Edward Snowden has become a freak magnet. They’re all coming out of the woodwork. Everybody from the freaks over at Human Rights Watch to national leaders in Socialist paradises. I had Snowden pegged as a screwball before I realized he was going to attract the usual army of Lefties. One statement Snowden made has the potential for doing more damage than anything he leaked:
Nuremberg is the root of a serious problem few admit to. It was the Nuremberg Trials that proclaimed the concept of international crime —— quickly followed by non-existent International law —— meaning UN law. It was the Nuremberg Trials that gave the infant UN the on-going hope that all future war crimes trials would be judged by an International panel in The Hague.
Most Americans today do not know much about the Nuremberg Trials. Many Americans in the late 1940s saw the political implications of the Nuremberg Trials. They did not like what they saw. American Communists were the exceptions; they still go all gooey-eyed at the mention of the Nuremberg Trials.
Parenthetically, the phrase “The Constitution is not a suicide pact.” is often attributed to Associate Justice Robert H. Jackson (1892 - 1954). Yet liberalism is hellbent on bringing about America’s self-destruction. Infanticide, euthanasia, population controls, death panels, forced sterilization, and doctor-assisted suicides, represent the very essence of institutional sadism. Every one of those progressive ideals has been gaining acceptance while wearing a cloak of compassion.
NOTE: Robert H. Jackson took a leave of absence from the Supreme Court in order to act as the chief PROSECUTOR in the best-known of the Nuremberg Trials.
The wartime alliance of America, Britain and the Soviet Union began to fall apart before WWII officially ended, but their leaders were united in one respect: The determination to arraign the principal Nazis for their crimes. The three powers agreed at a London conference in August 1945 to put the Nazis on trial. France, liberated in 1944, became the fourth member of a tribunal.
Each of the four powers appointed a senior judge, an alternate judge and a team of prosecutors. Nuremberg was chosen as the venue not only because it had a courthouse that had survived the war unscathed, but also because the Bavarian city had been the scene of Nazi party rallies and was associated with Hitler's race laws.
For the record, War Crimes Trials were conducted in Germany, Japan, the Philippines, and Australia shortly after WW II ended. Those trials were military tribunals. The most famous of those trials were held in Nuremberg. Collectively, they were called International Military Tribunals or IMT. Those trials were a big mistake.
A German court should have tried those Nazis who were not tried in the countries where the crimes were committed. Malleable Teutons wearing black robes could have been found who would have come to the same conclusions that non-German judges presiding over the Nuremberg Trials came to.
Even though the UN had nothing to do with the War Crimes Trials, the UN’s phoney judiciary headquartered in The Hague (the World Court, and the International Criminal Court) evolved into adjudicators of non-existent International law above and beyond treaties entered into by sovereign nations that are loosely defined as international law.
Military tribunals work quite well when there is a winner and a loser. When the crimes are internal without a winning foreign military available to conduct tribunals, the victims should judge the accused. Many call it a blueprint for revenge which is nothing more than sly opposition to the death penalty. After all, how can you execute war criminals when you do not execute ordinary serial killers and child murderers? The Left can twist it and turn it every which way, but the death penalty is still justice.
The punishment that was meted out to top Nazis at Nuremberg could have been doled out by the courts in those countries whose people had suffered at the hands of the Nazis. WW II Socialists wanted no part of that brand of justice.
Had Nazis been tried and condemned in national courts, Socialists rightly feared that top Communists would someday be tried by the people they were brutalizing in Soviet satellites. The precedent would have been established. That would never do. By extension, the UN’s judiciary —— WHERE THERE IS NO DEATH PENALTY—— protects the top people accused of a war crime from being put to death. The UN is all about protecting ruling classes when they go bad.
To this day you will never see a Communist butcher brought before a United Nations tribunal. The UN never identifies Communist criminals let alone demand that they be brought to justice while they are alive. Slobodan Milosevic was brought before an international tribunal because Muslim fundamentalists were his opponents. Did you ever hear anyone at the UN call for Castro’s arrest and trial?
Even in death, Communist murderers are protected by the World Court. Whenever The Hague comes sucking around for more money you will never hear Congress say no because Communists like Stalin and Mao are supposed to get away with their crimes.
Now, more than ever Snowden should NOT be arrested and tried. There is not a chance he will be executed. He can be tried in absentia if at all. The goal should be: Deny him a platform for spouting his “Nuremberg Principles” crapola. Serendipitously, there is no statue of limitations on a fugitive from justice.
NOTE: Talking heads asked how Snowden got security clearance? The answer is simple. Nobody checks to see if perspective applicants believe in the phoney Nuremberg Principles. Snowden’s motivation was based on the crap he now spouts with pride. Conclusion: Those folks that hand out security clearances better come up with a “Snowden Adjustment” for future applicants. They might even review everybody that already has a security clearance.
Know this if you know nothing else about the Nuremberg Trials: Nuremberg Principals are code talk for Socialist/Communist ideology.
Incidentally, I’m pretty sure Snowden has at least one friend on the FOX Network. Then-presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, who is now a FOX contributor, blamed Cheney for a violation of Nuremberg Principles.
Finally, here’s a message I posted back on November 4, 2012:
Younger Americans might not be aware of the 1961 movie Judgement at Nuremburg; a film about four defendants who were judges in Nazi Germany. In spite of the star-studded cast, I would not recommend it to young movie buffs. J-at-N is an overrated stinker that is highly regarded by liberals.
The film was accurate in that the defendants were judged by a military tribunal with three American civilian judges presiding. In real life the United States got its authority from Control Council Law No. 10 which can accurately be described as an early attempt to establish “International law.” Wikipedia gives this brief explanation of No. 10:
Although it had been initially planned to hold more than just one international trial at the IMT, the growing differences between the victorious allies (the United States, United Kingdom, France, and Soviet Union) made this impossible. However, the Control Council Law No. 10, which the Allied Control Council had issued on December 20, 1945, empowered any of the occupying authorities to try suspected war criminals in their respective occupation zones. Based on this law, the U.S. authorities proceeded after the end of the initial Nuremberg Trial against the major war criminals to hold another twelve trials in Nuremberg. The judges in all these trials were American, and so were the prosecutors; the Chief of Counsel for the Prosecution was Brigadier General Telford Taylor. In the other occupation zones similar trials took place.
Subsequent Nuremberg Trials - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I never understood how an agreement reached by four WWII allies can be called law. Call it for what it is; the winners judging the losers, but don’t confuse it with the way most Americans view laws that are legislated in sovereign nations.
There’s nothing wrong with punishing those responsible for war crimes, but I always thought that they should be tried and punished by the victims in the country where the crimes took place —— not by an international body of any kind.
Dreaming and scheming
Socialist intellectuals have been working towards establishing International law since the second half of the 19th century. I believe that J-at-N was the first major propaganda attempt to sell it to the masses. J-at-N was shown on television’s Playhouse 90 before it was made into a theatrical movie.
After listening to some of the dialogue in the movie it is hard to miss the standard liberal garbage. This excerpt is a little taste of the plug for International law garbage that is sprinkled throughout the movie. Move the cursor to 6:16. Maximilian Schell starts speaking English at 6:57:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9xUa478wsY&feature=player_embedded]Judgment at Nuremberg (1961) - Part 2 - YouTube[/ame]
The movie’s attack on love of country is even more offensive than is glorifying International law. That is not to say I put in with the kind of patriotism the Nazis practiced. The not-so-subliminal message that I object to is that patriotism itself was portrayed as the villain; Nazi judges went along out of their love for Germany.
Hitler came to power on false patriotism. Hussein came to power by paying scant lip service to love of country. Frankly, he did not need patriotism as a stepping stone to power. Had he needed it he would have used it. Luckily for Hussein, and with a lot of help from the media, he avoided a patriotism pissing contest with his opponent John McCain.
After becoming president it became obvious that Hussein’s patriotism resides in a place other than defense of the nation, the Constitution, and America’s independence. In less than 48 hours the polls will open. Is Hussein’s shadowy patriotism an issue to enough voters to make a difference? I don’t know the answer.
See this thread for a look at how Democrats use patriotism in much the same way Nazis used it:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/military/227229-democrats-waving-the-flag.html
What’s next?
Everyone who is interested already knows everything they need to know about the mistakes that were made leading up to World War Two. Perhaps now those mistakes, and the military aspect of WWII, can be put in their proper places in order to get on with identifying, and correcting, the mistakes made in WWII’s aftermath. Promoting International law in order to implement the New World Order is one such mistake; the United Nations is another. Funding socialism’s vast education industry propaganda apparatus is another.
I don’t know where to begin pinpointing the biggest mistake of all: The advance of socialism after the guns fell silent.
Prior to WWII socialism/communism was stalled. FDR’s incremental socialism was failing and would have been discarded altogether had the war not revived the economy. Pre-war production in 1939 and 1940 gave FDR a third term; America’s entry into the war after Pearl Harbor gave him a fourth term.
The aftermath of WWII saw Socialists/Communists at home and abroad achieve more success than they ever thought possible prior to 1941. Much of that success began with taking credit for defeating fascism in Nazi Germany. Neither Hollywood propaganda machinery nor anyone else mentioned that Nazi murderers were executed by Communist butchers who should have been hanged alongside the Nazis.
The aftermath off WWII saw socialism morph into liberalism. Liberalism, when it was called progressivism, was always fashionable to effete intellectuals. After 1945 it became a wise career choice for ambitious opportunists in publishing, in Hollywood, and in the young television industry.
Making sport of Senator Joseph McCarthy (1908 - 1957) was a badge of honor to the new breed of liberals. Attacking McCarthy instead of disputing the things he was saying fooled many Americans into believing that liberals knew what they talking about. To this day, show biz libs attack the messenger but never the message.
Bottom line: The success of the current Administration’s Communist takeover of America’s government can be traced directly to the mistakes made in the aftermath of World War Two.
Finally, even if you watched J-at-N in 1961 to be entertained without analyzing the dialogue you were led to the inevitable conclusion: The world must never let such things happen again. “The world” in Liberaldom naturally means a global government administered by the United Nations. Ergo, International law must be obeyed while national sovereignty must be abolished. That piece of propaganda has been doing its insidious dirty work for more than fifty years. That’s a long run for a mistake.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/reviews/259714-j-at-n.html
Nuremberg is the root of a serious problem few admit to. It was the Nuremberg Trials that proclaimed the concept of international crime —— quickly followed by non-existent International law —— meaning UN law. It was the Nuremberg Trials that gave the infant UN the on-going hope that all future war crimes trials would be judged by an International panel in The Hague.
Most Americans today do not know much about the Nuremberg Trials. Many Americans in the late 1940s saw the political implications of the Nuremberg Trials. They did not like what they saw. American Communists were the exceptions; they still go all gooey-eyed at the mention of the Nuremberg Trials.
Parenthetically, the phrase “The Constitution is not a suicide pact.” is often attributed to Associate Justice Robert H. Jackson (1892 - 1954). Yet liberalism is hellbent on bringing about America’s self-destruction. Infanticide, euthanasia, population controls, death panels, forced sterilization, and doctor-assisted suicides, represent the very essence of institutional sadism. Every one of those progressive ideals has been gaining acceptance while wearing a cloak of compassion.
NOTE: Robert H. Jackson took a leave of absence from the Supreme Court in order to act as the chief PROSECUTOR in the best-known of the Nuremberg Trials.
The wartime alliance of America, Britain and the Soviet Union began to fall apart before WWII officially ended, but their leaders were united in one respect: The determination to arraign the principal Nazis for their crimes. The three powers agreed at a London conference in August 1945 to put the Nazis on trial. France, liberated in 1944, became the fourth member of a tribunal.
Each of the four powers appointed a senior judge, an alternate judge and a team of prosecutors. Nuremberg was chosen as the venue not only because it had a courthouse that had survived the war unscathed, but also because the Bavarian city had been the scene of Nazi party rallies and was associated with Hitler's race laws.
For the record, War Crimes Trials were conducted in Germany, Japan, the Philippines, and Australia shortly after WW II ended. Those trials were military tribunals. The most famous of those trials were held in Nuremberg. Collectively, they were called International Military Tribunals or IMT. Those trials were a big mistake.
A German court should have tried those Nazis who were not tried in the countries where the crimes were committed. Malleable Teutons wearing black robes could have been found who would have come to the same conclusions that non-German judges presiding over the Nuremberg Trials came to.
Even though the UN had nothing to do with the War Crimes Trials, the UN’s phoney judiciary headquartered in The Hague (the World Court, and the International Criminal Court) evolved into adjudicators of non-existent International law above and beyond treaties entered into by sovereign nations that are loosely defined as international law.
Military tribunals work quite well when there is a winner and a loser. When the crimes are internal without a winning foreign military available to conduct tribunals, the victims should judge the accused. Many call it a blueprint for revenge which is nothing more than sly opposition to the death penalty. After all, how can you execute war criminals when you do not execute ordinary serial killers and child murderers? The Left can twist it and turn it every which way, but the death penalty is still justice.
The punishment that was meted out to top Nazis at Nuremberg could have been doled out by the courts in those countries whose people had suffered at the hands of the Nazis. WW II Socialists wanted no part of that brand of justice.
Had Nazis been tried and condemned in national courts, Socialists rightly feared that top Communists would someday be tried by the people they were brutalizing in Soviet satellites. The precedent would have been established. That would never do. By extension, the UN’s judiciary —— WHERE THERE IS NO DEATH PENALTY—— protects the top people accused of a war crime from being put to death. The UN is all about protecting ruling classes when they go bad.
To this day you will never see a Communist butcher brought before a United Nations tribunal. The UN never identifies Communist criminals let alone demand that they be brought to justice while they are alive. Slobodan Milosevic was brought before an international tribunal because Muslim fundamentalists were his opponents. Did you ever hear anyone at the UN call for Castro’s arrest and trial?
Even in death, Communist murderers are protected by the World Court. Whenever The Hague comes sucking around for more money you will never hear Congress say no because Communists like Stalin and Mao are supposed to get away with their crimes.
Now, more than ever Snowden should NOT be arrested and tried. There is not a chance he will be executed. He can be tried in absentia if at all. The goal should be: Deny him a platform for spouting his “Nuremberg Principles” crapola. Serendipitously, there is no statue of limitations on a fugitive from justice.
NOTE: Talking heads asked how Snowden got security clearance? The answer is simple. Nobody checks to see if perspective applicants believe in the phoney Nuremberg Principles. Snowden’s motivation was based on the crap he now spouts with pride. Conclusion: Those folks that hand out security clearances better come up with a “Snowden Adjustment” for future applicants. They might even review everybody that already has a security clearance.
Know this if you know nothing else about the Nuremberg Trials: Nuremberg Principals are code talk for Socialist/Communist ideology.
Incidentally, I’m pretty sure Snowden has at least one friend on the FOX Network. Then-presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, who is now a FOX contributor, blamed Cheney for a violation of Nuremberg Principles.
Finally, here’s a message I posted back on November 4, 2012:
Younger Americans might not be aware of the 1961 movie Judgement at Nuremburg; a film about four defendants who were judges in Nazi Germany. In spite of the star-studded cast, I would not recommend it to young movie buffs. J-at-N is an overrated stinker that is highly regarded by liberals.
The film was accurate in that the defendants were judged by a military tribunal with three American civilian judges presiding. In real life the United States got its authority from Control Council Law No. 10 which can accurately be described as an early attempt to establish “International law.” Wikipedia gives this brief explanation of No. 10:
Although it had been initially planned to hold more than just one international trial at the IMT, the growing differences between the victorious allies (the United States, United Kingdom, France, and Soviet Union) made this impossible. However, the Control Council Law No. 10, which the Allied Control Council had issued on December 20, 1945, empowered any of the occupying authorities to try suspected war criminals in their respective occupation zones. Based on this law, the U.S. authorities proceeded after the end of the initial Nuremberg Trial against the major war criminals to hold another twelve trials in Nuremberg. The judges in all these trials were American, and so were the prosecutors; the Chief of Counsel for the Prosecution was Brigadier General Telford Taylor. In the other occupation zones similar trials took place.
Subsequent Nuremberg Trials - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I never understood how an agreement reached by four WWII allies can be called law. Call it for what it is; the winners judging the losers, but don’t confuse it with the way most Americans view laws that are legislated in sovereign nations.
There’s nothing wrong with punishing those responsible for war crimes, but I always thought that they should be tried and punished by the victims in the country where the crimes took place —— not by an international body of any kind.
Dreaming and scheming
Socialist intellectuals have been working towards establishing International law since the second half of the 19th century. I believe that J-at-N was the first major propaganda attempt to sell it to the masses. J-at-N was shown on television’s Playhouse 90 before it was made into a theatrical movie.
After listening to some of the dialogue in the movie it is hard to miss the standard liberal garbage. This excerpt is a little taste of the plug for International law garbage that is sprinkled throughout the movie. Move the cursor to 6:16. Maximilian Schell starts speaking English at 6:57:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9xUa478wsY&feature=player_embedded]Judgment at Nuremberg (1961) - Part 2 - YouTube[/ame]
The movie’s attack on love of country is even more offensive than is glorifying International law. That is not to say I put in with the kind of patriotism the Nazis practiced. The not-so-subliminal message that I object to is that patriotism itself was portrayed as the villain; Nazi judges went along out of their love for Germany.
Hitler came to power on false patriotism. Hussein came to power by paying scant lip service to love of country. Frankly, he did not need patriotism as a stepping stone to power. Had he needed it he would have used it. Luckily for Hussein, and with a lot of help from the media, he avoided a patriotism pissing contest with his opponent John McCain.
After becoming president it became obvious that Hussein’s patriotism resides in a place other than defense of the nation, the Constitution, and America’s independence. In less than 48 hours the polls will open. Is Hussein’s shadowy patriotism an issue to enough voters to make a difference? I don’t know the answer.
See this thread for a look at how Democrats use patriotism in much the same way Nazis used it:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/military/227229-democrats-waving-the-flag.html
What’s next?
Everyone who is interested already knows everything they need to know about the mistakes that were made leading up to World War Two. Perhaps now those mistakes, and the military aspect of WWII, can be put in their proper places in order to get on with identifying, and correcting, the mistakes made in WWII’s aftermath. Promoting International law in order to implement the New World Order is one such mistake; the United Nations is another. Funding socialism’s vast education industry propaganda apparatus is another.
I don’t know where to begin pinpointing the biggest mistake of all: The advance of socialism after the guns fell silent.
Prior to WWII socialism/communism was stalled. FDR’s incremental socialism was failing and would have been discarded altogether had the war not revived the economy. Pre-war production in 1939 and 1940 gave FDR a third term; America’s entry into the war after Pearl Harbor gave him a fourth term.
The aftermath of WWII saw Socialists/Communists at home and abroad achieve more success than they ever thought possible prior to 1941. Much of that success began with taking credit for defeating fascism in Nazi Germany. Neither Hollywood propaganda machinery nor anyone else mentioned that Nazi murderers were executed by Communist butchers who should have been hanged alongside the Nazis.
The aftermath off WWII saw socialism morph into liberalism. Liberalism, when it was called progressivism, was always fashionable to effete intellectuals. After 1945 it became a wise career choice for ambitious opportunists in publishing, in Hollywood, and in the young television industry.
Making sport of Senator Joseph McCarthy (1908 - 1957) was a badge of honor to the new breed of liberals. Attacking McCarthy instead of disputing the things he was saying fooled many Americans into believing that liberals knew what they talking about. To this day, show biz libs attack the messenger but never the message.
Bottom line: The success of the current Administration’s Communist takeover of America’s government can be traced directly to the mistakes made in the aftermath of World War Two.
Finally, even if you watched J-at-N in 1961 to be entertained without analyzing the dialogue you were led to the inevitable conclusion: The world must never let such things happen again. “The world” in Liberaldom naturally means a global government administered by the United Nations. Ergo, International law must be obeyed while national sovereignty must be abolished. That piece of propaganda has been doing its insidious dirty work for more than fifty years. That’s a long run for a mistake.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/reviews/259714-j-at-n.html
Last edited:
