Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (3023)	10/6/2001 6:47:37 PM
From: BirdDog	Respond to of 281500

Nuremberg Trials... jurisdiction, then? Oh please.... We made sure that everyone who was willing to die, did. Why do you think we let the Russians beat us to Berlin? Besides them loosing a million men to take it. We knew they were going to tear the Germans apart. Only the ones who took a so called innocent civil stance ever made it to trial. The worst thing that could happen now, is if Osama boy gives himself up for a trial here. Another OJ fiasco! This is war...not a police action. BirdDog

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (3023)	10/6/2001 9:49:47 PM
From: Ilaine	Respond to of 281500

I think it's pretty well accepted that the Third Reich did not take power legally. AFter the Reichstag was set on fire (probably nothing to do with the Nazis, but they capitalized on it) Hitler had all the members of the Reichstag (German legislature) who opposed him locked up on various pretexts, which gave the Nazis a majority. Then he suspended the Reichstag and called himself the Fuhrer and said he was the source of all laws. So "laws of the Third Reich" is a contradiction in terms. In a civil law society, like Germany, laws originate from legislatures, and are interpreted by courts. Dictators issue edicts, not laws. Usually civil codes have as Article One something like "Law is the expression of legislative will." Legislatures are democratically elected. Hitler was not.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (3023)	10/7/2001 5:45:23 AM
From: D. Long	Respond to of 281500

This was an issue at the Nuremburg Trials. Not to get too much into legal philosophy here, but there's two ways of looking at it, Legal Positivism and Natural Law. Basically, both conclude that there are some laws that no reasonable person could accept as legitimate, and thus those guilty of heineous crimes can be held responsible because they should not have obeyed illegitimate law. One of the cases was a woman who caused the death of her husband by denouncing him to the authorities. She murdered her husband deliberately by exploiting a Nazi law. They found her guilty, despite that her action was legal under the law of the Nazi regime. Derek