result of their mandate.

A notice of parental authority form, which parents can use to notify relevant parties that they do not consent to their child being vaccinated without their written informed consent.

Another type of legal challenge you can pursue is that of religious and medical exemptions. Just keep in mind that while this might temporarily save the livelihoods of some, it does virtually nothing to protect you or anyone else from tyranny in the long term. If you know anything about Amish who choose not to vaccinate, you know what a ridiculous statement that is, but at the end of the day, these are the kinds of people making the decisions.

You can also sign petitions, such as the British togetherdeclaration.