Even today, globalized companies violate the 1947 Nuremberg code by using aborted human fetal tissue research and vaccines in violation due to the lack of informed consent of the subject
I can't see how this could be true since it was invented by old white men. I think mass slaughter of your foe is more third world progressive and the future.
(((Ehret))) is a taldmudic douchebag, the article is bollocks.
Nuremburg was a sham pageant put on by jews for the benefit of jews and the creation of Israel. German officers were tortured and not allowed to provide any of their own evidence. The communist Jews running the slave camp call the USSR managed to pin Katyn Forest on the Germans even though it was a mass murder committed by jews. The biggest war criminals were Churchill, Roosevelt, Stalin, Bomber Harris and Eisenhower.
The Nuremberg Trials were even less credible as Soviet show trials.
Two key points from the article:
“The Charter recognizes that one who has committed criminal acts may not take refuge in superior orders nor in the doctrine that his crimes were acts of state….
“The real complaining party at your bar is Civilization…. The refuge of the defendants can only be their hope that International Law will lag so far behind the moral sense of mankind that conduct which is crime in the moral sense must be regarded as innocent in law. Civilization asks whether law is so laggard as to be utterly helpless to deal with crimes of this magnitude by criminals of this order of importance.”
The first deals with the 'I was just following orders' defense individuals use to pass the responsibility off to those up the line. Police and the military often use this excuse and today so does the Justice Department and the legal class (lawyers and judges), many politicians and business executives. The 'do as I say or you are fired/won't get paid' focuses the minds of underlings to carry out the dirty business ordered from those up the line.
The second point is why lawyers get paid so much money (the high powered ones anyway) to defend actions by the powerful. It allows the focus of actions to concentrate on the legal/illegal aspects of a case while ignoring the moral or rightness of those actions. 'If it's not illegal, it's allowed' might be the slogan here. Lately it has been expanded to point to a lesser law as justification for action (by the enforcements arms of government in particular) while ignoring the supreme laws of the land's Constitution.
Another Nuremburg set of trials would put into the docket the visible power wielders and the shadow figures pulling the strings behind them. The whole tapestry of actions would be presented and judged based on a moral/right basis. Defining that and putting a system forward that is workable on the everyday basis so we don't need to do this again in a generation or two should also be a goal here.
Perhaps there are Statesmen out there up to the task. The last group to so form took us a long way from the dictatorial rule of kings and queens. That rule was based on heredity and divine right. The new dictators are based on wealth and technological power. What falls out of the current US election chaos will go a long way in determining if Civilization is advancing or retreating.
Words on paper, nothing more.
NO HUMAN LAW CAN GIVE ME THE RIGHT TO DO WHAT IS INHERENTLY WRONG :
Now that Natural Law edict is enshrined in International Law and the human consciousness!.
We build Freedom Of Speech Software. We champion free speech, individual liberty and the free flow of information online. All are welcome.