Yesterday after I replied in a tongue-in-cheek manner on the release of a new ‘Nuremberg’ film – which my friend J. Otto Pohl had actually predicted would happen as a way to try and recapture the moral high ground/intellectual narrative by jews (jews are unironically extremely unimaginative in this regard) – referencing the fact that US Chief Justice at Nuremberg Robert Jackson asked the former Armaments Minister of the Third Reich Albert Speer about an allegation of that ‘20,000 Jews were killed by atomic bomb near Auschwitz’. (1)
The tweet went viral to my infinite surprise – being a right-wing historian I am used to not being listened to by the general public – and aside from the desperate jews screaming that it was lies because Grok – Elon Musk’s ‘A.I. Chatbot’ – denied it was true or just shrieking it was lies anyway because ‘it couldn’t possibly be true’.
One objection stood out as possibly the only remotely plausible objection to my point which was that Jackson ‘merely asked Albert Speer whether it was true or not and moved on’ so thus it ‘wasn’t that Jackson believed what he said was factual’ but rather he ‘wanted to ask Speer about it’.
This is an absurd objection which I will now address, but firstly lets remind ourselves of what the Nuremberg Trial Transcript actually states, which is as follows:
‘MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And certain experiments were also conducted and certain researches conducted in atomic energy, were they not?
SPEER: We had not got as far as that, unfortunately, because the finest experts we had in atomic research had emigrated to America, and this had thrown us back a great deal in our research, so that we still needed another year or two in order to achieve any results in the splitting of the atom.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: The policy of driving people out who didn't agree with Germany hadn't produced very good dividends, had it?
SPEER: Especially in this sphere it was a great disadvantage to us.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, I have certain information, which was placed in my hands, of an experiment which was carried out near Auschwitz and I would like to ask you if you heard about it or knew about it. The purpose of the experiment was to find a quick and complete way of destroying people without the delay and trouble of shooting and gassing and burning, as it had been carried out, and this is the experiment, as I am advised. A village, a small village was provisionally erected, with temporary structures, and in it approximately 20000 Jews were put. By means of this newly invented weapon of destruction, these 20000 people were eradicated almost instantaneously, and in such a way that there was no trace left of them; that it developed, the explosive developed, temperatures of from 400 to 500 centigrade and destroyed them without leaving any trace at all.
Do you know about that experiment?
SPEER: No, and I consider it utterly improbable. If we had had such a weapon under preparation, I should have known about it.’ (2)
Now aside from the details of the claim we can see that Jackson is interrogating Speer and brings up this ‘20,000 jews murdered by atomic bomb’ claim on the basis of:
‘I have certain information, which was placed in my hands, of an experiment which was carried out near Auschwitz and I would like to ask you if you heard about it or knew about it.’ (3)
What Jackson is saying here is that he has been given ‘certain information’ – which would be in the form of documents/testimony of some kind – that suggested such an experiment taken place so he sought to use those documents/testimony as the basis for a line of potential questioning that he opened up in the above passage only to be shut down hard by Speer and then – as it was unproductive – Jackson simply moved on.
One of the lesser-known facts about the Nuremberg trials is that they were not remotely exhaustive and were largely exploratory in nature in that the way criminal trials are supposed to work is that you produce evidence to make your case, while the Nuremberg Trials acted more like grand jury trials (but without a jury) and simply ‘explored Nazi atrocities/crimes’ so they often would make allegations on the basis of claims made on the basis of the evidence handed to them by the Allied and Soviet ‘war crimes investigators’ – who were often jewish incidentally – and then see what they could make to stick in the trials themselves.
Now obviously there was some kind of quality control process of what would be move from the desks of the Allied/Soviet ‘war crimes investigators’ and then in turn a further level of quality control when those same Allied/Soviet ‘war crimes investigators’ put their findings to Allied/Soviet justices who conducted the trials and the justices could then accept whatever they felt was well - or somewhat well - authenticated and reject whatever was not in their opinion.
Thus when we see Jackson ask this question he’s not ‘asking a frivolous question about a rumour’ but rather – as he himself makes quite clear at the start of the passage (‘I have certain information, which was placed in my hands’) – he’s asking an exploratory question to Speer on the basis of evidence that he received from Allied/Soviet ‘war crimes investigators’ which he believed to be factual.
Therefore the objection is completely invalid as it removes Jackson’s comments from their historical context and doesn’t note that in the transcript itself that Jackson states that he has ‘evidence’ of such an experiment and is seeking to pooh-pooh a devastating revelation that the Jackson believed something to be true – a ‘Nazi atomic bomb test near Auschwitz which killed 20,000 jews’ – which even the most gullible ‘Holocaust’ believer knows is complete and utter nonsense.
References
(1) See my article: https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/remarkable-holocaust-nonsense-37
(2) https://www.famous-trials.com/nuremberg/1935-speercross
(3) Ibid.