Re: Nazis on the Net

[nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)]

E. ALLEN SMITH writes:

| (one reason for Hiroshima and Nagasaki being right
| was the Japanese alliance with Germany)

Was Dresden also right? (more died than at Hiroshima)  The firebombing
of Tokyo? (10% died in one raid).  Stalins execution of his own people?
Look at facts, not propoganda, before coming to such conclusions.
The conventions of war (namely the aim of keeping civilians out of it,
along with good treatment of prisoners) evolved over many centuries,
but then come the Brits and the Yanks to destroy it all with their
indiscriminate bombing of civilians, using the "they can stop the
torture simply by surrendering," and "those bombs saved countless
[American/British] lives!" excuses, and directing attention away from
their own attrocities by spreading propoganda such as soap made from
Jews.  Then to direct attention away from themselves even further, the
victors judge the defeated at Nuremburg for "war crimes," when the
accusors themselves were guilty of terror bombing, the worst war crime
of them all.

| and the Holocaust (people who claim
| it didn't happen are calling my paternal grandfather a liar).

Does anybody really claim it did not happen?  I doubt it.
I assert that those who express doubt over details of the current
story (such as the numbers that died in the camps, the existence of
gas chambers, or whether Hitler gave an order to systematically kill
Jews) are referred to by the media as saying that the Holocaust didn't
happen, but that is *not* what they are saying.  With regard to your
grandfather being liar, that is hard to say without knowing precisly
he has said, but if he states that, eg, Dachau was a terrible place,
riddled with disease and starvation and terrible conditions, and
hundreds of thousands of people died, then who would disagree with him?
If on the other hand he asserts that he saw gassed Jews at Dachau,
then he is mistaken (although not necessarally a liar.)

---
The Nuremberg Trials...had been popular throughout the world and
particularly in the United States.  Equally popular was the sentence
already announced by the high tribunal: death.  But what kind of trial was
this?  ...The Constitution was not a collection of loosely given political
promises subject to broad interpretation.  It was not a list of pleasing
platitudes to be set lightly aside when expediency required it.  It was
the foundation of the American system of law and justice and [Robert Taft]
was repelled by the picture of his country discarding those Constitutional
precepts in order to punish a vanquished enemy.
                U.S. President, John F. Kennedy