現在地 HOME > 戦争66 > 920.html
★阿修羅♪
|
現在地 HOME > 戦争66 > 920.html
★阿修羅♪
|
|
買iチスドイツの何十万もの文書公開の要求をCIAが議会に対して拒否
拒否するのは、当然、公開すると都合が悪いことがあるからである。
具体的には、拙著、『アウシュヴィッツの争点』の以下に抜粋した部分、ニュルンベルグ裁判が、いかに一方的な「茶番狂言」であったか、証拠が隠されていたか、が明らかになり、ホロコーストの大嘘のでっち上げの真相が、何と、60年を経て、白日の下に晒されるからである。
------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.jca.apc.org/~altmedka/aus-17.html
『アウシュヴィッツの争点』
[中略]
(その17)「歴史上もっとも恥ずべき法の名による茶番狂言」という批判
弁護団が記録を利用できず、被告に有利な証拠が突然「消滅」
被告側の弁護人は、しかも、裁判にはかかせない証拠の利用について、はなはだしく不利な立場におかれていた。
すでに紹介ずみの『ニュルンベルグ裁判』という本は、決して「ホロコースト」物語批判を目的として書かれたものではないが、そこにも事実の一端がしるされている。この本では、まず、連合軍が総力をあげてドイツの文書を押収し、「記録センター」に集中した状況をえがく。ところが法廷での実情は、つぎのように大変不公平なものであった。
「かくて検察側は、記録と記録保管所を自由に使えたわけであるが、これらについて弁護側のほうは、そんなものが存在することすら知りもしなかった。［中略］検察側はニュルンベルグでは（弁護団とは反対に）いつでも自分たちが必要と認めたものは、あらゆるところから手に入れることができたのである。ところが弁護団が見ることができるのは、無数の詳細なデータ、関連書類のうち［中略］、たいてい、有罪証拠物件だけで、多くはまったく知らないものばかりだった。これに反し、検察側はそれらを記録として証明できるのであった。被告側に有利な資料を探し出す可能性は、弁護団には皆無だった。
弁護団が、検察側の引用する記録を見せてほしいと要求しても、その記録が「消滅している」ことも、珍しくなかった。［中略］規約によれば、「重大な」箇所だけ翻訳すればよいことになっていて、（中略）テキストのひどい意味変更、歪曲、誤解が審理の際に生ずることも珍しくなかった。［中略］
連合国側に場合によっては不利となり、一方被告側の罪を軽減するのに適当と思える数千の記録は、突然姿を消してしまった。［中略］すでに一九四五年の時点で、記録が押収されたり、弁護団の手から取り上げられたり、あるいは盗まれたりしたという事実には、無数の証拠がある。［中略］
弁護団の証人や援助者は、ときどきころあいをみて、また執拗に脅迫を受けたりして、強引に出廷させてもらえなかったり、あるいは出廷させられることも珍しくなく、さらには自分たちの声明を検閲されたり、押収されたりしたうえで、検察側の証人にされたりした。一九五六年五月になってやっと刑務所入りをしたオズワルド・ポールは、アメリカおよびイギリス役人から尋問を受ける際、椅子に縛りつけられ、意識を失うほど殴りつけられ、足を踏まれ、ついにワルター・フンクの有罪を証明するものを文書で出すと約束するまで虐待された」
ドイツ人の法律家の場合には、そのうえに、ニュルンベルグ裁判が採用した英米式の訴訟手続きに不慣れだった。審理のすすめかたについて弁護団が抗議したときのジャクソン首席検事の「言い草」は、「数人の弁護人は元ナチスでありました」というものだった。結果として、そのさい、裁判長は弁護団の抗議を却下した。
『六〇〇万人は本当に死んだか』では、ニュルンベルグ裁判を「歴史上もっとも恥ずべき法の名による茶番狂言」と断定した理由をたくさんあげているが、そのなかでも、もっとも決定的とおもえるものは、つぎのような法廷の内部の構成員による告発であろう。
「ニュルンベルグ裁判の背景的事実を暴露したのは、その法廷の一つの首席裁判官だったアメリカ人の裁判官、ウェナストラム判事だった。かれは訴訟手続きの進行状況に愛想をつかして辞任し、アメリカに飛行機でもどったが、置き土産として、裁判にたいするかれの異議を逐一箇条書きでしるした声明を『シカゴ・トリビューン』紙上で発表した」
法廷構成の欠陥は早くも、当のニュールンベルグ裁判の進行中にも専門家から指摘され、メディア報道にもあらわれていたのだ。「正義は否定された」と主張するウェナストラム判事の「異議」は、いかにも判事らしい慎重な表現になっている。「箇条書き」の異議のなかから、もっとも核心的な法廷の構成の適格性にたいする疑問を要約すると、つぎのようである。
一、「国際検察局」のアメリカ人スタッフが「個人的な野心や復讐心のみによって動く」
一、「ニュルンベルグ裁判の法廷構成員の九〇％は、政治的または人種的な立場から、訴訟事件を利用しようする偏見にみちた人々だった」
一、「検察当局はあきらかに、どうすれば軍事法廷のすべての管理的地位を、帰化証明がきわめてあたらしい“アメリカ人”によって占めることができるかを心得ていた」し、それらの「“アメリカ人”」が「被告人たちにたいする敵意にみちた雰囲気をつくりだした」
------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/30/international/europe/30nazis.html?oref=login&oref=login&ei=5094&en=607d439c301d899e&hp=&ex=1107061200&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print&position
January 30, 2005
C.I.A. Said to Rebuff Congress on Nazi Files
By DOUGLAS JEHL
ASHINGTON, Jan. 29 - The Central Intelligence Agency is refusing to provide hundreds of thousands of pages of documents sought by a government working group under a 1998 law that requires full disclosure of classified records related to Nazi war criminals, say Congressional officials from both parties.
Under the law, the C.I.A. has already provided more than 1.2 million pages of documents, the vast majority of them from the archives of its World War II predecessor, the Office of Strategic Services. Many documents have been declassified, and some made public last year showed a closer relationship between the United States government and Nazi war criminals than had previously been understood, including the C.I.A.'s recruitment of war criminal suspects or Nazi collaborators.
For nearly three years, the C.I.A. has interpreted the 1998 law narrowly and rebuffed requests for additional records, say Congressional officials and some members of the working group, who also contend that that stance seems to violate the law.
These officials say the agency has sometimes agreed to provide information about former Nazis, but not about the extent of the agency's dealings with them after World War II. In other cases, it has refused to provide information about individuals and their conduct during the war unless the working group can first provide evidence that they were complicit in war crimes.
The agency's stance poses a sharp test between the C.I.A.'s deep institutional reluctance to make public details about any intelligence operations and the broad mandate set forth in the law to lift the veil about relationships between the United States government and Nazi war criminals.
The dispute has not previously been made public. Critics of the C.I.A.'s stance, including all three private citizens who are members of the working group, said they were disclosing the dispute now in hopes of resolving the impasse by March, when the working group's mandate is to expire.
"I think that the C.I.A. has defied the law, and in so doing has also trivialized the Holocaust, thumbed its nose at the survivors of the Holocaust and also at Americans who gave their lives in the effort to defeat the Nazis in World War II," said Elizabeth Holtzman, a former congresswoman from New York and a member of the group. "We have bent over backward; we have given them every opportunity to comply."
At the request of Senator Mike DeWine, Republican of Ohio, the Senate Judiciary Committee plans to hold a public hearing on the matter early next month, and is planning to call C.I.A. officials and members of the working group as witnesses, Congressional officials said.
A C.I.A. spokesman said the agency had already declassified and released 1.25 million pages of documents under the law, including those related to 775 different name files.
"The C.I.A. has not withheld any material identified in its files related to the commission of war crimes by officials, agents or collaborators of Nazi Germany," he said.
The spokesman acknowledged that the C.I.A. had refused to disclose other material "that does not relate to war crimes per se" and that the agency was working on a report to Congress to justify its actions under exemptions spelled out in the law.
A spokeswoman for the panel, formally known as the Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group, said it would not comment on the dispute. The group is led by a representative of the National Archives, and includes representatives of the C.I.A., the F.B.I., the Defense Department and other government agencies, and has taken no formal stand on the matter, people involved in the issue said.
But in interviews, all three public members of the group, including Ms. Holtzman; Richard Ben-Veniste, a Washington lawyer; and Thomas H. Baer, a former federal prosecutor, made plain their opposition to the C.I.A.'s position. Congressional officials said the three had a sympathetic hearing from Senator DeWine, a sponsor of the 1998 law, known as the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act.
The 1998 law that established the working group directed that it "locate, identify, inventory, recommend for declassification and make available to the public at the National Archives and Records Administration, all classified Nazi war criminal records of the United States."
Under the law, the heads of government agencies have the power to exempt from release nine categories of national security information. But to assert such exemptions, agency heads are required to submit a report to Congressional committees, a step the C.I.A. has not yet taken, the Congressional officials said.
"I can only say that the posture the C.I.A. has taken differs from all the other agencies that have been involved, and that's not a position we can accept," Mr. Ben-Veniste said. In a separate interview, Mr. Baer said: "Too much has been secret for too long. The C.I.A. has not complied with the statute."
A book, "U.S. Intelligence and the Nazis," that was released by the working group in May provided a partial picture of those dealings. It has shown that the American government worked closely with Nazi war criminals and collaborators, allowing many of them to live in the United States after World War II.
Historians who have studied the documents made public so far have said that at least five associates of the Nazi leader Adolf Eichmann, the architect of Hitler's campaign to exterminate Jews, had worked for the C.I.A. Eichmann, who was arrested by the Allies in 1945, escaped and fled to Argentina. He was captured by Israeli agents in 1960, tried and hanged. The records also indicate that the C.I.A. tried to recruit two dozen more war criminals or Nazi collaborators.
American officials have defended the recruiting of former Nazis as having been essential to gaining access to intelligence after World War II, particularly about the Soviet Union and its cold war allies. Among former Nazis who were given refuge in the United States was Wernher von Braun, the German scientist who developed the V-2 rocket in World War II for the Nazis and played a major role in the development of the American space program.
After World War II, the Allied powers who occupied Germany defined war crimes broadly, declaring the Nazi SS to be a criminal organization guilty of exterminating and persecuting Jews and killing prisoners of war and slave laborers. They identified as a war criminal anyone who was a principal, accessory to, or consented in the commission of war crimes, or anyone who was a member of an organization or group connected with the commission of such crimes.
Exactly how many pages of documents the C.I.A. is still withholding is not clear, according to people involved in the dispute. But they said that at minimum, they believed it amounted to hundreds of thousands of pages.
A report made public by the working group in 1999 said an initial survey by the C.I.A. estimated that more than two million pages of documents among records in the agency's files for the years 1947 to 1998 included "operational, personality, country, and project files; analytical products, source material, and biographic reports" related to Nazi war criminals. The agency estimated that an additional 2.1 million pages among the files of its predecessor organizations, including the O.S.S., from 1941 to 1947, could be covered by the group's mandate.
The group outlined its objections to the C.I.A.'s position in a letter sent to the agency in February 2004, according to Congressional officials. The group's mandate to examine intelligence documents related to the Nazi war criminals was to expire last year. But Congress agreed to extend it until the end of March 2005, in a step that Congressional officials from both parties said was intended in large part to allow more time to resolve the impasse.
------------------------------------------------------------
このような、とうてい、裁判とは言えない「茶番狂言」を根拠にして、ホロコーストを信じ込み、
ホロコーストの嘘を暴く見直し論者を、口汚く攻撃する連中は、間抜けもいいところなのである。しかも、そういう間抜けが、反戦平和を云々するのだから、滑稽至極なのである。
題名には必ず「阿修羅さんへ」と記述してください。