Judgement in America

If you've ever seen Judgement At Nuremberg you know it is a excellent movie. If you haven't check TCM to see when its on next. I've seen it many times but this time I was able to seriously sit down and see the movie from beginning to end. It is set in post WW2 Germany in the city of Nuremberg to host the trial of nazi judges. Judges that rubber stamped whenever Hitler and the nazis wanted. Until after a time the trials conducted by the nazis served no other purpose but to punish those that did not believe with those in power to just shut up. It worked in the days of the inquisitions and crusades just as it served modern day dictators. The administration of justice(some have called it "the allies revenge")was conducted by the various allied partners: US,USSR,France and Great Britain. There were no allied attorneys to represent the nazi defendants,most refrained because helping the accused may be disadvantageous down the road so the defense was mainly conducted by German attorneys. What goes on in the movie is the various personalities and psychologies in play. The former jurists on trial range from Ernst Janning:at one time a pro-democracy judge who helped frame the constitution for the Weimar Republic who later went on to serve the nazis,wrestles with his decision on what he's done and does the best he can to rationalize it. He went along to get along. At the other extreme is Emil Hahn:a dedicated nazi judge that had no problem following the orders of the nazis because he was a nazi too. The only thing Hahn was sorry about is that Germany lost the war. The other two former judges were just rubber stamping the demands of the nazis with a little sadism thrown in. The psychologies of prosecuting attorney Tad Lawson: An American soldier who helped liberate the extermination camps on one side and Hans Rolfe on the other trying to salvage what remaining shred of dignity Germany still had left and reminded the world that they helped enable Hitler so they can blame themselves as well. Presiding over this case is American jurist Dan Haywood as the chief jurist. He is presiding over this case with two other American jurists. In the movie there is the American ideology clashing with the German ideology,between prosecutor and defense,respectively. Freedom for the individual,which is something we try to carry out and guard versus the good of society which is what the nazis cherished. The movie is fraught with rationalizations. From the doctors and nurses who performed sterilization (castrations) on those deemed intellectually inferior,while stating they think it is a barbaric practice that sickens them. Their protests are mostly rhetoric. They rationalize this by saying someone else with stand up to the nazis. Someone else will tell them this is unacceptable and they will reform their ways. Just wait until that someone else tells them off. They'll be sorry. Besides it's for the good of society. "It's for the good of society so let it happen" was allowed by the laypeople,professionals,government civil servants to the courts and chancellory. "It's for the good of society so let it happen" so no one dared to step up,to say "enough,no more". All through the fatherland you can hear the rhetoric "someone else will stop them". In the movie Haywood says that ever since he's been in Germany it is one rationalization or another by the native population. Fast forward to today. Civil Liberties being trampled upon while while being ignored by the media,an entity that is supposed to keep an eye on the government for the good of the people. However they don't. The old media has become a joke. They have the same topics over and over for the next 5-7 hours while you can spend the same amount of time on the net and never run across the same thing twice. There are statists eager and waiting to take away your freedoms just to enrich themselves. Those that screwed up radio and tv now want to screw up the net. The last bastion of freedom is the internet. the government tells us it's okay "to go along to get along". From throughout society we are told to obey. To go along to get along. If there are any problems someone else will fix it so don't worry about it. You have American Idol that promotes something the powers that be want you to be dazzled with. Fluff has replaced news: celebrity A fucking celebrity B is now more worthy than North and South Korea duking it out which also involves Russia and China at this point (just a scenario). We're being fed sugarcoated lies in the form of propaganda that falsely passes for "news". This can be done with the right person in office. In this case Barrack Obama (it could have be any left leaning black man) as the president. A black man could get further with this agenda than a white man could. If Obama were white Solyndra alone would have impeached him. The reason this is done by a black man is that America is in a hurry to absolve itself from its racist past and will do pretty much anything to accomplish that goal. It's a wet dream for the statists,a no-lose scenario--or is it? We can fight back. The net has leveled the playing field. Do we safeguard our freedoms and demand the lost ones restored or do we go along to get along? "Go along to get along" works real well in one place: the slaughterhouse. What do we do: fight back and take and preserve what is ours as a country or do we go along to get along? Which is it? We know where one road leads to and it's not good. Let's choose the other one.