dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
of Austria. It was he who proposed several tactical manoeuvres, to quiet the vigilance of world opinion on the one hand, and allow Germany to conclude her war preparations, on the other. This follows indisputably from Papen's statement to the Austrian Minister Berger-Waldeneck (P1760), from the Report of Gauleiter Reuner of 6th July, 1939 (US-61), from Papen's Report to Hitler of 26th August, 1936 (P2246), from Papen's Report to Hitler of 1st September, 1936 (US-67), and from a series of other documents which had been submitted in evidence Papen played this game until the issuance of the order for alerting the German Armed Forces for moving into Austria. (US-69.) He participated in arranging the conference between Hitler and Schuschnigg of 12th February, 1938. {US 69.) It was Papen who in a letter to Hitler emphatically recommended that financial aid be given the Nazi organisation in Austria known as the " Freedom Union ", specifically for " its fight against the Jewry." (PS-2830.) Indisputable appears the fact of the Nazi seizure of Austria and of Papen's participation in this act of aggression. After the occupation of Austria, Hitler rewarded von Papen with the golden insignia of the Nazi Party. (D-632.) Neither is it possible to ignore von Papen's role as agent provocateur when in his capacity of diplomat he was the German Ambassador to Turkey whenever evaluation of his activity there is made. The post of Ambassador to Turkey was at the time of considerable importance in helping the Nazis realise their aggressive plans. The official Nazi biographer wrote about von Papen as follows: " Shortly after (the occupation of Austria) the Fuehrer had need of von Papen's services again and on 18th April, 1939, he therefore appointed him German Ambassador in Ankara". (D-632.) It should also be noted that for his Turkish activities, Hitler rewarded von Papen with the Knight's Cross for his " military services ". (D-632.) Thus evidence submitted establishes beyond doubt that: 1. Von Papen actively aided the Nazis in their seizure of power. 2. Von Papen used both his efforts and his connections to solidify and strengthen the Hitlerian terroristic regime in Germany. 3. Von Papen actively participated in the Nazi aggression against Austria culminating
submitted establishes beyond doubt that: 1. Von Papen actively aided the Nazis in their seizure of power. 2. Von Papen used both his efforts and his connections to solidify and strengthen the Hitlerian terroristic regime in Germany. 3. Von Papen actively participated in the Nazi aggression against Austria culminating in its occupation. 4. Von Papen faithfully served Hitler up to the very end aiding the Nazi plans of aggression both with his ability and his diplomatic skill. It therefore follows that defendant von Papen bears considerable responsibility for the crimes of the Hitlerite regime. For these reasons I cannot consent to the acquittal of defendant von Papen. III. The Unfounded Acquittal of defendant Fritzsche. The acquittal of defendant Hans Fritzsche follows from the reasoning that Fritzsche, allegedly, had not reached in Germany the official position making him responsible for the criminal actions of the Hitler regime and that his own personal activity in this respect cannot be considered criminal. The verdict characterises him as a secondary figure carrying out the directives of Goebbels and Ribbentrop, and of the Reich Press Director Dietrich. The verdict does not take into consideration or mention the fact that it was Fritzsche who until 1942 was the Director de facto of the Reich Press and that, according to himself, subsequent to 1942, he became the " Commander-in-Chief of the German radio." (Transcript, Morning Session, 23rd January, 1946.) For the correct definition of the role of defendant Hans Fritzsche it is necessary, firstly, to keep clearly in mind the importance attached by Hitler and his closest associates (as Goering, for example) to propaganda in general and to radio propaganda in particular. This was considered one of the most important and essential factors in the success of conducting an aggressive war. The Germany of Hitler, propaganda was invariably a factor in preparing and conducting acts of aggression and in training the German populace to accept obediently the criminal enterprises of German fascism. The aims of these enterprises were served by a huge and well centralised propaganda machinery. With the help of the police controls and of a system of censorship it was possible to do away altogether with
in training the German populace to accept obediently the criminal enterprises of German fascism. The aims of these enterprises were served by a huge and well centralised propaganda machinery. With the help of the police controls and of a system of censorship it was possible to do away altogether with the freedom of the press and of speech. The basic method of the Nazi propagandistic activity lay in the false presentation of facts. This is stated quite frankly in Hitler's " Mein Kampf "; " With the help of a skilful and continuous application of propaganda it is possible to make the people conceive even of heaven as hell and also make them consider heavenly the most miserly existence." ;(US-276. D. 302.) The dissemination of provocative lies and the systematic deception of public opinion were as necessary to the Hitlerites for the realisation of their plans as were the production of armaments and the drafting of military plans. Without propaganda, founded on the total eclipse of the freedom of press and of speech, fit would not have been possible for German Fascism to realise its aggressive intentions, to lay the groundwork and then to put to practice the war crimes and the crimes against humanity. In the propaganda system of the Hitler State it was the daily press and the radio that were the most important weapons. In his Court testimony, defendant Goering named three factors as essential in the successful conduct of modern war according to the Nazi concept, namely, (l) the military operations of the armed forces, (2) economic warfare, (3) propaganda. With reference to the latter he said: " Propaganda has tremendous value, particularly propaganda carried by means of radio.... Germany has learned this through experience better than anyone else". (English Transcript, pp. 5981-5982.) With such concepts in ascendance it is impossible to suppose that the supreme rulers of the Reich would appoint to the post of Director of Radio Propaganda who supervised radio activity of all the broadcasting companies and directed their propagandistic content-a man they considered a secondary figure. The point of view of the verdict contradicts both the evidence submitted and the actual state of affairs. Beginning with 1942, and into 1945,
of Radio Propaganda who supervised radio activity of all the broadcasting companies and directed their propagandistic content-a man they considered a secondary figure. The point of view of the verdict contradicts both the evidence submitted and the actual state of affairs. Beginning with 1942, and into 1945, Fritzsche was not only Chief of the Radio Department of the Reich Ministry of Propaganda but also " Plenipotentiary for the Political Organisation of Radio in Greater Germany " This circumstance is fully proven by the sworn affidavit of Fritzsche himself. (PS-3469, US-721.) It thus follows that not at all was Fritzsche merely ",one of the twelve departmental chiefs in the Ministry of Propaganda " who acquired Responsibility for all radio propaganda only toward the end of the war, as the verdict asserts. Fritzsche was the Political Director of the German radio up and into 1945, i.e., up to the moment of German defeat and capitulation. For this reason it is Fritzsche who bears responsibility for the false and provocative broadcasts of the German radio during the years of the war. As chief of the Press Section inside Germany it was also Fritzsche who was responsible for the activity of the German daily press consisting of 2,300 newspapers. It was Fritzsche who created and perfected the Information Section winning from the Reich Government for the purpose an increase in the subsidy granted the newspapers from 400,000 to 4,000,000 marks. Subsequently Fritzsche participated energetically in the development of the propaganda campaigns preparatory to the acts of aggression against Czechoslovakia and Poland. (Transcript, Morning, Session, 23rd January, 1946.) A similar active propaganda campaign was conducted by the Defendant prior to the attack on Yugoslavia as he himself admitted on oath in court. (Transcript, Morning Session, 23rd January, 1946.) Fritzsche was informed of the plan to attack the Soviet Union and was put " au courant" the military intentions at a conference with Rosenberg. (PS-1039, US-146, Rosenberg's Written Report to Hitler on the Subject of Preliminary Drafts on Eastern European Problems.) Fritzsche headed the German press campaign falsifying reports of Germany's aggressive war against France, England, Norway, the
and was put " au courant" the military intentions at a conference with Rosenberg. (PS-1039, US-146, Rosenberg's Written Report to Hitler on the Subject of Preliminary Drafts on Eastern European Problems.) Fritzsche headed the German press campaign falsifying reports of Germany's aggressive war against France, England, Norway, the Soviet Union, the U.S.A., and the other States. The assertion that Fritzsche was not informed of the war crimes and the crimes against humanity then being perpetrated by the Hitlerites in the occupied regions does not agree with the facts. From Fritzsche's testimony in court it is obvious that already in May, 1942, while in the Propaganda Section of the 6th Army, he was aware of Hitler's decree ordering execution for all Soviet political workers and Soviet intellectuals, the so-called " Commissar Decree ". It is also established that already at the beginning of hostilities Fritzsche was fully aware of the fact that the Nazis were carrying out their decision to do away with all Jews in Europe. For instance, when commenting on Hitler's statement that " among results of the war there will be the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe" (p. 248 of the transcript), Fritzsche stated that: "As the Fuehrer predicted it will occur in the event of war in Europe, the fate of the European Jewry turned out to be quite sad." (P. 3231 of the transcript.) It is further established that the defendant systematically preached the antisocial theory of race hatred and characterised peoples inhabiting countries victimised by aggression as " subhumans ". (Transcript, Morning Session, 26th April, 1946, p. 83; and of the Afternoon Session, pp. 12.) When the fate of Nazi Germany became clear, Fritzsche came out with energetic support of the defendant Martin Bormann and of other fanatical Hitler adherents who organised the undercover fascist association, the so-called " Werewolf." On the 7th of April, 1945, for example, in his last radio address, Fritzsche agitated for all the civilian population of Germany to take active part in the activities of this terroristic Nazi underground organisation. He said: " Let no one be surprised to find the civilian population, wearing civilian clothes, still continuing the fight in
in his last radio address, Fritzsche agitated for all the civilian population of Germany to take active part in the activities of this terroristic Nazi underground organisation. He said: " Let no one be surprised to find the civilian population, wearing civilian clothes, still continuing the fight in the regions already occupied and even after occupation has taken place. We shall call this phenomenon " Werewolf " since it will have arisen without any preliminary planning and without a definite organisation, out of the very instinct of life." (USSR 496.) In his radio addresses Fritzsche welcomes the German use of the new terror weapons in conducting the war, specifically the use of the " V" rockets. On receiving a plan for the introduction of bacterial warfare he immediately forwarded it to the OKW for acceptance. (USSR-484 Evidence submitted during the Afternoon Session, 28th June, 1946.) I consider Fritzsche's responsibility fully proven. His activity had a most basic relation to the preparation and the conduct of aggressive warfare as well as to the other crimes of the Hitler regime. IV. Concerning the sentence of the defendant Rudolf Hess. The Judgment of the Tribunal correctly and adequately portrays the outstanding position which Rudolf Hess occupied in the leadership of the Nazi party and State. He was indeed Hitler's closest personal confident and his authority was exceedingly great. In this connection it is sufficient to quote Hitler's decree appointing Hess as his deputy: "I hereby appoint Hess as my deputy and give him full power to make decisions in my name on all questions of Party Leadership. (Transcript, 7th February, 1946, afternoon.) But the authority of Hess was not only confined to questions of Party leadership. The official NSDAP publication " Party Year Book for 1941 ", which was admitted as USA Exhibit No. 255, PS 3163, states that: . . . "In addition to the duties of Party leadership, the Deputy of the Fuehrer has far reaching powers in the field of the State. These are first: participation in national and State legislation, including the preparation of Fuehrer's order. The Deputy of the Fuehrer in this way validates the conception of the Party.... second, Approval of the Deputy of the
the Deputy of the Fuehrer has far reaching powers in the field of the State. These are first: participation in national and State legislation, including the preparation of Fuehrer's order. The Deputy of the Fuehrer in this way validates the conception of the Party.... second, Approval of the Deputy of the Fuehrer of proposed appointments for official and labour service leaders. Three, securing the influence of the Party over the self-government of the municipal units." (Doe. USA-255, PS-3163.) Hess was an active supporter of Hitler's aggressive policy. The crimes against peace committed by him are dealt with in sufficient detail in the Judgment. The mission undertaken by Hess in flying to England should be considered as the last of these crimes, as it was undertaken in the hope of facilitating the realisation of aggression against the Soviet Union by temporarily restraining England from fighting. The failure of this mission led to Hess's isolation and he took no direct part in the planning and commission of subsequent crimes of the Hitler regime. There can be no doubt, however, that Hess did everything possible for the preparation of these crimes. Hess, together with Himmler, occupied the role of creator of the SS police organisations of German fascism which afterwards committed the most ruthless crimes against humanity. The defendant clearly pointed out the "special tasks" which faced the SS formations on occupied territories. When the Waffen SS were being formed Hess issued a special order through the Party Chancellery which made aiding the conscription of Party members into these organisations by all means compulsory for Party organs. He outlined the tasks set before the Waffen-SS as follows: "The units of the Waffen-SS composed of National Socialists are more suitable than other armed units for the specific tasks to be solved in the occupied Eastern territories due to the intensive training in regard to questions of race and nationality." (GB-267, 3245-PS.) As early as 1934 the defendant initiated a proposal that the so-called SD under the Reichsfuehrer SS (Security Service) be given extraordinary powers and thus become the leading force in Nazi Germany. On the 9th of June, 1934, Hess issued a decree in accordance with which the " Security
3245-PS.) As early as 1934 the defendant initiated a proposal that the so-called SD under the Reichsfuehrer SS (Security Service) be given extraordinary powers and thus become the leading force in Nazi Germany. On the 9th of June, 1934, Hess issued a decree in accordance with which the " Security Service of the Reichsfuehrer SS " was declared to be the " sole political news and defense service of the Party ". (GB-257.) Thus the defendant played a direct part in the creation and consolidation of the system of special police organs which were being prepared for the commission of crimes on occupied territories. We find Hess to have always been an advocate of the manhating " master race " theory. In a speech made on the 16th January, 1937, while speaking of the education of the German nation, Hess pointed out: "Thus, they are being educated to put Germans above the subjects of a foreign nation, regardless of their positions or their origin." (GB-253, 3124-PS.) Hess signed the so-called " Law for the Protection of Blood and Honour" on the 15th September, 1935. (USA-300, 3179-PS.) The body of this law states that " the Fuehrer's deputy is authorised to issue all necessary decrees and directives" for the practical realisation of the " Nuremberg decrees." On the 14th of November, 1935, Hess issued an ordinance under the Reich citizenship law in accordance with which the Jews were denied the right to vote at elections or hold public office. (GB-258; 1417-PS.) On the 20th of May, 1938, a decree signed by Hess extended the Nuremberg laws to Austria. (GB-259, 224-PS.) On 12th October, 1939, Hess signed a decree creating the administration of Polish occupied territories (Reichsgesetzblatt N-210, 1939, p. 2077). Article 2 of this decree gave the defendant Frank the power of dictator. There is sufficiently convincing evidence showing that this defendant did not limit himself to this general directive which introduced into the occupied Polish territories a regime of unbridled terror. As is shown in the letter of the Reichsminister of Justice to the Chief of the Reichs Chancellery dated 17th April, 1941, Hess was the initiator in the formation of special " penal laws " for Poles and Jews in occupied Eastern territories. The role of this defendant in
a regime of unbridled terror. As is shown in the letter of the Reichsminister of Justice to the Chief of the Reichs Chancellery dated 17th April, 1941, Hess was the initiator in the formation of special " penal laws " for Poles and Jews in occupied Eastern territories. The role of this defendant in the drawing up of these " laws " is characterised by the Minister of Justice in the following words: " In accordance with the opinion of the Fuehrer's deputy I started from the point of view that the Pole is less susceptible to the infliction of ordinary punishment.... Under these new kinds of punishment prisoners are to be lodged outside prisons in camps and are to be forced to do heavy and heaviest labour.... The introduction of corporal punishment which the Deputy of the Fuehrer has brought up for discussion has not been included in the draft. I can not agree to this type of punishment.... The procedure for enforcing prosecution has been abrogated, for it seemed intolerable that Poles or Jews should be able to instigate a public indictment. Poles and Jews have also been deprived of the right to prosecute in their own names or join the public prosecution in an action.... From the very beginning it was intended to intensify special treatment in case of need: When this necessity became actual a supplementary decree was issued to which the Fuehrer's deputy refers to in his letter...." (GB-268, R-96.) Thus, there can be no doubt that Hess together with the other major war criminals is guilty of crimes against humanity Taking into consideration that among political leaders of Hitlerite Germany Hess was third in significance and played a decisive role in the crimes of the Nazi regime. I consider the only justified sentence in his case can be-death. V. Incorrect Judgment With Regard to the Reich Cabinet The Prosecution has posed before the Tribunal the question of declaring the Reich Cabinet a criminal organisation. The verdict rejects the claim of the Prosecution, unfoundedly refusing to declare the Hitler Government a criminal organisation. With such a decision I cannot agree. The Tribunal considers it proven that the Hitlerites have committed innumerable and monstrous crimes. The Tribunal also considers it proven that these crimes, were
rejects the claim of the Prosecution, unfoundedly refusing to declare the Hitler Government a criminal organisation. With such a decision I cannot agree. The Tribunal considers it proven that the Hitlerites have committed innumerable and monstrous crimes. The Tribunal also considers it proven that these crimes, were as a rule committed intentionally and on an organised scale, according to previously ,prepared plans and directives. (" Plan Barbarossa ", " Night and Fog ", " Bullet ", etc.) The Tribunal has declared several of the Nazi mass organisations criminal, the organisations founded for the realisation and putting to practice the plans of the Hitler Government. In view of this it appears particularly untenable and rationally incorrect to refuse to declare the Reich Cabinet, the directing organ of the State with a direct and active role in the working out of the criminal enterprises, a criminal organisation. The members of this directing staff had great power, each headed an appropriate government agency, each participated in preparing and realising the Nazi programme. In confirmation it is deemed proper to cite several facts: 1. Immediately after the Nazi ascent to power on the 24th of March, 1933 there was a law passed entitled " The Law of Defense of the People and the State " whereby the Reich Cabinet, besides the Reichstag, received the right of issuing new legislature. On the 26th May, 1933, the Reich Government issued a decree ordering the confiscation of the property of all Communist organisations and on ;the 14th of June, the same year, it also confiscated the ,property of the Social Democrat organisations. On the 1st December, 1933, the Reich Government issued the law " Ensuring Party and State Unity ". Following through its programme of liquidating democratic institutions, in 1934, the Government passed a law of the " Reconstruction of the Reich " whereby democratic elections were abolished for both central and local representative bodies. The Reichstag thereby became an institution without functional meaning. (Transcript, Afternoon Session, 22nd November. 1945. pp. 2325.) By the law of 7th April, 1933, and others, all Reich government employees, including judges, ever noted for any anti-Nazi tendencies or ever