It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Nazi war crimes suspect faces court

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 12:41 PM
link   
You are missing the point that the law can only exist if the law is upheld. By your logic, we would not have tried and convicted the 10 y/o's responsible for the torture and death of that child in britain back in the 80's because they were young!

Now, i am all for a slimming down of the legal system in many, many, many aspects. But quite frankly this is one of those cases where yes, the law must be applied at all costs.




posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by vox2442
 


this would be the same as a person driving another person somewhere so they could commit murder.

you played a part in it, therefore you are capable of standing trial for it.

just because 1 person died doesn't mean that 1 person had something to do with it, if he was there when the person was killed, and did nothing to stop it. he is as guilty as the person who actually committed the deed.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by scotty18

Originally posted by tezzajw


Another example of extreme stupidity being abused.

Seriously, he's 86 with failing health! What will an extradition and trial prove???

I don't which is the worse offense to commit - being an ex-Nazi, or hacking into NASA computers. Either way, the offended countries will pursue you to the corners of the Earth to find you and extradite you.

www.news.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)


...and what does it say to the Jews, Gypsies, Homosexuals, etc. who's people were victims of the Nazi atrocities if you decide to not prosecute a person who committed such atrocities simply because he is old?


Let me ask you a question. Does your zeal to uphold the law only apply to laws you agree with? I ask you this, because I am curious: what was the law and the punishment for NOT wearing a yellow star at that time? Was beating and/or killing someone for not wearing the star LEGAL where the officer was? If it was, you, my friend, are guilty of hypocrisy.

How many American servicemen and/or intelligence agents have been prosecuted in the world court because of what they have done to Iraqi people? Does your zeal to uphold "the rights of people" extend to Iraqis? Or, do those rights only cover Jews? Are mere goyim (literally, "cattle") exempt from that protection?

How many people were convicted of war crimes for killing gypsies and homosexuals? Or was it just the war crimes against jews that were important to uphold?

So, here's what we learn from your post: Only jews are worthy to be victims of "war crimes", and it's only a war crime if you lose the war.

Have a nice day.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by sir_chancealot

Originally posted by scotty18

Originally posted by tezzajw


Another example of extreme stupidity being abused.

Seriously, he's 86 with failing health! What will an extradition and trial prove???

I don't which is the worse offense to commit - being an ex-Nazi, or hacking into NASA computers. Either way, the offended countries will pursue you to the corners of the Earth to find you and extradite you.

www.news.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)


...and what does it say to the Jews, Gypsies, Homosexuals, etc. who's people were victims of the Nazi atrocities if you decide to not prosecute a person who committed such atrocities simply because he is old?


Let me ask you a question. Does your zeal to uphold the law only apply to laws you agree with? I ask you this, because I am curious: what was the law and the punishment for NOT wearing a yellow star at that time? Was beating and/or killing someone for not wearing the star LEGAL where the officer was? If it was, you, my friend, are guilty of hypocrisy.

How many American servicemen and/or intelligence agents have been prosecuted in the world court because of what they have done to Iraqi people? Does your zeal to uphold "the rights of people" extend to Iraqis? Or, do those rights only cover Jews? Are mere goyim (literally, "cattle") exempt from that protection?

How many people were convicted of war crimes for killing gypsies and homosexuals? Or was it just the war crimes against jews that were important to uphold?

So, here's what we learn from your post: Only jews are worthy to be victims of "war crimes", and it's only a war crime if you lose the war.

Have a nice day.


Wow. Do you always take things that people say or write, ignore the parts that don't fit your agenda and emphasize those that do? That's a pretty ignorant thing to do.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by SRTkid86
reply to post by vox2442
 


this would be the same as a person driving another person somewhere so they could commit murder.

you played a part in it, therefore you are capable of standing trial for it.

just because 1 person died doesn't mean that 1 person had something to do with it, if he was there when the person was killed, and did nothing to stop it. he is as guilty as the person who actually committed the deed.


Yes, if we're talking about three guys heading home from the pub, you'd be right.

As this is military we're talking about, rank does come into play - both in terms of judgment and the practical ability of a person to stop a crime being committed.

The accused was a warrant officer. His lieutenant has been convicted of this crime. His captain testified 60 years ago that the accused had no part in it.

The ranks are important, because unlike in civilian matters, interference with the actions of commanding officers will bring reprisals - in this case, up to and including execution.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 11:55 PM
link   
How many nazi war criminals did they smuggle out and put on the payroll to form bot NASA and the CIA? These people obviously don't give a # either way. Leave the old bastard be



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 05:55 PM
link   
Call me cold-hearted, but all these years later, for one murder during war time? Come on, the war is long since over. I am far more concerned about the Nazis in the White House today, than I am about some low-level Nazi-grunt so many decades ago. Was this guy an architecht of Nazism and the final solution? No. So there does come a point where you just have to let it go. This guy probably really was one of those who was just following orders. Just like our troops today who torture and murder innocent civilians.



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


It was war. There is no such thing as "warcrimes"...



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
Call me cold-hearted, but all these years later, for one murder during war time? Come on, the war is long since over. I am far more concerned about the Nazis in the White House today, than I am about some low-level Nazi-grunt so many decades ago. Was this guy an architecht of Nazism and the final solution? No. So there does come a point where you just have to let it go. This guy probably really was one of those who was just following orders. Just like our troops today who torture and murder innocent civilians.


People like you make me sick. I don't care what you think about the current administration to compare them to the Nazi's and the atrocities they committed is absolutely disgusting...and ignorant.



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 07:06 PM
link   
Interesting that Sir_Chancelot hasn't posted again since making his asinine comments.



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by scotty18
 


Talk about ignorant. You are aware of the roots of the Bush family fortune?



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by scotty18
 


Talk about ignorant. You are aware of the roots of the Bush family fortune?



Yes, now please point out how the current administration has committed atrocities like the Nazi's did.



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by scotty18
 


Guantanamo, a million Iraqi civilians dead, thousands of Americans killed in a false-flag attack, etc., etc. You should watch the movie "Taxi to the Darkside" and then come talk to me.

Or perhaps Bush isn't as bad because he hasn't racked up as high of a body count yet? But then by that logic, why would you really be concerned at all with what one man did to another more than a half-century ago?



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by scotty18
 


Guantanamo, a million Iraqi civilians dead, thousands of Americans killed in a false-flag attack, etc., etc. You should watch the movie "Taxi to the Darkside" and then come talk to me.

Or perhaps Bush isn't as bad because he hasn't racked up as high of a body count yet? But then by that logic, why would you really be concerned at all with what one man did to another more than a half-century ago?


Oh, I get it, your obsessive hate for the current administration precludes rational thought. Thanks for letting me know that my disgust is well placed.



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by scotty18
Interesting that Sir_Chancelot hasn't posted again since making his asinine comments.


No, sometimes I lose track of threads I have posted in. I will repeat my post, since no one seemed to answer the questions I put forth. Here it is, in it's entirety


Let me ask you a question. Does your zeal to uphold the law only apply to laws you agree with? I ask you this, because I am curious: what was the law and the punishment for NOT wearing a yellow star at that time? Was beating and/or killing someone for not wearing the star LEGAL where the officer was? If it was, you, my friend, are guilty of hypocrisy.

How many American servicemen and/or intelligence agents have been prosecuted in the world court because of what they have done to Iraqi people? Does your zeal to uphold "the rights of people" extend to Iraqis? Or, do those rights only cover Jews? Are mere goyim (literally, "cattle") exempt from that protection?

How many people were convicted of war crimes for killing gypsies and homosexuals? Or was it just the war crimes against jews that were important to uphold?

So, here's what we learn from your post: Only jews are worthy to be victims of "war crimes", and it's only a war crime if you lose the war.


Please answer the bolded, underlined questions.

[edit on 24-8-2008 by sir_chancealot]



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by scotty18
 


Not just the current administration, but the next one too. You have yet to see the bigger picture it seems. Or are you going to sit there and claim that everything the Bush regime has done has been righteous? Because unless they are righteous, then they are far worse than this old man.



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by sir_chancealot

Originally posted by scotty18
Interesting that Sir_Chancelot hasn't posted again since making his asinine comments.


No, sometimes I lose track of threads I have posted in. I will repeat my post, since no one seemed to answer the questions I put forth. Here it is, in it's entirety


Let me ask you a question. Does your zeal to uphold the law only apply to laws you agree with? I ask you this, because I am curious: what was the law and the punishment for NOT wearing a yellow star at that time? Was beating and/or killing someone for not wearing the star LEGAL where the officer was? If it was, you, my friend, are guilty of hypocrisy.

How many American servicemen and/or intelligence agents have been prosecuted in the world court because of what they have done to Iraqi people? Does your zeal to uphold "the rights of people" extend to Iraqis? Or, do those rights only cover Jews? Are mere goyim (literally, "cattle") exempt from that protection?

How many people were convicted of war crimes for killing gypsies and homosexuals? Or was it just the war crimes against jews that were important to uphold?

So, here's what we learn from your post: Only jews are worthy to be victims of "war crimes", and it's only a war crime if you lose the war.


Please answer the bolded, underlined questions.

[edit on 24-8-2008 by sir_chancealot]


How about you step up to my response first.



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by scotty18
 


Not just the current administration, but the next one too. You have yet to see the bigger picture it seems. Or are you going to sit there and claim that everything the Bush regime has done has been righteous? Because unless they are righteous, then they are far worse than this old man.





Wow, you and Sir Chancelot must be buddies. Both with an agenda who put words into other people mouths to try to fit your agenda. pathetic.



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by scotty18
 


I have no secret "agenda" and the other member is not on my friend list, you can check for yourself. I've seen the person around, that's about it.

Do you have anything valid to add now, or will you contunie to deflect?



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by scotty18
 


I have no secret "agenda" and the other member is not on my friend list, you can check for yourself. I've seen the person around, that's about it.

Do you have anything valid to add now, or will you contunie to deflect?


You really shouldn't be attempting to scold anyone considering you put words into others mouths to try to be the "winner" of the internet.

PS. Excellent job of deflecting away from that.

[edit on 24-8-2008 by scotty18]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join