The Demise of Western Law Dates from the Nuremberg Trials

 ....Until I read some years ago David Irving’s book, Nuremberg, I was a great admirer of Robert Jackson.  I still am for his previous positions, but he blew it at Nuremberg.

World War II was a disaster for many reasons still unrecognized. The victims were not only the millions of lives, the destruction of economies, the loss of European countries’ national confidence and sovereignty, but also truth and justice as values that must be defended.  

At Nuremberg the British, Americans, and Soviets, who had committed worst war crimes than the Germans, sat, immune from accountability, in judgment. “The winners write the histories” and hold he trials.

As David Irving documents in his histories, Churchill’s War and Hitler’s War, Hitler regarded the bombing of civilian cities as a war crime. When Churchill kept secret from his cabinet Hitler’s generous offer of peace, which included Germany’s promise to use its military power in defense of the British Empire, which Hitler regarded as essential to the continuation of vastly outnumbered white ethnicities, Churchill kept the document secret from the British Parliament and ordered the British air force  to commence bombing civilian German residential neighborhoods. 

Churchill ordered that the air force focus on workers’ housing, because it was closer together and the fires would spread quicker.  He ordered that first the British bombers use incendiary  bombs, then when the fire trucks showed up to again hit with high explosives.  He ordered that the British air force add poison gas to the bombs.  At this point, the Air Force high command, already concerned about war crimes, flatly refused......

.....You can find the documentation in Irvings’ World War II histories and in John Wear’s books reproduced on my web sites.  Ron Unz of the Unz Review has also written extensively about the true story of World War II, one most people have never heard.

As far as I can tell, there are only three historians of World War II who are not court historians regurgitating the official war propaganda.  One is A.P.J. Taylor, who saw the hypocrisy of the court historians, but did not have the documentary resources that David Irving spent 50 years hunting down and forcing out of official files, hunting down and reading diaries and interviewing survivors.  John Wear is the third.

If you want to know the truth about World War II, you can only find it in these few writers, especially David Irvings’ Churchill’s War and Hitler’s War.  On orders from Israel, these books, that once sold in the millions of copies, have been burnt by the threatened and intimidated publisher, and copies are hard to find.

My generation and those following were taught that Churchill, Franklin Roosevelt, and Dwight Eisenhower were moral crusaders who fought against the evil demon Hitler.  Once you read Irving’s histories of World War II–histories based entirely on the OFFICIAL DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE, NOT IRVING’S OPINION–you will wonder who the true evil demons were.  John Wear’s account of Eisenhower’s treatment of German prisoners of war shows the hate-driven barbarity with which German POWs were treated.  No honor of the rules of war here.......

Full text:

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2025/07/31/the-demise-of-western-law-dates-from-the-nuremberg-trials/ 

.....Irving’s book is, of course, politically incorrect. However, he lists in the introduction the voluminous files on which the book is based: Robert Jackson’s official papers and Oral History, Francis Biddle’s private papers and diaries, Col. Andrus’ papers, Adm. Raeder’s prison diary, Rudolf Hess’ prison diary, interrogations of the prisoners, interviews with defense counsel, prosecutors, interrogators, and letters from the prisoners to their wives. All of this and more Irving has made available on microfilms for researchers. He compared magnetic tape copies of the original wire-recordings of the trial with the mimeographed and published transcripts to insure that spoken and published words were the same.

What Irving does in his book is to report the story that the documents tell. This story differs from the patriotic propaganda written by court historians with which we are all imbued. The question arises: Is Irving pro-truth or pro-Nazi. The National Socialist government of Germany is the most demonized government in history. Any lessening of the demonization is unacceptable, so Irving is vulnerable to demonization by those determined to protect their cherished beliefs.

Zionists have branded Irving a “holocaust denier,” and he was convicted of something like that by an Austrian court and spent 14 months in prison before the conviction was thrown out by a higher court.

In Nuremberg, Irving removes various propaganda legends from the holocaust story and reports authoritative findings that many of the concentration camp deaths were from typhus and starvation, especially in the final days of the war when food and medicine were disappearing from Germany, but nowhere in the book does he deny, indeed he reports, that vast numbers of Jews perished. As I understand the term, a simple truthful modification of some element of the official holocaust story is sufficient to brand a person a holocaust denier.

My interest in the book is Robert Jackson. He had a noble cause—to outlaw war—but in pursuit of this purpose he established precedents for American prosecutors to make law a weapon in their pursuit of their noble causes just as it was used against Nazis—organized crime convictions, child abuse convictions, drug convictions, terror convictions. Jackson’s pursuit of Nazis at Nuremberg undermined the strictures he put on US attorneys such that today Americans have no more protection of law than the defendants had at Nuremberg.