John Demjanjuk judgment

Comparison of John Demjanjuk with the accused in a climate crime trial 2075 Which of the two defendants is more credible? Who is guilty?



  Let's imagine the year 2075


The whole of humanity in a desperate defensive struggle against the climate catastrophe. 25% of the GNP of all mankind is spent to filter CO2 from the atmosphere and to split it into C and O.

Bangladesh has gone under. The rise in sea level just above what the worst prediction has calculated.

The madness of the NS racial theory is already 130 years past.

The madness of economics, perpetual growth with a limited amount of fossil energy, ignoring climate change, on the other hand, is a burden for every human being, how well could one live if 25% GNP did not have to be invested in the fight against climate catastrophe?

The catastrophic famines, which claimed 3 times more lives than the entire Second World War.

Big court case today. The defendant was born in 1985, just turned 90. After studying "Communication Sciences and Journalism", he began working for a PR agency in 2008.

The PR agency was paid by a large oil company to spread disinformation about climate change in order to delay the switch to renewable energy and electric mobility as long as possible.

In the PR agency, the accused soon became a top employee when it came to defaming scientific findings, spreading the pseudo-teachings of climate deniers.

With great enthusiasm he used all his creativity to fulfil the wishes of his employer in the best possible way.

Today he is on trial as a climate criminal. Criminal propaganda to prevent and delay action on climate change.

The accused refers to the fact that he firmly believed that oil is eternal, that fossil energy is the best for people and that climate change is a tissue of lies of the eco-fascists.

Which defendant is more credible: Demjanjuk or the accused in the climate crime trial?



 






Context description:  politics political