“. . . some of these tanks stopped when they came opposite the
field in which the unarmed American prisoners were standing in a
group, with their hands up or clasped behind their heads. A
German soldier, either an officer or a noncommissioned officer,
in one of these vehicles which had stopped, got up, drew his
revolver, took deliberate aim and fired into the group of
American prisoners. One of the American soldiers fell. This was
repeated a second time and another American soldier in the group
fell to the ground. At about the same time, from two of the
vehicles on the road, fire was opened on the group of American
prisoners in the field. All, or most, of the American soldiers
dropped to the ground and stayed there while the firing
continued, for 2 or 3 minutes. Most of the soldiers in the field
were hit by this machine gun fire. The German vehicles then
moved off toward the south and were followed by more vehicles
which also came from the direction of Weismes. As these latter
vehicles came opposite the field in which the American soldiers
were lying, they also fired with small arms from the moving
vehicles at the prostrate bodies in the field. . . .”
Page 132:
“. . . some German soldiers, evidently from the group of those
who were on guard at the crossroad, then walked to the group of
the wounded American prisoners who were still lying on the
ground in the field . . . and shot with pistol or rifle, or
clubbed with a rifle butt or other heavy object, any of the
American soldiers who still showed any sign of life. In some
instances, American prisoners were evidently shot at close
range, squarely between the eyes, in the temple, or the back of
the head. . . .”
This deed constitutes an act of pure terrorism, the shame of which will
remain on the German Army, for nothing justified this. These prisoners
were unarmed and had surrendered.
The Tribunal authorized me yesterday to present the documents on which
the French accusation is based for establishing the guilt of Göring,
Keitel, Jodl, Bormann, Frank, Rosenberg, Streicher, Schirach, Hess,
Frick, the OKW, OKH, OKL, the Reich Cabinet, and the Nazi Leadership
Corps, as well as of the SS and the Gestapo, for atrocities committed in
the camps. I shall be very brief. I have very few new documents to
present.
The first concerns Kaltenbrunner. It is the American Document L-35 which
the Tribunal will find on Page 246 of the document book concerning
concentration camps, that is the second book. This document has not been
submitted. It is the testimony of Rudolf Mildner, Doctor of Law, Colonel
of the Police, who declares:
“The internment orders were signed by the Chief of the Sipo and
SD, Dr. Kaltenbrunner, or, as deputy by the head of Amt IV, SS
Gruppenführer Müller.”
In submitting this it becomes Exhibit Number RF-383 (bis).
Concerning Göring we submit the American Document 343-PS, Exhibit Number
RF-384. This is a letter from Field Marshal Milch to Wolff. This letter
concludes with this phrase:
“I express to the SS the special thanks of the
Commander-in-Chief of the Luftwaffe for the aid they have
rendered.”
Now, from what precedes, one can conclude that these thanks refer to the
biological experiments of Dr. Rascher. Thus, Göring is involved in
these.
The German SS Medical Corps is implicated. This one can gather from
Document 1635-PS, which has not yet been handed to the Tribunal, which
becomes Exhibit Number RF-385, and which the Tribunal will find in the
annex of the second document book. These are extracts from reviews of
microscopic and anatomical research. They deal with experiments made on
persons who died suddenly, although in good health. The circumstances of
their death are stated by the experimenters in such a way that no reader
can be in any doubt as to the conditions under which they were put to
death.
With the permission of the Tribunal, I shall read a few brief extracts.
Page 132 of the document which we submit to the Tribunal:
“The thyroid glands of 21 persons between 20 and 40 years of
age, who were in supposedly good health and who suddenly died,
were examined.
“The persons in question, 19 men and 2 women, until their death
lived for several months under identical conditions, also with
regard to food. The last food taken consisted chiefly of
carbohydrates.
“Replacement products and examination methods:”—that is the
title.
“Over a considerable period, substance for experiments was taken
from the livers of 24 adults in good health, who suddenly died
between 5 and 6 o’clock in the morning.”
On examining these documents, as well as the originals, the Tribunal
will see that German medical literature is very rich in experiments
carried out on “adults in good health who died suddenly between 5 and 6
o’clock in the morning.”
No one in Germany could be deceived as to the conditions under which
these deaths occurred, since the accounts of the SS doctors’ experiments
in the camps were printed and published.
One of the last documents is F-185(b), and (a), relative to an
experiment with poisoned bullets carried out on 11 August 1944, in the
presence of SS Sturmbannführer Dr. Ding and Dr. Widmann—Page 187 of the
second document book concerning concentration camps. These two documents
are submitted as Exhibit Numbers RF-386 and RF-387. The Tribunal will
find the description of this experiment, in which the victims are
described as persons sentenced to death.
THE PRESIDENT: The document has been read already, I think.
M. DUBOST: It is a document from the French archives. However, Mr.
President, I doubt whether the Tribunal has heard Document F-185(b),
Exhibit RF-386, which is the opinion of the French professor, M. May,
Fellow of Surgery, to whom the pseudo-scientific documents to which I
alluded just now were submitted—the reports from scientific reviews of
experiments. He wrote, Page 222:
“The wickedness and the stupidity of the experimenters amazed
us. The symptoms of aconitine nitrate poisoning have been known
from time immemorial. This poison is sometimes employed by
certain savage tribes to poison their war arrows. But one has
never heard of them writing observations in a pretentious style,
on the anticipated result of their experiments—observations
which are completely inadequate and puerile—nor that they would
have them signed by a ‘Doz,’ that is to say, a professor.”
We now submit Document F-278(a) as Exhibit Number RF-388. It involves
Keitel. It is a letter signed: “By order of the High Command of the
Wehrmacht, Dr. Lehmann.” It is dated 17 February 1942 and is addressed
to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, and it implicates him. It concerns
the regime in the internment camps:
“Delinquents brought to Germany in application of the decree of
the Führer are to have no communication of any kind with the
outside world. They must, therefore, neither write themselves,
nor receive letters, packages, or visits. The letters, packages,
and visits are to be refused with the remark that all
communication with the outside world is forbidden.”
The High Command gives its point of view in a letter of 31 January 1942,
according to which there can be no question of Belgian lawyers being
permitted for Belgian prisoners.
We now submit Document 682-PS, which becomes Exhibit Number RF-389, Page
134 of the second document book. This document implicates the German
Government and the Reich Cabinet. It is a record of a conversation
between Dr. Goebbels and Thierack, Minister of Justice, in Berlin, on 14
September 1942, from 1300 hours to 1415 hours.
“With regard to the destruction of asocial life, Dr. Goebbels is
of the opinion that the following should be exterminated: All
Jews and Gypsies, Poles having to serve 3-4 years of penal
servitude, and Czechs and Germans sentenced to death, to penal
servitude for life, or to security custody
(Sicherungsverwahrung). The idea of exterminating them by work
is the best. . . .”
We stress this last phrase which shows, even in the heart of the German
Government itself, the will to “exterminate by work.”
The last document that we shall submit with regard to the concentration
camps is Document F-662, which becomes Exhibit Number RF-390, Pages 77
and 78, second document book. This document is the testimony of M.
Poutiers, living in Paris, Place de Breteuil, who points out that the
internees in the detachments of Mauthausen-Ebens worked under the direct
control of civilians, the SS dealing only with the guarding of the
prisoners. This witness, who was in numerous work units, states that all
were ordered and controlled by civilians and only supervised by the SS
and that the inhabitants of the country, as the internees went to and
from their work and while at work, could therefore observe their misery;
which confirms the testimony which has already been given before the
Tribunal during these last few days.
We shall summarize the increasing advance of the German criminal policy
in the West: At the beginning of the occupation, violation of Article 50
of the Hague Convention; execution of hostages, but creation of a pseudo
“law of hostages” to legalize these executions in the eyes of the
occupied countries.
In the years that follow, contempt for the rights of the human
individual increases, until it becomes complete in the last months of
the occupation. By that time arbitrary imprisonment, parodies of trials,
or executions without trial have become daily practice.
The sentences, the Tribunal will remember, were not put into effect in
cases of acquittal or pardon; people acquitted by German tribunals, who
should have been set at liberty, were deported and died in concentration
camps.
At the same time there developed and grew in strength the organization
of Frenchmen who remained on the soil of France and refused to let their
country die. At this stage German terrorism was intensified against them
ever increasingly. What follows is the description of the terrorist
repression carried out by the Germans against the patriots of the west
of Europe, against what was called the “Resistance,” without giving this
word any other meaning than its generic sense.
From the time Germany understood that her policy of collaboration was
doomed to defeat, that her policy of hostages only exasperated the fury
of the people whom she was trying to subdue; instead of modifying her
policy with regard to the citizens of the occupied countries, she
reinforced the terror which already reigned there and tried to justify
it by saying it was an anti-Communist campaign.
The Tribunal will recall Keitel’s order and will understand what was
thought of this pretext. All the French, all the citizens of Europe
without distinction, without any distinction of party, profession,
religion, or race, were involved in the resistance against Germany and
their heroes were mingled in the graves and in the collective charnel
houses into which the Germans threw them after their extermination.
But this confusion was voluntary; it was calculated; it justified to a
certain degree the arbitrary measures of repression of which we already
had evidence in Document F-278, which we submit under Number RF-391. It
is dated 12 January 1943, and is signed “Von Falkenhausen.”
“Persons who are found, without valid authorization, in
possession of explosives and military firearms, pistols of all
kinds, submachine guns, rifles, _et cetera_, with ammunition,
are liable in future to be shot immediately without trial.”
This order and others analogous to it continued to be executed even
after the allied landing in the west of Europe. These orders were even
carried out against organized forces in Belgium as well as in France,
although the Germans themselves considered these forces as troops to a
certain extent. This can be verified by reference to Document F-673,
submitted under Exhibit Number RF-392, entitled “Terrorist action
against patriots.”
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps this would be a convenient time to break off.
[_A recess was taken._]
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, M. Dubost.
M. DUBOST: The document I have just submitted under Exhibit Number
RF-392 is a memorandum to the Wiesbaden Commission. We read the
following:
“The action of the German troops, even if we admit the truth of
the facts presented by the French, is taking place in the form
of combat by far exceeding in scope any purely police action
against isolated outlaws. On the enemy side we have
organizations which absolutely refuse to accept the sovereignty
of the French Government of Vichy and which from the point of
view of numbers as well as of armament and command should almost
be designated as troops. It has been reiterated that these
revolutionary units consider themselves as being a part of the
forces fighting against Germany.
“General Eisenhower has described the terrorists who are
fighting in France as troops under his command. It is against
such troops”—on the original is written in red pencil
“unfortunately not only”—“that repressive measures are
directed.”
This document shows us that when in action the French Forces of the
Interior, as well as all French forces in the western occupied
countries, were considered as troops by the German Army.
THE PRESIDENT: I see that it may be useful for the record. It is in the
document book on the extermination of innocent populations, on Page 167.
M. DUBOST: I thank you, Mr. President. Are then these patriots, who were
consequently considered by the German Army as constituting regular
troops, treated as soldiers? No.
The order of Falkenhausen is proof thereof. They were either to be
killed on the spot—and, after all, that is the fate of a combatant—or
else delivered to the Sipo, to the SD, and tortured to death by these
organisms, who dispensed with any legal formalities, as is shown by
Document 835-PS, which has already been submitted under Number USA-527,
and also by Document F-673, Page 6 in your document book, which we
submit under Exhibit Number RF-392.
Document Number F-673 is a considerable bundle of papers which comes
from the archives of the German Commission at Wiesbaden, and we are
submitting it in its entirety under Exhibit Number RF-392. Whenever we
refer to Document F-673, it will be one of the documents in this big
German book.
“Letter from the Führer’s headquarters, 18 August 1944, 30
copies; copy 26; top secret.
“Subject: Combatting terrorists and saboteurs in occupied
territories . . . . 2. Jurisdiction over non-German civilians in
occupied territories.
“1) Enclosed herewith”—says the writer of this letter—“we are
transmitting a copy of the order of the Führer of 30 July
1944. . . .”
This order of the Führer will be found on Page 9 of your document book.
Paragraph 3.
“I therefore order the troops and every individual member of the
Wehrmacht, the SS, and the police to shoot immediately on the
spot terrorists and saboteurs who are caught in the act . . . .
“2) Whoever is captured later is to be transferred to the
nearest local office of the Security Police and of the SD.
“3) Sympathizers, particularly women, who do not take an actual
part in hostilities, are to be assigned to work.”
We know what that means. We know the regime of labor in concentration
camps. But I shall proceed with reading the text of the covering letter
of this order of the Führer, Paragraph 4. This paragraph is a commentary
on the order itself:
“Present legal proceedings relating to any act of terror or
sabotage or any other crime committed by non-German civilians in
the occupied territories, which endanger the security or the
readiness for battle of the occupying power, are to be
suspended. Indictments are to be withdrawn. The carrying out of
sentences is not to be imposed. The accused and the records are
to be turned over to the nearest local office of the Security
Police and SD.”
This order, to be transmitted to all commanding officers, as indicated
on Page 7, is accompanied by one last comment, Page 8, the penultimate
paragraph:
“Non-German civilians in the occupied territories who endanger
the security or readiness for battle of the occupying power in a
manner other than through acts of terrorism and sabotage are to
be turned over to the SD.”
This order is signed by Keitel.
By this comment, Keitel has associated himself in spirit with the order
of his Führer. He has brought about the execution of numerous
individuals, for an order to kill without control any one suspected of
being a terrorist affects not only the terrorists but the innocent and
affects the innocent more than the terrorists. Moreover, Keitel’s
comment exceeds even Hitler’s own orders. Keitel applied Hitler’s
stipulation—on Page 9 of your document book—to a hypothetical case
which had not been foreseen, to wit:
“Acts committed by non-German civilians in occupied territories
which endanger the security or readiness for battle, of the
occupying power.”
This is on the general’s own initiative. It is a political act which has
nothing to do with the conduct of war. It is a political act which
compromises and involves him. It makes him participate in the
development and extension of the Hitlerian policy; for it is the
interpretation of an order from Hitler, within the spirit of the order
perhaps, but beyond its scope.
Instructions were given to the Sipo and the SD to execute without
judgment. These instructions were carried out. Document F-574 on Page 10
of your document book, submitted as Exhibit Number RF-393, is the
testimony of a certain Goldberg, an adjutant to the Sicherheitspolizei
in Chalon-sur-Saône before the liberation of that city. He was captured
by the patriots and interrogated by the divisional commissioner, who was
head of the regional judicial police officials at Dijon. The Defense
will certainly not accuse us of having had him examined by a subordinate
police officer. It was the chief himself of the judicial police
officials for the Dijon region who interrogated this witness. The
witness declared, Page 12:
“At the end of May 1944, without my having seen any written
order on this subject, the Sicherheitspolizei of Chalon were
given the right to pronounce capital punishment and to have the
sentence executed without those concerned having appeared before
a tribunal and without the case having been submitted for
approval to the commander at Dijon. The chief of the SD in
Chalon, that is Krüger, had all necessary authority to make such
decisions. There was no opposition, so far as I know, on the
part of the SD of Dijon. I therefore conclude that this
procedure was regular and was the consequence of instructions
which were not officially communicated to me but which emanated
from higher authorities.”
Execution was carried out by members of the SD. Their names are given by
the witness, but they are not of particular interest to this Tribunal,
which is only concerned with the punishment of the principal
criminals—those who gave the orders and from whom the orders emanated.
How were these orders applied in the various countries of the West? In
Holland, according to the testimony found in the report given by the
Dutch Government, Page 15, I quote:
“About 3 days after the attempt against Rauter—about 10 March
1945—I witnessed the execution of several Dutch patriots by the
German ‘green’ police while I was working in the fields in
Waltrop.”
This Dutch document is classified in the French file as Number F-224
(Document F-224 (a), Exhibit RF-277) and has been submitted to you in
its entirety, but the specific passage to which I refer has not been
read. The witness continues, on Page 16 of your document book:
“I spoke to an Oberwachtmeister of the ‘green’ police whose name
is unknown to me, and he told me that this execution was in
revenge for the attempt against Rauter. He told me also that
hundreds of Dutch ‘terrorists’ had been executed for similar
reasons.”
Another witness stated:
“About 6 o’clock in the evening”—this is the German who gave
the orders to execute the Dutch patriots—“when I went to my
office, I received the order to have 40 prisoners shot.”
On Page 19, the investigators, who are Canadian officers, state the
conditions under which the corpses were discovered. I do not believe
that the Tribunal will want me to read this passage.
On Page 21 the Tribunal will find the report of Munt, completing and
rectifying his report of 4 June on the execution of Dutchmen after the
attempt against Rauter.
The execution was carried out on the order of Kolitz; 198 prisoners were
transported. Munt denies having sanctioned the execution of these Dutch
patriots, but says that it was nevertheless impossible for him to
prevent it, in view of the orders from higher sources which he had
received.
On Page 22, next to the last paragraph, the same Munt states:
“After an attack against two members of the Wehrmacht on two
consecutive days, in which both were wounded and their rifles
taken away, my chief insisted that 15 Dutch citizens be shot; 12
were shot.”
An important document is to be found on Page 30 in your document book.
It is included in F-224, which comprises the documents relative to
inquiries made by the Dutch Government. This is a decree concerning the
proclamation of summary police justice for the occupied Netherlands
territory. It is signed by the Defendant Seyss-Inquart. Therefore one
has to go to him when seeking for the chief responsibility for these
summary executions of patriots in Holland.
From this decree we take Paragraph 1:
“. . . I proclaim, for the occupied Netherlands territory in its
entirety, summary police justice which shall enter into force
immediately.
“Simultaneously, I order that everyone abstain from any kind of
agitation which might disturb public order and the security of
public life.”