Q It was very learned, but I don't think that it has an****** specifically and objectively, the question. I'll put it very simply: How could the average German pick up a magazine of that type, look at the picture of a suffering child, and not be filled with sympathy for that child, regardless of the child's nationality?
A Sympathy for the suffering child was exactly aroused.
Q That was not the purpose of the propganda, certainly?
A I think it was. After all, the sympathy was to be aroused for suffering children, and thus-
Q How about the suffering men? How about all these individuals who were regarded as "suh-humans", with their beards and with their unkemptness, and with their raged clothing? Wouldn't that arouse sympathy, rather than antipathy, rather than anger or revulsion, which, of course, was the object of the author of the magazine?
A Revulsion was to be aroused, if I understand the intention correctly, not against the individuals whose pictures were shown here, but against the system which made this misery possible, which tolerated this misery, and also against the system which put these people into power.
Q You have on opposite pages there, as I understand the pamphlet, a picture of a well-fed, healthy looking German, and on the other side the so-called "sub-human" in all his dirt and squalor. Now, the author intends that the reader shall be very much annoyed with the so-called sub-human and be filled with pride at the clean, well shaven German.
A Quite right.
Q Well, now, a person who has the intelligence of a ten year old child will realize that this person who is unshaven and has poor clothing and is sick and isn't even too intelligent, is not that way because he wants to be that way but because economic circumstances have forced him into that situation.
A You are quite right, Your Honor. Here we go beyond the economic factor and we come to the race struggle.
However, one confrontation here is significant. It shows that the ideals of two systems were confronting each other. That is at the place where not nature is being shown but art--our own art and the art of the enemy. In order to speak the language of the booklet here, the German ideal of beauty is given, and here the Soviet product is being shown (indicating), and now it is stated here that this was the ideal of beauty, which however, is not ture.
Q Such views vary. I am not concerned about that. I was concerned with the more fundamental things of health and disease. Just one more question, Herr Fritscho, and that is all. You will notice on one page pictures of Rossevelt, Stalin, LaGuardia and Churchill. I think the inscription, although I do not read German, is to the effect that they have in themselves the characteristics or the facial delineants of this inferior race. Do you suppose that that kind of an argument is at convincing to an intelligent person?
A It is not convincing in anyway, and I was thinking in particular of this page when I spoke before about the inferiority of this propaganda.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Very well. Thank you very much.
EXAMINATION BY JUDGE PHILLIPS:
Q Along the same line that Judge Musmanno has interrogated you, I wish to ask you one question. You have described the effect of such a publication and the effect it would have on a man of your education and learning. Would it not have a much different effect upon the masses of the SS when they saw that it was an SS publication, published by one of its own Main Offices?
A I don't believe that fundamentally the effect would be any different, because the taste does not depend on training; it either exists or it does not exist. Now, if an SS office had issued this literature, then the author in my opinion made a mistake with regard to the psychology of those to whom this booklet was distributed.
I don't believe that Upon the SS or the people this booklet would have had any positive effect. I believe upon the SS, as well as upon the people, it Would have had an effect of revulsion.
Q Well, it is not disputed that it was published by the Nordland Publishing Company and one of the Main Offices of the SS; that is shown upon the publication itself. You do not think when a member of the SS would see this publication, that it would have no more effect upon him than if it had been published by some one else?
A I believe that an SS man was more impressed by the booklet if he considered it to be an official SS publication. I have the impression from the introduction to this booklet that this booklet was published on the initiative of Himmler, because it is mentioned in some part of the introduction to this book. Only in this way can it be explained that probably a large sum of money was invested in the publication of this literature, which did not pay off in the end, however, and it could be observed quite frequently that Himmler as well as Hitler and also Goebbels, did not have the right idea of the effects of their propaganda on the mass of their people, because they thought that the broad masses were much more primitive than was actually the case.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: All right.
RE DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. HAENSEL:
Q Witness, I would like to go on from these last few questions, which were very interesting. Tell me this from your propaganda experience: In the course of time were you able to observe that the people considered the official propaganda--that is to say, the propaganda which came from the SS or some other agency--as being not as credible as publications coming from completely different sources?
A That is quite correct. The people refuted opinions which could be clearly recognized as coming from official sources, and they refuted them more than opinions which at least seemed to have same form of free expression.
Q From your propagandist activity, can you recall that, in cognizance of this fact, important propaganda publications were made which perhaps were printed at the expense of some Party agency or the State, but where it was carefully aboided that this fact was actually expressed in these publications?
A That happened, without any doubt. However, at the moment, I can not give you an individual example of that.
Q If, therefore, a booklet of this kind was officially provided with the SS stamp and an introduction by Himmler, would you then say an expert that this was extremely clumsy?
A Well, the introduction has nothing to do with my opinion. I think it was done in a very unprofessional fashion.
Q It has further been discussed here how these pictures of unfortunate and suffering people affected the population. As far as concentration camp inmates and concentration camp children are concerned, have you ever seen any pictures of them?
A Yes, in part, as far as I was able to look at them in the various prisons where I was kept.
Q Therefore, unfortunate people were also shown there, and may I ask you (a) to what feelings did these pictures appeal with regard to these people, and (b) why were they shown in this very unfortunate and regrettable part? Just what was the propagandists background for that?
A It could not have been any other idea than that anger was to be aroused against those people who could be found guilty of having caused the unfortunate conditions which are shown there.
Q Is that the came thought which came to you when you looked at these pictures of the ill dressed people and children there -- that anger was to be aroused, not against the unfortunate child but through sympathy with the child against those who had caused these bad economic conditions?
A Yes, without any doubt this part of the booklet had that particular tendency.
Q Witness, in the cross examination several questions were put to you, where the disappearance of Jews from the streets was concerned, did you bring the disappearance of these people into connection with the concentration camps, or did you have an opinion about the new location of these Jews which had nothing to do with the concentration camps in that actual sense?
A I was trying to explain this before. We did not bring the disappearance of the Jews into connection with the concentration camps but with the development of reservations which would lead later on to autochratix states which were to be governed by the Jews themselves. I mentioned one of them, and with regard to this particular case I received reports That was the district of Biala-Podlaska.
Q In the direct examination and the cross examination, you have repeatedly mentioned Heydrich. Perhaps it would be well if you would tell the Tribunal briefly, first of all, whether Heydrich, according to your knowledge, had anything to do with the WVHA and, secondly, what functions Heydrich carried out in the various groups, the SS, the Waffen SS, the Gestapo, and the Goneral-SS. Just where did he belong?
THE PRESIDENT: I think we know the answers on that, Dr. Haensel. We know that Heydrich had no relation to the WVHA, and we know what his field of activity was.
BY DR. HAENSEL:
Q Witness, you stated that if you hod been aware of the full truth of what was actually going on you would have gone so far as to take a pistol and shoot down the person who was responsible for it, and there is only one who bears the full responsibility.
Would you have realized that you would have had to pay for this with your life?
A I have had to pay for it much more that I did not know it, and that I did not do it.
Q Witness, you were asked by the Prosecution whether, in cognizance of these circumstances you would also have resigned from your position. If, during the war, in this fashion you had left your position would that have had the same result in the end as if you had shot somebody?
A No, I am not of that opinion at all. I could have found a thousand reasons for resigning my position. After all, I did it on one occasion. I did this for a certain reason, which I do not want to mention here because it goes too far, but then in March 1942 I resigned my position as the director of the Office for the German Press and I became a soldier. I did not have the intention of ever returning to the Ministry of Propaganda. Only when a new development arose and certain promises and assurances were made, in November or December 1942 these assurances and promises caused me to return.
Q Well, that is the possibility for a civilian to become a soldier; that is what you are thinking of now. If somebody was a soldier at the time, could he then resign his position without any danger for his life?
AA soldier could not resign his position. Acivilian could do it.
BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q Could a soldier protest?
A I would like to answer this question with No. However, he could fail to carry out an order.
Q Well, let's say that the soldier is a major general or lieutenant general. Are his lips sealed, or can he express his opinion and protest if he wishes?
A Not only can he do it, but he has the right to do it and it is actually his duty to do so.
RE*CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q I understood your answer to be, witness, that you would have resigned your position, even though it would have meant your death, if that had been the case, is that correct?
A No. In answer, to various questions, I have given the following answers: One: I would have shot; two: I would have resigned, and without any doubt I would have had the possibility of resigning without as a result of this having any danger to my life.
Q Witness, I would like just to ask you two or three questions additionally: Will you look at this letter, which is Berger's letter to Himmler regarding the publication "Sub-Human" and just read to yourself the first paragraph. It is quite short.
A Do you want me to read it aloud?
Q No, just road it to yourself. If that copy is unclear, there is another one there.
A I have just finished reading the first paragraph.
Q You can see from this letter that Burger, the Chief of the Main Office-SS and Himmler, and Schwarz, the Treasurer of the Nazi Party, all approved of this publication, do you not?
A I can see it from the contents here, yes.
Q And it is your opinion that these three officials misjudged the effect which this propaganda would have; is that correct?
A I am of that opinion, yes. Convinced of it.
Q You can see from the publication, can you not, that their purpose was to convince the reader that Jews and Russians are sub-humans?
A No.
Q All right, witness, will you turn to the first page, and will you see the quotation that, "The subhuman man, when seen from a biological viewpoint, has hands and feet and a sort of brain, eyes and mouth. Nevertheless, the sub-human man is quite different, a dreadful creature. He is only an imitation of man, with man-resembling features but inferior to any animal, without intellect and soul."
Now, there the publication is not talking about a system; it is talking about people, is it not?
A When I glanced at this article slightly, I, of course, was not able to go into details. I am reading this now for the first time.
Q W'll pass over that. I think it is clear from the text. You know today, do you not, that the SS did, as a matter of fact, participate in wholesale exterminations of the Jews and the Russians; you know that today, do you not? 7304
A. I cannot confirm your question in this form.
Q. Then let me put it in another form; you know that the SS participated in the extermination of the Jews?
A. I cannot answer your question in the affirmative either.
Q. Do you mean you don't know that millions of Jews were killed in concentration camps under the SS?
A. Unfortunately I heard about the fact that millions of Jews were killed in the concentration camps.
Q. Well, you know that is a fact do you not; you believe that?
A. Yes.
Q. You know that Himmler gave orders for the execution of Jews?
A. That Himmler did is news to me. During the research which I have carried out so far after the truth up to now, I have reached the conclusion that Hitler gave the order to Himmler and Heydrich and that Heydrich initiated and organized the execution of this order.
Q. Well, you know that was a part of the program of the SS; don't you?
A. No, that is not known to me.
Q. Well, tell us if you will what part the SS took in carrying out these orders and carrying out the execution of the Jews?
A. Mr. Prosecutor, I would be very pleased if I could answer this question. I have done everything in order to make suggestions on my part, as far as a prisoner can do that, in order to find out the full truth about the killing of Jews.
Q. Let me put the question in a different way. If the proof in this case should show that the SS as a matter of fact did participate in a large manner in the execution of Jews and Russians, would you still contend that this sort of propaganda would have no effect on the members of the SS?
A. The possibilities with which you connect your question I do not want to answer that in the affirmative, however, if that had been the case then of course such a magazine should prove to have a certain amount of stimulating and supporting such an activity.
Q. Are you familiar with the Nordland Publishing Corporation, witness?
A. It did not mean anything to me up to today.
Q. No further questions.
DR. RAUSCHENBACH: (Counsel for the defendant August Frank.)
Witness, the President of this Tribunal asked you just now whether a Major General or Lieutenant General could object to any order, could protest against it and you answered that in the affirmative. You said that it had been the duty of these officers to do so. Now, I want to ask you what insight you had into the command and conditions insofar as officers of the Wehrmacht and Waffen SS were concerned. You held high rank, were you able to answer that question in the affirmative from you own experience?
A. Only to a certain extent from my own experiences. Before I was assigned to an Infantry regiment as a soldier, I was approximately ten days together with General Field Marshal Paulus and I was able to observe him and his activities during his entire working day. I saw how orders arrived, I saw the manner in which they were carried out. Together with him I sent to points and sectors where combat was taking place and things of that sort. If I said before that a high ranking officer could protest, then I would like to say now that it would have been more correct for me to say that he could "remonstrate." He could not simply say I am not going to follow this order, that would have confronted him with the question of his life, but first of all he could quietly accept and order and then he could work against that order. I have seen that on several occasions in Paulus' headquarters. Beyond that of my position in the Ministry, I had sufficient insight into things and also in the conditions, which prevailed in the O.K.W. For example of that, I knew that in this sphere there was not only direct disciplinary orders and obedience, but also an exchange of opinions there.
Q. Witness, it is certain that on a higher level there is still a certain exchange of opinions. However, if the Fuehrer - and this did not always have to be Hitler but could be a chief or commander in chief of the O.K.W. - if he seriously wanted to have an order carried out, could a general under his command then raise an objection and as you stated before, was it his duty to do that; just how do you come to the conclusion that this was his duty?
A. From the moral fundamental law of every organization.
Q. Did this also apply in the Third Reich?
A. Yes it also applied in the Third Reich.
THE PRESIDENT: Of course the Court's question applied only to illegal orders, orders to commit unlawful acts or acts in violation of the rules of war, orders which should not be issued. No officer would have a right to protest against an order to march his command down the street or to a certain point, but if an order came through to shoot all the five year old children in a city, he would have a right to protest or to remonstrate - of there is any difference?
THE WITNESS: I can only say that there is not a power in the world which can give another human being the power to shoot a child.
DR. RAUSCHENBACH: And if Himmler ordered it?
THE WITNESS: Not even then.
DR. RAUSCHENBACH: Thank you.
DR. HOFFMANN: Witness, in the course of this trial rumors have been mentioned and I would like to hear from you first what probative value these rumors had within the Third Reich and whether any official steps were taken against these rumors?
THE WITNESS: Rumors never have any probative value. Rumors, how ever, can contain a certain degree of truth.
In the Third Reich they were frequently very troublesome so that entire campaigns were organized against rumors and it was intended that people who started rumors were to be discredited.
BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. Herr Fritsche, isn't it true that starting a rumor is one of the most effective weapons of the propagandist?
A. It is not the best weapon, but it is the most effective.
Q. Well, yes. We are splitting hairs.
A. I was just going to continue and I wanted to say that in the end rumors were used for purposes of our own propaganda.
Q. The rumors that were forbidden were the ones that were not favorable?
A. Naturally.
Q. Those are bad rumors?
A. Yes, it was all the bad ones. Propaganda unfortunately is always very primitive and it always paints the colors of black and white.
Q. Propaganda is primitive because it appeals to the most primitive in people, it does not appeal to their intelligence, does it? It appeals to their passions and their hates?
A. The bad propaganda, yes. I cannot help it but I have to say that.
Q. Well, do people act more readily through an appeal to their hate, prejudice and passions than they do to their intelligence; is that true?
A. Yes, unfortunately.
Q. That is good, high-class propaganda, isn't it?
A. Yes.
Q. That is all.
MR. ROBBINS: May it please the Tribunal, last week I announced that the prosecution would like to call a witness who would testify as to the public nature of the atrocities that were committed at Czloshov while the Viking Division was there and if it please the Tribunal, we have the witness here now. I am certain that we can finish the direct examination before the noon hour.
THE PRESIDENT: Alright.
MR. ROBBINS: His name is Dr. Salomon Jollek and he is a doctor in a near-by city and we would like to return his as soon as possible.
DR. FICHT: (Counsel for the defendant Klein.) Your Honor, I would like to announce now that the three witnesses from Wewelsburg will be at the disposal of the Court from this afternoon on if the Tribunal is ready to hear them.
THE PRESIDENT: We are ready to hear any witnesses that there are left to be heard and if you will bring them to the witness stand, as soon as this witness is finished, we will hear them.
DR. FICHT: After the noon recess?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
MR. BOBBINS: If it please the Tribunal, Mr. Ponger will interrogate the witness.
DR. SOLOMON JOLLEK; a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:
BY JUDGE MUSMANNO:
Q. What is your name?
A. Solomon Jollek.
Q. Will you raise your right hand and repeat this oath after me?
I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath.)
JUDGE MUSMANNO: You may be seated.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. PONGER:
Q. Witness, will you please tell your name to the Tribunal?
A. It is Jollek.
Q. What is your first name?
A. My first name is Solomon.
Q. When were you born?
A. I was born on 16 February 1909.
Q. Where were you born?
A. Potkanin.
Q. Is it in Poland?
A. Yes, it is in Poland.
Q. Where are you residing now?
A. I live at Degendorf.
Q. What is your profession?
A. I am a physician.
Q. Where did you practise your profession?
A. Since 1937 I practised at Csloshav.
Q. Were you also at Csloshov when the German units occupied Czloshov?
A. Yes.
Q. Will you please tell the Tribunal in your own words just what happened when the city was taken?
A. The city was occupied on the 1st or the 2nd of July and during the first two days individual murders took place in the city. People were shot whenever they showed themselves in the streets. Only on the third morning the organization program took place at Czloshov and the people were called upon to report voluntarily for work. At the same time, the SS went from house to house and took the people out of the houses and told them that they were to be taken for work. In this way people is the city believed everything was going in order and they began to show themselves voluntarily and they came out of their hiding places voluntarily. When a large number of people were in the streets, they were taken in and direction of the citadel.
Q. Can I interrupt you for a moment? When you talk about people to whom are you referring?
A. That is to say I was one of the people.
Q. When you say "we" are you referring to Jews?
A. Yes, I am referring to Jews. When I am referring to the population now, I only mean the Jews. However, I cannot say "we" in this case as my turn came later on. The Jews were taken through the streets in the direction of the citadel and inhumane beatings took place.
When this was going on there were beatings with iron rods and other objects and at the same time shootings were going on so that more and more victims were lying in the streets. One of these victims was the Rabbi of the city, he was beaten in an inhuman manner and afterwards he was shot.
These people were driven toward the direction of the citadel. There was a bridge in the direction of the citadel and then many steps went up to the citadel. Along the entire road, the SS were standing there, row by row, and they were armed with rifle buts, with sticks, etc, and terrible beatings were meted out. They did not even look where the blows were falling.
At the citadel, I would also like to say, from the moment on when I arrived at that time corpses had been excoriated by the Jews. I cannot tell you the number of corpses there, but there were approximately twenty.
We were driven onto the ditch, but first of all we were ordered to enlarge the ditch and then the Jews were driven into the ditch. We were beaten up so that we would be place ourselves closely to one another and so there would be more room available. Whoever could not move quickly enough was shot done immediately. On the occasion I received a blow and I collapsed. When I regained consciousness I noticed that at the side of the wall there was a big gap which had been caused by an artillery shell. I succeeded in crawling into this hole and then 2 terrible shooting began, handgrenades were thrown at the people and they were also fired upon with machine guns. That is what happened continually until four O'clock in the afternoon. Then a Higher SS officer arrived. He looked at the scene and then he walked off. After he left the shooting interrupted. I succeeded in climbing over the wall of the citadel at night and I was able to get back home by making a detour.
Q. What happened to the Jews, who were dead in the trenches; what was done with their bodies?
A. They were covered with a thin layer of earth and nobody checked to see whether they were alive or dead. That many of them lived is shown by the fact that many people, a large number perhaps 30 or 40, succeeded in leaving this particular ditch and in saving themselves. One of them was a friend of mine.
Q. Did your friend tell you about this? Did you understand my question?
A. Yes, excuse me please. This friend came to see me after three days had passed. The stench which he carried with him was terrible. I received him at my home. I washed him and I discovered that the joint of the elbow in his left arm had been injured by shrapnel from a hand grenade and it was completely torn. The right arm had bluish color, as a result of the beatings he had received with sticks.
With considerable effort, because he was afraid, I was able to get him to come along with me to the hospital as even in day time it was very unsafe there. On the following day, however, I succeeded in taking him to the hospital and there I amputated his left hand, after a week had passed it became evident that his right hand could not be saved either and I had to amputate his right hand. He died of a general sepsis. Things of that kind occurred in numerous cases, I have seen it with my own eyes, because I was working as a physician at the hospital.
Q. Doctor, you have described to us briefly what took place at the citadel. If I understood you correctly, you said that this happened on the first week of the occupation?
A. It was on the third of July.
Q. What year was it?
A. It was in the year of 1941. It was directly after the outbreak of the Russian war, ten days must have passed since the outbreak of the war. The German soldiers only had been in our city for two or three days, it was at the very beginning.
Q. Doctor, you have previously mentioned that you had to pass a bridge at Czloshov; what bridge was that?
A. That is a very small bridge which connects the main road from Lemberg Czloshov and Taropol.
Q. Did you pass this bridge?
A. We had to pass this bridge on order to reach the citadel. At the same time it is also the main road to the east and the citadel is located to the east of the city.
Q. Could this bridge be driven ever by vehicles, or was it damaged?
A. The bridge was fixed up. It was repaired, it could be seen that the bridge had been damaged. Of course, in the psychological condition in which I was at the time, I could not see to what extent it had been damaged or repaired.
Q. Do you know who repaired the bridge?
A. The bridge was repaired by the Jews and the Jews suffered severe beatings when doing this work. Not only shot was fired there.
Q. Well, how do you mean that?
A. Not only one shot bat several shots were fired there. The bridge was very necessary for the German advance toward the east because it was the most important link between Lemberg and Tarnopol. That is to say these people were immediately forced to repair the bridge and on this occasion barbarous measures were used.
THE PRESIDENT: We will recess until one thirty five.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will recess until 1335 Hours.
(The Tribunal recessed until 1335 o'clock.)
AFTERNOON SESSION "The hearing reconvened at 1345 hours, September 3, 1947.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
SALOMON JOLLEK - Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION - Continued BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q. Dr. Jollek, there are just one or two other questions I would like to ask you. You were telling us about the atrocities that happened at Zclotzow and you were about to tell us about the killings at the bridge. Will you please continue?
A. I did not see killings only at the citadel and the bridge, but also throughout the city. At the bridge, for the workers who worked there the payment was a bullet. There were bomb craters in the town on a small meadow, for instance; there 20 to 25 people were shot down.
Q. And do you know what happened to the Jews who worked on the bridge after the work was completed?
THE PRESIDENT: He answered that.
A. After they had finished their work, but even during their work, they were shot down and new workers were always being driven there. Near the bridge there was a bomb crater and there dead and injured Jews were thrown in and shot.
Q. Now, you told us that the city was occupied for the first time on the 1st of July?
A. Yes.
Q. And what troops came in on the 1st of July?
A. On the 1st day it was the Wehrmacht who was in the city. They conquered the city and they left; I don't know whether it was on the same day or the second day and then the SS came in.
Q. Was that on the second day?
A. Yes, that was on the second day.
Q. That was on the 2d day of July, 1941?