Perspective...

David Aranovitch gives us a healthy dose. For a change. He spoofs coverage of an Adolph Hitler war crimes trial. Here's a sampling:

Comment, Jonathan Steele, The Guardian October 21, 1946
“Along comes a second big German event: the trial of Adolf Hitler. Important though it is as a catharsis for the former dictator’s hundreds of thousands of surviving victims, it has little political significance since only a small minority of Germans still support him. "

“Of course, it could backfire on the Allies if Hitler is humiliated in court by unfair or high-handed treatment. To a wider circle of Germans and other Central Europeans, he might then become a symbol of wounded nationalist pride. “But manipulating the trial’s timing is the real story. Why is the trial being started suddenly this week? The date was fixed, conveniently diverting reporters’ attention from the problems of occupied Germany and the hotly disputed local elections. Was the trial a Special Action to get vote-rigging out of the headlines?”

BBC Today programme. October 20, 1946
Presenter: “In the studio we have international lawyer Renee Rock, who has written a book about something to do with the legal basis of the war and therefore, by association, might know something about this. Mr Rock, why have they chosen to press charges based on this one death camp — Treblinka — and not on all the other invasions and atrocities?

RR: “They’ve clearly decided, at the request of the occupying powers, not to include charges that might be embarrassing and might indicate complicity in earlier crimes. Who, after all, allowed Hitler to remilitarise the Rhineland? To occupy Czechoslovakia? Who divided Poland with him?”

Sound familiar? Utterly foolish and contemptible?