The problems with the nuremberg trial

[Hektor]

Can anyone please delineate exactly what were some issues with the nuremberg trial, as it is obvious it was a show trial meant to promote the holohoax. But what are some details regarding this trial. I know they used forged evidence, that the Defense refused to cross examine witnesses, that the confessions were extracted by weak "torture". But what else and what specifically was questionable about the procedures in the trial.

What's the evidence for the defence REFUSING to cross examine witnesses?

....
Oh, they definitely presented evidence in the form of affidavits and "eyewitnesses" who testified, but- it is important to remember- this was a show trial, and the evidence presented- such as the ridiculous shrunken heads-was part of the show. The purpose of the show was not to evaluate evidence against the individual defendants per se, but to demonize the NSDAP regime as well as the German people in the eyes of gullible westerners.

Actually it seems that the main motivation for the show trial was actually pinning the blame for the war on the Germans. The Holocaust Tales were more for spicing the whole thing up and add more justification (the demonizing and all). If the Nazis were so evil and gas the Jews, sure they'd also plot unwarranted wars against other countries.

Don't forget that there was quite some opposition towards war with Germany in Western countries. And those people may have inserted the question whether the sacrifices and damages were really justified to bring Germany down.

[Mortimer]

But what else and what specifically was questionable about the procedures in the trial.

They hypocrisy of the charge of "waging aggressive war". In 1939 Poland was invaded by 2 countries Germany on September 1 and the Soviet Union on September 17. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland
At the trial the German defendants were condemned for the invasion of Poland but the Soviet invasion wasn't mentioned. I don't think the defendants were even allowed to bring up the subject of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact of August 1939.

[hermod]

But what else and what specifically was questionable about the procedures in the trial.

They hypocrisy of the charge of "waging aggressive war". In 1939 Poland was invaded by 2 countries Germany on September 1 and the Soviet Union on September 17. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland
At the trial the German defendants were condemned for the invasion of Poland but the Soviet invasion wasn't mentioned. I don't think the defendants were even allowed to bring up the subject of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact of August 1939.

Point quite fallacious anyway for anyone regarding the side which made the war inescapable (instead of the side which shot the first bullet) as the guilty side. Such an approach - more fair and mature than the usual "who shot the first bullet" one, IMO - points to the FDR administration, some specific circles in Britain, and the Polish military junta as the guilty side of WW2.

[Hektor]

But what else and what specifically was questionable about the procedures in the trial.

They hypocrisy of the charge of "waging aggressive war". In 1939 Poland was invaded by 2 countries Germany on September 1 and the Soviet Union on September 17. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland
At the trial the German defendants were condemned for the invasion of Poland but the Soviet invasion wasn't mentioned. I don't think the defendants were even allowed to bring up the subject of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact of August 1939.

Actually Joachim von Ribbentrop mentioned the pact AND the secret protocol in his interrogation and defense speech:
https://archive.org/details/Verteidigun ... ProzessIMT
It was just ignored, since the Soviets denied the secret protocol part (which was actually their idea).

Further more I think the following was ignored - and correct me, if I just overlooked or forgot it:
* British and French attempts to get the Soviet Union into a pact against Germany before the Hitler-Stalin agreement
* Instigating Poland against Germany with the guarantee and especially the secret protocol which singles out Germany as the enemy.
* Allied Plans to invade formally neutral Norway (and Sweden) to cut Germany off iron ore supplies from there.
* Allied cooperation with formally Neutral Belgium and Holland.
* British and Soviet mingling on the Balkans as in the Yugoslav coup

There is far more documents on this, but I doubt they were accessible at the time. All that was accessible would mostly be from the German archives and from the Allied side ONLY, if they wanted to have that made public.