dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
M. DUBOST: The International Military Tribunal in Paris. It is our office in Paris at Place Vendome-it is an office of the French Ministry of Justice. The telegram begins, "General Giraud." It is a telegraphic declaration. The letters "OFF" at the beginning of the telegram mean "Official." Please forgive me for insisting that the three letters "OFF" at the beginning of the telegram mean "Government, official" from Paris. No French telegraph office could transmit such a telegram if it did not come from an official authority. This official authority is the French Delegation of the IMT in Paris, which received the statement made by General Giraud and transmitted it to us: "By General Giraud, French Delegation of the IMT."
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, the Tribunal will receive the document under Article 21 of the Charter .
M. DUBOST: I am grateful to the Tribunal. I read further on, at Page 150: "On the other hand, the death of Madame Granger on 24 September 1943 is undoubtedly due to lack of care and medicine, in spite of her reiterated requests for both. After an autopsy of her body, which took place in the presence of a French doctor, specially summoned from Paris after her death, authorization was given to this doctor, Dr. Claque to bring the four children back to France, and then to Spain, where they would be handed over to their father. This was refused by the Gestapo in Paris, and the children were sent back to Germany as hostages, where their grandmother found them only 6 months later." The last four lines: "The health of Madame Giraud, her daughter Marie Theresa, and two of her grandchildren has been gravely impaired by the physical, and particularly by the moral, hardships of their deportation." As a reprisal for the escape of General Giraud, 17 persons were arrested, all innocent of his escape. I have frequently shown that in their determination to impose their reign of terror the Germans resorted to means which revolt the conscience of decent people. Of these means one of the most repugnant is the call for informers. Document F-278(b), Page 152, which we submit as Exhibit Number RF-408, is a reproduction of an ordinance of 20 December 1941, which is so obviously contrary to international law that the Foreign Ministry of the Reich itself took cognizance of it. The ordinance of 27 December 1941 prescribes the following: "Whosoever may have knowledge that arms are in the possession or keeping of an unauthorized person or persons is obliged to declare that at the nearest police headquarters." The Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Berlin, on 29 June 1942, objected to the draft of a reply to the French note, which we do not have here but which must have been a protest against this ordinance of 27 December 1941.
M. DUBOST: The Tribunal knows that in the military operations which accompanied the liberation of our land many archives disappeared, and therefore we cannot make known to the Tribunal the protest to which the note of 29 June 1942, from the German Foreign Ministry refers. Paragraph 2 summarizes the arguments of the French protest. The French evidently had written: If German territory were occupied by the French, we would certainly consider as a man without honor any German who denounced to the occupying power an infraction of their laws, and this point of view was taken up and adopted by the German Foreign Ministry. The note continues: "As a result of consideration of this matter, the Foreign Office considers it questionable whether punishment should be inflicted on whomsoever fails to denounce a person possessing or known to possess arms. Such a prescription of penalty under this general form is, in the opinion of the Foreign Office, the more impracticable in that it would offer the French the possibility of calling attention to the fact that the German Army is demanding of them acts which would be considered criminal if committed by German citizens." This German note, I repeat, comes from the Reich Ministry of Foreign Affairs and is signed "Strack." There is no more severe condemnation of the German Army than that expressed by the Reich Ministry of Foreign Affairs itself. The reply of the German Army will be found by the Tribunal on Page 155, "Berlin. 8 December 1942. High Command of the Wehrmacht." The High Command of the Wehrmacht concludes: " ... since it does not seem desirable to enter into discussion with the French Government on the questions of law evoked by them, we too consider it appropriate not to reply to the French note." This note begins, moreover, by asserting that any relaxing of the orders given would be considered as a sign of weakness in France and in Belgium. These are not the signs of weakness that the German Army gave in our occupied countries of the West.
M. DUBOST: The weakness manifested itself in terror; it brought terror to reign throughout our countries, and that in order to permit the development of the policy of extermination of the vanquished nations which, in the minds of all Nazi leaders, remained the principal purpose, if not the sole purpose, of this war. This terrorist policy, of which the Tribunal has just seen examples in connection with the repression of attacks by our French Forces of the Interior on the enemy, developed without any military necessity for it in all the countries of the West. The devastations committed by the enemy are extremely numerous. We shall limit our presentation to the destruction of Rotterdam at a time when the city had already capitulated and when only the question of the form of capitulation had to be settled; and secondly, to a description of the inundations which the German Army caused, without any military necessity of any sort, in 1945 on the eve of its destruction when that Army already knew that it had lost the game. We have chosen the example of Rotterdam because it is the first act of terrorism of the German Army in the West. We have taken the inundations because, without her dykes, without fresh water, Holland ceases to exist. The day her dykes are destroyed, Holland disappears. One sees here the fulfillment of the enemy's aim of destruction, formulated long ago by Germany as already shown by the citation from Hitler with which I opened my speech, an aim which was pursued to the very last minute of Germany's existence as is proved by those unnecessary inundations. We submit to the Tribunal Document P-719 as Exhibit Number RF-409, which comprises Dutch reports on the bombing of Rotterdam and the capitulation of the Dutch Army., On Pages 38 and 39 of the second document book are copies of the translations of documents exchanged between the commander of the German troops before Rotterdam and the colonel who was in command of the Dutch troops defending the city.
M. DUBOST: Captain Backer relates the incidents of that evening which ended with the burning of the city. At 1030 hours a German representative appeared with an ultimatum, unsigned and without any indication of the sender, demanding that the Dutch capitulate before 1230 hours. This document was returned by the Dutch colonel, who asked to be told the name and the military rank of the officer who had called upon him to surrender. At 1215 hours Captain Backer appeared before the German lines and was received by a German officer. At 1235 hours he had an interview with German officers in a dairy shop. A German general wrote his terms for capitulation on the letter of reply, which the representative of the Dutch General Staff had just brought to him. At 1320 hours Captain Backer left the place, this dairy shop where the negotiations had taken place, with the terms to which a reply had to be given. Two German officers escorted him. These escorting officers were protected by the flight of German aircraft, and red rockets were fired by them at 1322 and 1325 hours. At 1330 hours the first bomb fell upon Rotterdam, which was to be completely set on fire. The entry of the German troops was to take place at 1850 hours, but it was put forward at 1820 hours. Later the Germans said to Captain Backer that the purpose of the red rockets was to prevent the bombing. However, there had been excellent wireless communication from the ground to the aircraft. Captain Backer expressed his surprise that this should have been done by means of rockets. The work on the inundation of the "Wieringermeer" polder began on 9 and 10 April 1945. 1 quote a Dutch document. That day German soldiers appeared on the polder, gave orders, and placed a guard for the dyke. "On 17 April 1945 at 1215 hours the dyke was dynamited so that two parts of it were destroyed up to a height somewhat lower than the surface of the water of the Ijesselmeer....
M. DUBOST: "As for the population, they were warned during the night of 16 to 17 April"-that is, at the time when the water was about to flood the polder-"In Wieringerwerf the news received by the mayor was passed from house to house that at noon the dyke would be destroyed. Altogether for this great polder, with an area of 20,000 hectares, not more than 81/2 to 9 hours were granted for evacuation.... Telephone communications had been completely interrupted', and it was impossible to use automobiles, which meant that some individuals did not receive any warning until 8 o'clock in the morning .... "The time given to the population was, therefore, too short for the evacuation.... "The looting in the flooded polder has already been mentioned. During the morning of 17 April, on the day of the disaster, groups of German soldiers begin to loot ... These soldiers came from Wieringen ... Moreover, they broke everything that they did not want to take..." This polder by itself covers half of all the flooded lands in Northern Holland. The polder was flooded on 17 April, when defeat was already a fact as far as the German Army was concerned. The Dutch people are seeking to recover the land which they have lost. Their courage, industry and energy arouse our admiration, but it is an immense loss which the German Army inflicted upon those people on 17 April. Terrorism and extermination are intimately interwoven in all countries in the West. Document C-45, which we submit as Exhibit Number RF-410 and which is the first in the document book, is an order of 10 February 1944 showing that repression, in the minds of the leaders of the German Army, was to be carried out without consideration of any kind: "Fire must be immediately returned. If, as a result, innocent people are struck, it is to be regretted but it is entirely the fault of the terrorists." These lines were written over the signature of an officer of the general staff of the German Military Command in Belgium and Northern France. This officer was never denounced by his superiors as can be seen by the document.
M. DUBOST: Document F-665, submitted as Exhibit Number RF-411, Page 2 of your document book: "The search of suspected villages requires experience. SD or GFP (Secret Field Police) personnel should be called upon. The real accomplices of the guerillas must be disclosed, and apprehended with all severity. Collective measures against the inhabitants of entire villages (this includes the burning of villages) are to be taken only in exceptional cases and may be ordered only by divisional commands or by chiefs of the SS and Police." This document is dated 6 May 1944. It comes from the High Command of the Wehrmacht; and it, or at least the covering letter, is signed by Jodl. This document involves not only the Army General Staff, but the Labor Service-that is to say, Sauckel-and the Todt Organization- that is to say, Speer. Indeed, in the next to the last paragraph we may read: "The directive ... is applicable to all branches of the Wehrmacht and to all organizations which exercise their activities in occupied territories (the Reich Labor Service, the Todt Organization, et cetera." These orders, aimed at the extermination of innocent civilian populations, were to be carried out vigorously but at the price of a constant collusion of the German Army, the SS, the SD, and the Sipo, which the people of all countries of the West place together in the same horror and in the same reprobation. In the war diary of General Von Brodowski submitted this morning under Exhibit Number RF-405, an excerpt of which is to be found on Pages 3, 4, and 5 of the document book, it -is stated that repressive operations were carried out: "An action against terrorists was undertaken in the southwestern area of the Department of Dordogne near Lalinde, in which a company of Georgians of Field Police, and members of the SD took part..." Dated 14 June 1944 is a statement on the destruction of Oradoursur-Glane. I shall come back to the destruction of this village: "600 persons are said to have been killed," writes General Von Brodowski. It is underscored in the text.
M. DUBOST: "The whole male population of Oradour has been shot. Women and children took refuge in the church. The church caught fire. Explosives had been stored in the church. Even women and children perished." We shall let you know the results of the French inquiry. The Tribunal will see to what degree General Von Brodowski lied when he described the annihilation of Oradour in these terms. Concerning Tulle: "On 8 July 1944 in the evening the barracks occupied by the 13th Company of the 95th Security Regiment were attacked by terrorists. The struggle was terminated by the arrival of the Panzer division, 'Das Reich.' 120 male inhabitants 'of Tulle were hanged, and 1,000 sent to the SD at Limoges for investigation."
THE PRESIDENT: M. Dubost, could we see the original of this document?
M. DUBOST: I showed it to you this morning, Mr. President, when I submitted it. It is rather a large document, if you will remember, Sir.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. We would like to see it.
DR. ROBERT SERVATIUS (Counsel for Defendant Sauckel): I should like briefly to rectify an error now, before it is carried any further. The French Prosecutor mentioned that certain people were put at the disposal of the Arbeitsdienst. I should like to point out that Arbeitsdienst is not to be confused with the Arbeitseinsatz. The Arbeitseinsatz was ultimately directed by Sauckel, whereas the Arbeitsdienst had nothing whatsoever to do with Sauckel. I should like to ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice of that distinction.
THE PRESIDENT: On account of a technical incident, the Tribunal will adjourn. [A recess was taken.]
THE PRESIDENT: The attorney for Sauckel, I think, was addressing the Tribunal.
DR. SERVATIUS: I had pointed out the difference between the Arbeitsdienst and the Arbeitseinsatz. The French prosecuting attorney apparently confused the Arbeitsdienst with the Arbeitseinsatz, for he said that the Arbeitsdienst was connected with Sauckel. That is not so. The Arbeitsdienst was an organization for pre-military training which existed before the war and in which young people had to render labor service. These young people were to some extent used for military purposes. The Arbeitseinsatz; was concerned solely with the recruiting of labor to be used in factories or other places of work. It follows, therefore, that Sauckel cannot be associated with the accusations that were made in this connection. That is what I wanted to say.
M. DUBOST: The two German words were translated in an identical manner in French. A verification having been made, the remarks of the defense are correct and Sauckel is not involved, but only the Army.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
M. DUBOST: Here are a few examples of terrorist extermination in Holland, in Belgium, and in other occupied countries of the West. In Holland, as one example out of a thousand, there were the massacres of Putten of 30 September 1944. They are included in Document Number F-224, which we submit as Exhibit Number RF-324 and which is to be found on Page 46 of the document book. On 30 September 1944 an attack was made at Putten by members of the Dutch resistance against a German automobile. The Germans concluded that the village was a refuge for partisans. They searched the houses and assembled the population in the church. A wounded German officer had been taken prisoner by the Dutch resistance. The Germans declared that if this officer was released within 24 hours no reprisals would be made. The officer was released, after having received medical care from the soldiers of the Dutch resistance who had captured him. However, in spite of the pledge given, reprisals were made upon the village of Putten, whose inhabitants were all innocent. I now cite Paragraph 2 of the Dutch report: "The population gathered in the church was informed that the men would be deported and the women had to leave the village because it would be destroyed. "150 houses were burned down (the total amount of houses in the built-up area being about 2,000). "Eight people, amongst whom a woman who tried to escape, were shot. "The men were taken to the concentration camp at Amersfoort. Amongst them were many accidental passers-by who had been admitted into the closed village but who had been prevented from leaving the place. "At Amersfoort about 50 people were selected; and during the transport, 12 jumped out of the train. 622 men were eventually deported to Auschwitz. The majority of those died after two months. "From the 622 deported men, only 32 inhabitants of the village of Putten and 10 outsiders returned after the liberation." In Belgium, we will cite only a few facts which are related in Document Number F-685, already submitted under Exhibit Number RF-394.
M. DUBOST: This document is to be found on Page 48 in your document book. It describes the murder  of a young man who had sought refuge in a dug-out. He was killed by the Germans who were looking for soldiers of the Belgian secret army. At Herve the Germans fired on a lorry filled with young men and killed two of them. The same day some civilians were killed by a tank. On Page 49, the summary executions of members of the secret army are described. I quote: "At Anhee, shots having been fired upon them, the Germans crossed the river Meuse. They set fire -to 58 houses and killed 13 men. At Annevoie, on the 4th, the Germans came across the river and burned 58 houses." Then follows a report on destruction, useless from the military point of view: ". . . At Arendonck, on the 3rd, 80 men were killed, five houses were burned. At St. Hubert, on the 6th, three men killed and four houses burned. At Hody, on the 6th, systematic destruction of the village, 40 houses destroyed, 16 people killed. At Marcourt, 10 people were shot, 35 houses were burned. At Neroeteren, on the 9th, 9 people were killed. At Oost-Ham, on the 10th, 5 persons were killed. At Balen-Neet, on the 11th, 10 persons were shot." Page 50 contains the description of German extortions at the time of the temporary stabilization of the front. "At Hechtel, the Germans having withdrawn before the British vanguard, the inhabitants hung out flags. But fresh German troops came to drive out the British vanguard and reprisals were taken; 31 people were shot; 80 houses were burned, and general looting took place. At Helchteren 34 houses were set on fire and 10 people were killed under similar circumstances. The same thing took place at Herenthout.... "The circumstances in which these men were executed are always identical. The Germans search the cellars, bring the men out, line them along the highway, and shoot them, after having given them the order to run.
M. DUBOST: In the meantime, grenades are thrown into the cellars, wounding women and children." Another example: "At Lommel, the unexpected return of the German soldiers found the village with flags out. Seventeen persons who had sought refuge in a shelter were noticed by a German. He motioned to a tank which ran against the shelter crushing it and killing 12 people." In the case of Norway we shall take an example from a document already submitted under Exhibit Number *RF-323, Pages 51 and 52 of your book: "... on 13 April 1940, two women 30 years of age were shot at. Ringerike. On 15 April, four civilians, of whom two were boys of 15 and 16 years of age, were shot in Aadal. One of those murdered was shot through the head, and had also been bayonetted in the stomach. On 19 April four civilians, of whom two were women and one a little boy 3 years of age, were shot at Ringsaker. "To avenge the death of the two German policemen, who were shot on the 26th of April 1942 at Televaag, the entire place was laid waste. More than 90 properties with 334 buildings were totally destroyed, causing damage to buildings and chattels (furniture and fishing outfits) amounting to a total of 4,200,000 Kroner." In this document the Tribunal will find the continuation of the descriptions of German atrocities committed in Norway, without any necessity of a military character, simply to maintain the reign of terror. In France massacres and destructions without military purpose were extremely numerous, and all of them were closely associated. We submit Document F-243 as Exhibit Number RF-412. The Tribunal will find this document on Pages 178 to 193 of. the document book. It is a long list, drawn up by the French Office for Inquiry into War Crimes, of the towns that were destroyed and looted without any military necessity. The Tribunal will undoubtedly be enlightened by the reading of this document. We shall give but a few examples.
M. DUBOST: In submitting this Document F-909 as Exhibit Number RF-413, we intend to relate the conditions under which a whole section of Marseilles was destroyed-Pages 56, 57, and 58, of your document book. It is estimated that about 20,000 people were evacuated. This evacuation was ordered on 23 January. It was carried out without warning during the night of the 23rd to the 24th. I quote: "It is estimated that 20,000 persons were evacuated. From Frejus some of them were shipped by the Germans to the concentration camp of Compiegne. . . . "The demolition operations began on 1 February at about 9 o'clock in the morning. They were carried out by troops of the German engineer corps..., "The area destroyed is equivalent to 14 hectares: that is approximately 1,200 buildings." Inquiry was made to find those who were responsible for this destruction. After the liberation of Marseilles the German consul in Marseilles, Von Spiegel, was interrogated. His testimony is in Document F-908, which we submit as Exhibit Number RF-414, Page 53 of your document book. Spiegel stated: "I know that a very short time after the evacuation of the old port the rumor spread that this measure had been brought about by financial interests, but I can assure you that in my opinion such a hypothesis is erroneous. The order came from the higher authorities of the Reich Government and had only two motives-the security of troops and the danger of epidemics." We do not intend to give you a complete description of the attacks committed by the Germans but merely a few examples. We submit Document F-600 as Exhibit Number RF-415, Page 59: "At Ohis (Aisne) a civilian wanted to give an American soldier some cider to drink. The Germans returned. The American soldier was taken prisoner, and M. Hennebert was also taken away by the Germans to a spot known as the 'Black Mountain' in the village of Origny en Thierache where his body was later discovered partly hidden under a stack of wood.