And that is what the situation actually was like. Do you admit that your speech on the 22nd of April, 1940, was the usual lies?
A. No, I do not admit that, but I am asserting, on the contrary, that you, Mr. Prosecutor, in submitting this extract, are not taking into consideration the fact that I, in my introduction, reported to the effect that I wanted to describe those things that I had seen myself, namely, a journey into the Goldbrauns Valley -- a journey, as I am just recalling, that went almost up to Atta. It is not contrary to the presentation I made if, according to the conclusions drawn by the Norwegian government, on the whole, in this action this loss and damage actually did occur.
Q. I believe that the Norwegian people and the Norwegian government has sufficiently experienced the weight of the German occupation and the government report actually states facts and not the sort of fonts which you stated in your propaganda. This document is being submitted to the Tribunal and they will appreciate it. I have a few questions to put to you in connection with a fact which has already been dealt with in detail here. It is the case "Athenia". I will not question you in detail on this matter as it has already been ascertained with sufficient accuracy, but will you admit now that special propaganda slanderingly and falsely informed the public opinion of the "Athenia' case?
A. whether this was done by the Fascist propaganda in Italy, that I don't know. The National Socialist propaganda, however, did do it and they did it in good faith, as I have described at length.
Q. I say that now facts have been ascertained here. Do you agree that this speech was a slanderous speech or do you still deny it?
A. No, I have already admitted that and I showed, in detail, how these statements were made.
Q. Very well. I am only interested in this matter as to the personal part you played in it. Why did you so actively deal with this matter and why were you the first man to spread this slander?
A. I do not believe that I brought this matter before the public and was the first one to do so. However, the fact was and is that I spoke very frequently about the case of the "Athenia".
and I spoke on the basis of official reports which I believed 28 June A LJG 15-1a completely.
I spoke about this case because I just happened to be the one who, at the beginning of the war, spoke over the radio in the evenings. "Athenia" appeared in the "Voelkischer Beobachter" in October, 1939?
Q Very well. Tehn I will remind you that you dealt with the "Athenia" as early as September, 1959; is that right? in the "Voelkischer Beobachter"? assertions?
Q Very well. I will only put one other question to you. Will you not deny that in 1940 you still spread this propaganda? I will report the question. I ask you, you will not deny that even in 1940 you continued to propagate this version? it likes to repeat good and effective things frequently and for a long period of time. I have stated already that only in December of 1945, here in the prison, I heard from Grand Admiral Raeder that it actually was a German U-Boat that had sunk the "Athenia".
Q Very well. I will pass on to a group of questions regarding your participation in the carrying out of propaganda connected with the preparation of aggression against the Soviet Union. You assert that you had no knowledge of the preparation of aggression against the Soviet Union until at 5:00 o'clock on the morning of the 22nd of June, 1941 -- that is to say, when the German troops had already entered Soviet territory -- you were called by Ribbentrop to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to a P ress conference.
Did I correctly understand your testi-
28 June A LJG 15-2a mony?
A No. Several hours before that, thus is on the evening of the preceding day, Dr. Goebbels had called some of the division chiefs of the Ministry to his house at Wannsee, and on that occasion told them about this fact and prohibited them from leaving and from telephoning. That was the first actual knowledge that I had of this fact.
Q Very well. But you chain that you had knowledge of the aims of Germany with regard to the Soviet Union in 1942, according to your own observations; is that right?
A I do not exactly know what you mean by that. I testified this morning, and tried to clarify the point, that a doubt as to the validity of the reasons given by official German sources did not come to no until I was a prisoner. That is a thing that I set forth very clearly this morning. In interrogations carried on in Moscow as well, I emphasized the fact that after the war against the Soviet Union had broken out for quite a period of time preceding the 22nd of June preparations of all kinds, of necessity, would have had to have been taken. speech, a document which you confirm in full. It is No. 3469 PS. In Paragraph 42 we read: " The Beginning of 1942 I was a soldier on the Eastern front. I saw that large preparations had been made beforehand for the occupation and administration of territories extending as far as the Crimea."
"On the basis of my personal observations, I came to the conclusion that the plans regarding war against the Soviet Union had been prepared a long time before the actual outbreak of the war."
Is this statement right? this matter. with the carrying out of propaganda, in view of the preparation of war and actual attack against the Soviet Union. I am referring to the minutes of a conference held by Hitler dated the 16t h of July 1941.
GENERAL RUDENKO: This document, Mr. President, is No. L-221 and has already been submitted.
Q (Continuing): This document will be handed to you and I will quote two paragraphs on the first page.
" Now, it is essential that we do not publicize our aims before the world. There is actually no need for that. But by no means should we render our task more difficult by making superfluous declarations. Similar declarations are superfluous because we can do everything wherever we have power, and what is beyond our power we will not be able to do anyway.
"Further, what we tell the world about our motives ought to be conditioned by tactical reasons. We must act here in exactly the same way as we did in the case of Norway, Denmark, Holland, and Belgium. In those cases, too, we did not publish our aims and we will be as sensible in the future and will continue in the same way."
Did you have any knowledge of similar ideas of Hitler? statements and directives were submitted in this courtroom was the reason, as I have said, that I considered some of the premises and some of the bases of our propaganda to be shaken.
Q Very well. You did, therefore, not have any knowledge either of the instructions regarding the carrying out of propaganda in the case Barbarossa issued by the OKW and signed by the defendant Jodl?
Barbarossa as such was not a concept until I arrived here.
GENERALRUDENKO: Mr. President, this document is No. C-26 and has already been submitted to the Tribunal. I will deal with it only in connection with the matter of propaganda. It is 477 in your document book, Mr. President, C-26. BY GENERAL RUDENKO:
Q I will quote one excerpt, Defendant. These instructions say:
"For the moment one should not carry out propaganda directed towards the dismemberment of the Soviet Union. In various parts of the Soviet Union, propaganda must use the language which is the most current. This does not mean that some propaganda text should be interpreted as an intention of dismembering the Soviet Union."
Were you acquainted with those directives? you have just read. which the propaganda was carried out.
A No. As far as I could observe, the propaganda which was carried on in the Soviet Union had just the reverse tendency. It tried to educate the various nationalities for independence, such as the Ukraine, White Russia, the Baltics, and so forth.
Q Very well. I would like to ask you now: When did you meet Defendant Rosenberg for the first time, and when did you get information concerning the tasks of German propaganda in the East?
A I doubt whether before this trial I ever spoke with Mr. Rosenberg, but I do believe that I have met him socially. However, I never had an official conversation with him in my entire life.
Q Very well, You will be handed Document No. 1039-PS. This is a report of Rosenberg regarding the preparatory work concerning matters connected with the territory of Eastern Europe. This document has already been submitted to defendant Rosenberg and he did not deny it but confirmed it.
I would like you to turn to the second quotation which is marked. In order to shorten this cross examination, I will not read the first quotation, In this report, we read:
"Aside from these negotiations, I received the responsible deputies of the entire propaganda, namely Ministerial Director Fritsche, Ambassador Schmidt, Reich Superintendent of Broadcasting Glasmeier, Dr. Grothe OKW, and others.
Without going into details of political objectives, I instructed the above-named persons in confidence about the necessary attitude, with the request to tone down the whole terminology of the press, without issuing any statements.
"The works for substantial coverage of the Eastern question prepared long ago appeared in my office, which I turned over to the propaganda deputies". in 1941, before the attack against the Soviet Union?
A No. I do not recall having been received by Rosenberg at any time. In no case did I over receive from Rosenberg or from one of his co-workers a report before the 22nd of June about the planned attack on the Soviet Union. that a co-worker of Rosenberg's frequently appeared before me or my co-workers, and in time I will recall his name too. The leader of his press group before that was Major Kranz. This man appeared before me and my co-workers frequently and transmitted the wishes of Rosenberg pertaining to press propaganda. But in no case did we deal with this question before the 22nd of June. are concerned, is not correct?
A Untrue would be putting it too strongly in this case. It may be that this entire bit of informing which he talks about may refer to a later period of time. I am not judge of that for I did not read the entire document. It may apply as well that Rosenberg, in this report, wasn't exactly accurate when he dealt with the receiving of the responsible members of propaganda.
Q Very well. In connection with this, I would like to put two questions to you. First of all, I would like to refer to the written testimony of Hans Voss, whichis Document 471, and you are inpossession of it. It is excerpt No. 3 of Document USSR-471. Have you found it?
Q I quote: This is what Hans Voss testified:
"After the defeat of the German troops at Stalingrad, and withthe beginning of the general Soviet offensive on the Eastern Front, Goebbels and Fritsche took great pains to organize German propaganda in such a manner as to effectively aid Hitler in rectifying the position at the front. This propaganda was based on the hope that the Germans would be able to hold their own as long as possible, The Germans were intimidated about the stories of the Russian soldiers.
"With this aim inmind, libelous statements were spread of the alleged brutalities of the Russian soldiers and the aim of the Soviet Union to annihilate the German nation.
"In the last stages of the war, Goebbels and Fritsche made onelast attempt to serve Hitler and to organize resistance to Soviet troops."
Is this correct?
A It is not only not correct; but it is nonsense.
Q But you referred to it in many cases. All right, I do not intend to enter into polemics with you.
I would like you to refer to your testimony of September 1945. It is the third excerpt of the document. Have you found that part? I will quote your explanations.
A The entire thing is not my statements. Perhaps you can tell me which passage you are referring to Mr. Prosecutor.
Q I mean Excerpt No. 3, which begins with the words, "The military aggression against the Soviet Union..."
Q "The military attack upon the Soviet Union in connection with the treaties signed was prepared by Germany in secret. Therefore, during the period of preparation of war against the Soviet Union, no propaganda was carried out. In this respect, an active anti-Soviet campaign by the organs of German propaganda was only started after the beginning of warfare on the Eastern Front. In this case, one must point out that the main task put by Goebbels before the entire propaganda machinery was to Justify the expansionist policy of Germany against the Soviet Union.
"As leader of the German press and radio, I organized the vast scale campaign of anti-Soviet propaganda, attempting to convince public opinion that the Soviet Union and not Germany was responsible for this war. I must, however, state that there was absolutely no justification for accusing the Soviet Union of preparing military aggression against Germany.
peoples of Europe and the population of Germany of the horrors of Bolshevism, and assorted that only Fascist Germany was the single barrier of the European countries against either American plutocracy and Red imperialism."
Do you admit this? have been worked over, and if I am permitted I should like to give you the various facts, point by point, I shall be brief.
It is correct to say that I stated in Moscow that the war against the Soviet Union had not had any preparation as to propaganda for after all this war came very suddenly and as a surprise.
Furthermore, it is correct to say that after the attack on the Soviet Union, it was the main task of German propaganda to justify the necessity of this attack, and therefore to emphasize again and again that we had only gotten ahead of a Soviet attack on us. Further, it is correct to say and I did say that the next task assigned to propaganda was and is almost the same thing, to show that not Germany but Russia was guilty of this war. argument is omitted, that I and with me millions of Germans believed the official communiques given out by the German government and we believed them for it seemed to usnonsensical and crazy if during a war which ahd not been decided in the west, arbitrarily and voluntarily, we would have risked going into another war in the east at the same time. issued by the "White Book" given out by the Foreign Office was rather meager and it is further correct to say that German propaganda tried to intimimidate Europe because of bolshevism and make them afraid of it. It is further correct that the German propaganda again and again emphasized the fact that Germany was the only bulwark against the Soviet world revolution.
Q Very well. I would now like to draw your attention to excerpt number four of the same document which is in your possession, in connection with propaganda upholding the spirit of resistance in the German people, notwithstanding all evidence of apparent defeat of Germany. I would like to read this very short excerpt from the same document number 474.
"Beginning with 1943 through German radio propaganda I attempted to assert that Germany was in possession of such weapons through which your aims would be crushed. For this I used invented data regarding the work ofthe German war industry which had been given me by the Reich Minister for Armaments and Munitions, Speer." stated.
To begin with the latter part, it is correct that I received figures from the armament industry which gave me great hopes forprogress.
I received, for instance, figures dealing with monthly aircraft production, figures deeding with new and especially effective fighter planes. In the meantime, through direct questioning of Speer himself, I determined that the figures which I received at that time were quite correct at the time and that the airplanes either were used illogically or wrongly, as for instance in the Ardennes offensive, instead of for the protection of Germany herself, the home country, or that they could not actually be used because of a fuel shortage. The first half -is really not relevant. gated by the Soviet Prosecutor here in November on 14 November, 1945. This is document USSR 492. I would like to read into the record only that part of the document which deals with the carrying out of propaganda during precisely this period, I quote:
"In September 1944, I wrote a letter to Dr. Goebbels. In this letter I warned Goebbels that he was carrying out propaganda which was not correct regarding new armaments and that in this way he would provoke vain hopes amongst the German people. This was propaganda which would have been carried out by Dr. Goebbels in order to inspire in the German people hope in a favorable outcome of the war."
Is that correct?
A Only partially. Correct is the fact that Dr. Goebbels more than a year before the use of the first "V" weapons himself conducted propaganda in its behalf. On the other hand, Speer in the meantime had stated, during his testimony here before this Court, and has said himself, that he know and now knows the actual Source of propaganda dealing with "miracle weapons" propaganda which he himself initiated. propaganda wherein you mentioned that with the popularization of a new weapon you hoped to inspire the German people with the hope of a successful resistance.
I will submit to you document USSR 469. You already have it. It is your radio speech of the 1st of July, 1943.
THE PRESIDENT: General, are you going to finish very soon or Should we adjourn now?
GENERAL RUDENKO: I believe we should adjourn now because I will stil l need about a half hour.
(A recess was taken) Q Well, I submit to you Excerpt Number 6 from document 28 June A LJG 18-1 USSR 496.
This is your speech, dated 1 July 1944. I can going to read it into the record:
"We Germans have been very reserved in our reports on the effect of the now weapon. We could afford this reserve, know-ing that sometime or other Britain would break the silence with which she tried at first to gloss over the effect of V-1. We were right about it. Reports from Britain during the last few days, and especially today, prove that the effects of this first of the now armed blows against here are becoming all too obvious. It is beside the point for the British now to complain about a wave of hatred which is supposed to surge from Germany against the British Isles. In the fifth wear of the war, it is useless to talk about feelings although much might be said about them." propaganda you told falsehoods to the German nation and incited it to a senseless resistance? vedly and much more modestly than , for instance, the German press used to do, when I talked about the outcome of the V-1. tion:
"We can only repeat that the V-1 is the weapon for us with which we can break the enemy terror."
Q Very well. Now I should like to remind you, defendant Fritsche of your testimony of 12 September 1945 with regard to the activity of the organization "Wehrwolf". This document is also Exhibit USSR 474, quotation number 5. Have you found the place?
Q I am going to read it:
"At the end of February 1945 State Secretary of the Ministry of Propaganda, Dr. Naumann, submitted to me instructions by Goebbels to work out a plan for the organization of a secret radio service.
Furthermore, Naumann explained that the German 28 June A LJG 18-2 government had taken the decision regarding the members of the National Socialist Party and making them illegal and arranging for the organization which is called 'Wehrwolf'. As Naumann stated, such a radio center will have to direct all the underground organizations of the 'Wehrwolf'." the organization of such a radio center, such as " Wehrwolf". However, it was created, and the direction of the broadcasts was entrusted to the former leader of the Reich Ministry of P ropaganda, Schlesinger.
Is that correct?
A No. Two things have got mixed up here. Firstly, the plan described in the paragraph which you have read for the creation of a Wehrwolf broadcasting station was a plan for a mobile station, and that mobile station was not built. On the other hand, there was--incidentally, during my absence--on 1 April 1945, by direct order from Dr. Goebbels, the so-called "Old German Broadcasting Station ", which was opened as a Wehrwolf station.
Q Very well. I should like to submit to you your own statements on that subject. I should like to submit to you your own utterances on the radio on 7 April 1945. This is the same document. USSR 498, Excerpt Number 7. Have you found the place?
Q You said at the time, in the radio broadcast:
"However, as a result of the superiority of men and material reserves, the enemy has now penetrated deep into German territory, and at this moment he is about to carry out his program of extermination against us."
"Let no one be surprised if this desire of strong hearts to revere "*---*" human rights needs not even a short pause for temporary recovery but that it flares up at once and directly with a surging flame and even becomes active. Let no one be surprised if here and there in newly occupied areas, civilians take part in the fight or even if after the occupation has been 28 June A LJG 18-3 carried out, the fight is continued by people in mufti, That is to say, without preparation, without organization, there has come into being, sprung from the very instinct to live, the phenomenon which today we call the 'Wehrwolf'."What will you tell us about that?
and although the passage is missing, whom I was talking about the right and said that right is a sensitive affair, based upon tradition and ethical knowledge-
Q Excuse me if I interrupt you, defendant. I do not want to ask you to explain in such detail. I just wanted to determine one fact, and that is that you did not speak against it but, on the contrary, incited and spoke for the organization of the Wehrwolf;is that correct?
A. That is absolutely incorrect This is not even propaganda for the Wehrwolf; it os an apology for cases of Wehrwolf activities.
Q. Very well. Let us leave that question. I should like to ask you if you know who the head of the organization Wehrwolf was
A. It has already been stated in this Court Room. At the very head of it was Bormann. Under him there was a Higher SS le ader whose name I have tried in vain to remember during my interrogations in Moscow. I have named one of his associates, however. That was Gunther Dalwin.
Q. Very well. Before putting the last few questions to you, I should like to ask you if it is not a fact that Rosenberg and Streicher had great influence on the German propaganda?
A. That influence was negligible. Official German propaganda was not influenced by Streicher at all, and by Rosenberg to an extent which I could hardly notice.
Q. All right. I have a few questions to put to you yet. You stated here to the High Tribunal that had you known Hitler's decrees regarding the murder of the people, you would never have followed Hitler and gone with him. Did I understand you correctly?
A. You have understood no perfectly correctly.
Q. Now, in other words, I understand you to say that you would have gone against Hitler?
A. It is hard to say what I would have done. Of course, this is a question which I have thought about a great deal new myself.
Q. I should like to ask you if, at the beginning of 1042; as you stated here to the High Tribunal, you recieved information that in the Ukraine, which was at the time occupied by the Germans, in one of the regions, an extermination of the Jews and the Ukrainian intelligentsia was being prepared, simply because of the fact that they were Jews and Ukrainian intelligentsia?
A That is correct.
Q That was in the beginning. In May of 1942 you were a member of the Sixth Army, and in the Sixth Army you learned about the existence of an order to shoot the Soviet Commissars; is that right ?
Q Did you consider that this sanguine order should not be applied ? Is that right ?
Q You knew that this order emanated from Hitler ?
Q That is to say, 1942 you knew that Hitler's order regarding murder existed, and yet you followed him.
A You are comparing two things which are not comparable. There is quite difference between not treating commissars as prisoners of war, and giving order for the killing of five million Jews. in the conduct of the war by the German Army, is that right ? That is, if you did not immediately act against Hitler.
A No; I considered that it was impossible, so I fought against it, not only impassively as others had done, but actively.
Q But you continued to support Hitler ?
Q Here is the last question. During the war, did you ever happen to come accross some questions referring to preparations for biological warfare ?
Q Did you ever hear the name of a certain Major von Passavant ? was he not ?
A No, he was not. He was a radio expert in the organization of the Propaganda Department of the OKW. you. This letter bears your signature, and it is directed to Major von Passavant, of the OKW. This is a short document, and I am going to read it to you.
"From the Leader of Broadcasting, to Major von Passavant, OKW.
"Herr Gustav Otto, Leader of the organization of Reichenberg is submitting a plan to me regarding biological warfare. I am submitting this proposal to you so that you might forward it to the proper organization."
It is signed "Heil Hitler, Fritsche."
Do you remember this document exactly ?
A Of course I do not remember it. At the same time, I want to state that I have no doubt that it is genuine.
Q Just a moment, please. I should like to put the last question in this way : Thus, you were for the planning and the actual undertaking by Germany of biological warfare.
I have finished; thank you. I wish to state that I was by no means in favor of biological warfare, but the situation merely was that there were piles of letters daily, sent by listeners, which were passed on to the department concerned by some official. They were accompanied by brief notes of two or three lines which I received for signature. I did not inform myself of the contents of the letters which accompanied those short notes.
THE PRESIDENT : Dr. Fritz, do you want to re-examine ? BY DR. FRITZ :
Q Just now, during General Rudenko's cross-examination, an allegation was made about your wireless speech of the 2nd of May 1940, in which you spoke about your journey to Norway. Can you tell me exactly when you went on that trip ? was at the end of April. put to you; that is, after Norway's occupation by the Germans. I am told that the fighting which had caused this damage could only have taken place after you had already completed your journey. Is that true ?
A That is perfecty possible, but I should like to say this. In the extract which the Russian Prosecutor has read, without quoting the beginning, I described precisely what I had seen in clearly defined places; Lilihammer and Kurvers Valley are a few names which I now remember.
To compare these statements now with the statements made by the Norwegian Government regarding the total damage is nothing less than attempt, for example, to compare a liquid measure with a yardstick, or vice versa.
Q I have one other question in this connection. Was this journey of yours carried out before the British landings or afterwards ? I think it was just South of a place called Ottar, in the Kurvers Valley.
DR. FRITS : Mr. President, General Rudenko, during his cross-examination, submitted three interrogation records. One was from Voss, USSR-471; one of Schorner, USSR-472; and one of Stahel, USSR-473. In the meantime I have looked through these three records, and I should like to ask the High Tribunal to compare these three records. I have ascertained that in these three records, originating from three different persons, parts of the answers repeat themselves; and they tally, word for word.
THE PRESIDENT : You aren't getting this from the witness; you are making an argument to us, and you must do that at some other time.
DR. FRITZ: Yes, but I wanted to make an application, Mr. President; I wanted to make an application. If these three records are used for the findings, then I wish to make an application that at least one of these persons who were interrogated should be at my disposal in person for the purpose of cross-examination.
THE PRESIDENT: Were you meaning that you should see, or that we should examine, the whole of those three affidavits, or were you meaning that you wanted one of the people who made the affidavits to come here in order to give evidence and be cross examined ? Which do you mean ?
DR. FRITZ: The latter, Mr. President.
THE WITNESS: All three. I can only ask to have all three called.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will consider you applications.
DR. FRITZ: Apart from this, Mr. President, I do not wish to carry out any further redirect examination. BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. There is one thing, defendant. You referred to the Commissar decree, or order, and you spoke of it as though it were an order not to treat Commissars as prisoners of war. That was not the order, was it ? The order was to kill them.
A. The order which I came across at the Sixth Army was an order saying that Commissars who had been captured should be shot.
Q. Yes. That is a very different thing from not being treated as prisoners of war. The answer you gave was that you imagined the Commissar order came from Hitler. But it is a very different thing, an order not to treat Commissars as ordinary prisoners of war and to kill 5,000,000 Jews. That was not a fair comparison at all, was it ?
A. In this case, I must admit that my way of expressing myself with reference to these Commissars was not correct, Mr. President.
Q. There is one other thing I want to ask you. In October 1939, this untruthful statement was published in a German newspaper, about the Athenia. That is right, is it not ?
A. In October, 1939, during the entire month of September and of October. untruthful statements about the Athenia appeared both in the German press as well as on the German radio.
Q. Yes. But on the 23rd of October 1939, a particularly untruthful statement attributing the sinking of the Athenia to Mr. Winston Churchill was made in a German newspaper. You told us about it.
A. Yes.