dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
HERR PELCKMANN: And in the Verigungstruppe, the so-called field service, a more military service, was taken up only when general military service was introduced. 127 affidavits confirm that the General SS did not demand any special obedience-that is, no oath which according to its form would obligate the individual to more than in the Wehrmacht or-in the civil service. 2,674 affidavits report on the training of SS men. In 3,138 affidavits it is asserted that orders against humanity were not known to them and were certainly not given. The second subsection of Group III is intended to provide an answer to the question of what the members recognized as the actual aim of the organization. It is a problem of ascertaining whether there was a contradiction between the theoretical training and the real actions of the leaders. 688 affidavits deal with the question of whether the power in Germany was to be achieved through suppression of political opponents. On the question of whether the SS members recognized the destruction- of Jewry as an aim of the leaders, 1,593 out of 1,637 affidavits which mention this problem state that the Jewish problem was not to be solved by killing or the so-called "final solution," and that they had no knowledge of these intentions of the leaders. They point out that the SS members were forbidden to undertake individual acts against Jews. As evidence, numerous members refer to the fact that many death or other severe sentences were passed because of crimes against Jewish persons or Jewish property. Another question was whether the SS members believed that the actual aim of the leaders was to dominate Europe through war. 12,596 affidavits say that neither statements of the SS leaders nor statements of Hitler made plain that the conquest of Europe was an aim of the SS. Group IV, the next, seems to me quite important. It includes affidavits on the question of the participation of the SS members in the crimes asserted in the Indictment. The first question deals with participation in the concentration camp system.
HERR PELCKMANN: 2,866 affidavits have been made out on this subject. They are mostly from guards, a few from former concentration camp inmates and a few from kitchen and workshop personnel. They deal with the treatment of the inmates and with the conduct of the guards. They only show, of course, how the guards saw the concentration camp conditions and the life of the inmates from their point of view. They give a cross-section through almost all concentration camps and labor camps. They give a unified picture of the impossibility of obtaining insight into the true conditions, even for people working near the camps. They also give a unified picture of the degree of ignorance of conditions in the camps and the reason for this, namely, the order for extreme secrecy. 2,385 say that instructions were constantly given about the conduct of the guards; examples of punishment are given for disobedience of these rules, especially for ill-treatment. Significant is the statement in many affidavits that relations between the guards and the command personnel were not only indifferent but even tense. Prisoners themselves, whose affidavits are presented, state that a great part of the responsibility for the conditions belongs to the internee Kapos, who were often criminals. The question of the participation of SS members in so-called mass exterminations in extermination camps, which must be distinguished from the concentration camps, is not mentioned at all in the affidavits. We have heard from various witnesses that these camps had a routine of their own and only a few SS men or men in SS uniforms were stationed there. Now I come to another point. A cross-section through all the well-known divisions of the Waffen-SS is given by 8,242 affidavits and on the question of illegal treatment of prisoners of war, 4,306 testify to constant instruction on correct conduct before each action. Numerous affidavits give examples of particularly good treatment of prisoners of war.
HERR PELCKMANN: 13,613 affidavits deal with the question of treatment of the civilian population in the occupied territories contrary to international law. There were no orders to this effect; constant instruction about correct conduct was given. The majority of SS members can report only good relations with the civilian population in the occupied territories. There is no mention in any affidavit of the participation of the SS in resettlement or in deportation. for slave labor. A few statements say that labor commitment was no concern of the SS. Only a very few affidavits touch. biological experiments. They come from men who had something to do with concentration camps. These few say that they had heard that the prisoners volunteered for experiments. 1,271 affidavits deal with the so-called Rohm Putsch. The General SS did not  participate in these events; parts of them had been told to stand by, but they were not armed and not employed. For 9 November 1938 4,407 affidavits give a cross-section of various units, Oberabschnitte, Abschnitte, and Standarten of the SS, in almost all cities of Germany and all districts. It is said with special emphasis that the SS did not participate in these excesses.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Pelckmann, I suppose what you are doing is reading out your summary of these 136,000 affidavits; is that right?
HERR PELCKMANN: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Verbatim?
HERR PELCKMANN: Your Lordship?
THE PRESIDENT: I asked you whether you were reading it out verbatim.
HERR PELCKMANN: As soon as the translation...
THE PRESIDENT: That is not an answer to my question. I asked you whether you were reading it out verbatim.
HERR PELCKMANN: No, I am only giving a resume, Your Lordship.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think we had better adjourn now. [A recess was taken.]
HERR PELCKMANN: Your Lordship, I regret very much that the translation of the summary is not at hand. It would, of course, greatly facilitate the understanding and the grouping of this material. Group V deals with statements concerning the general ignorance of the bulk of SS members. 96,257 affidavits are at our disposal. They tell us that the majority of the members of the SS knew nothing about the crimes attributed to them before the capitulation. They say that in general, but they make particular reference as well, when they deal with the various forms of crimes concerned. One fact is especially significant in this connection and is particularly emphasized. At the time when these crimes assumed a larger scale, that is, during the war, the main body of the SS was fighting at the front; for that reason alone it could not receive any knowledge of incidents of that sort, for the horizon of the man at the front is extremely limited, as experience teaches. Next comes Group VI. It deals with the assertion made by the Prosecution that the SS was a unity. The first question reads whether the branch organizations formed an actual unit. 5,700 affidavits deal with this question. One half shows that a conscious effort toward unification for purposes of carrying through a conspiracy was totally lacking. The other half refers to the fact that the Waffen-SS was not basically recruited from the General SS. Therefore, it emphasizes the separation between the General SS and the Waffen-SS. The second question inquires whether the members of the various branch organizations knew of the activities carried out by the other branches. The significance of the question could not be recognized by the members of the SS without a previous explanation, and therefore few of the affidavits deal with this question. Those few affidavits that we have concerning that activity of the various main offices of the SS ' confirm that they were set up separately and that a union was formed only in the person of Himmler himself.
HERR PELCKMANN: Several affidavits refer to the fact that, for instance, the personnel of the concentration camps were made up of the most varied groups and components. Many affidavits emphasize that the state of secrecy which had been ordered through the Fi1hrer Decree Number One, which has been quoted frequently, and also certain special directives, prohibited close co-operation among the various branches of the SS. In some other affidavits it is said that the General SS, on one hand, and the Police and the SD on the other hand, were not a unit. Very informative are the affidavits which deal with the components of the Leibstandarte 1934. Less than 10 percent of the members of this Leibstandarte were at the same time members of the General SS. A large number of these affidavits state that during the war, practically speaking, the General SS did not exist. 342 affidavits deal with numerous affiliated groups or branches of the SS. These, in truth, only engaged in activities of a definite specialized character; they were not concerned with carrying through the alleged SS activities and had only a loose connection with the General SS. Among these groups we find the SS mounted units, the Reitersturme, which devoted themselves to sporting activities, and the motor units; also the SS female helpers, who like the Wehrmacht female helpers were only used during the war in intelligence and information service. Others were the SS sport organizations, the Lebensborn, the medical units for first aid, front units of the German Reichspost, signals units, and so forth. Affidavits in Group VII deal with the question of the SS attitude toward the Church. 3,174 affidavits are on hand in this respect which, on the basis of their positive statements, conclude that according to their conviction, a persecution of the Church was not intended by the SS leadership.
HERR PELCKMANN: Under VIII there are 127 affidavits grouped together which testify to the fact that many offices under Himmler had no connection with the SS and, further, that between Himmler and the SS an estrangement had arisen, especially in the course of the war. Under IX, 435 affidavits are summarized. They deal with the behavior of our enemies during the war and after the capitulation. These affidavits, based on the experiences of the SS men, contain statements about actions contrary to international law which the enemy Perpetrated in combat. Names of places are given, as are theaters of war, nationality of the enemy, and the kind of excesses that occurred. The enumeration is intended to show that excesses of this kind can hardly be prevented during war and that for that I reason one cannot conclude that an underlying system existed. They serve the purpose of showing that the German troops, especially the Waffen-SS, when confronted with isolated cases of violations of international law, which some of the affidavits say were punished, cannot be charged with having acted according to a system. The last group is X. It contains 57 affidavits which reproduce the actual personal impressions of foreigners about the SS. From the recognition accorded by these foreigners, which was known within the SS, the individual SS man concluded that the general behavior -of the SS could not be criminal and that the activity was not objected to by the world as a whole. Various personalities are mentioned on the grounds of certain incidents; the opinions of prominent Americans, Englishmen, and Russians are given, such as Daladier, Chamberlain, Lord Rothermere, Chaim Weizmann, and others. Finally, I should like to submit, though without going into a detailed explanation of it, a statistical record drawn up on the basis of a circular. With that, My Lord, I have concluded the submission of affidavits and documents.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you next, Dr. Laternser?
DR. LATERNSER: First of all, I should like to submit the list of these 14 witnesses whose testimony I expect to use, as well as the transcripts dealing with their interrogations. Moreover, I have a complete list of the affidavits submitted to the Commissions, and I have submitted this list. It is contained in one volume, which has been placed before the High Tribunal in an English translation. It is the list which has been referred to this morning by the President. I made a systematic compilation of the subject matter and have supplied this list with an index. The numbers of the affidavits are given, as are the names of the deponents and a brief description of the contents of the affidavits. In this way, the rather comprehensive and, in my opinion', especially valuable evidence is easily understandable. The basis for the judgment of the circle of persons accused is the organization and structure of the highest Wehrmacht leadership. For this purpose I should like to submit Document General Staff Number 2, which you will find on Pages 12 and 13 of the first volume of the document book. From the diagram on Page 13 we can see the actual method of subordination as it appertained to the highest Wehrmacht leadership. I need this document as counter-evidence because the draft of the Wehrmacht leadership submitted by the Prosecution-Exhibits USA-531 and 532-is not correct~ in various points and has again and again led to misunderstandings. Concerning those mainly responsible for the conduct of the war, I should like to submit Document General Staff Number 3. This contains a rather large diagram. The diagram on Page 13 shows the structure, and by this I should like to show in what manner the responsibility for the conduct of the war was shared between the military leaders and the other organs. From this diagram we see, first of all, that a clear distinction must be made between the military leadership of this war and the ideological political conduct of the war which was undertaken by Hitler and his various agencies.
DR. LATERNSER: You will find the markings in blue for the military leaders, and in red for the sphere of the ideological and political leadership. I The diagram shows also the chains of command and, thus, of responsibility between military and political leaders. The tasks which the military leaders had are marked in blue, and those which were entrusted to others are marked in red. This diagram shows further what tasks, even though they were in the spheres of the military leaders, were carried out within the responsibility of other agencies and offices in the operational territories which were under military jurisdiction. Thus we see an undermining of the authority of the military leaders even in the operational zones. A distribution of authority according to areas, and therewith a sharing of responsibility, is also shown in this diagram. Only the clearly defined operational areas were under the jurisdiction of the military leaders, and only for the time the operations were in progress. In all other fields the executive power was purely and solely in the hands of the political leadership, and these functions ate indicated in red. Just one more remark in connection with this diagram: the areas outlined in black and dealing with the responsibility of the Wehrmacht commanders do not involve the circle of people accused, for these military commanders do not come within the scope of the Indictment. The authenticity of the diagram is affirmed and sworn to by General Winter of the Wehrmachtsf-Uhrungsstab-the Armed Forces Operation Staff. Having given the structure of the Wehrmacht leadership as a foundation, I shall turn to the circle of accused persons and its composition. The Prosecution has ...
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Laternser, the Tribunal would like to know whether there are three colors indicated in this diagram; namely, blue for the armed forces, red for the political forces, and an indiscriminate color, a mixture of red and blue and black, for an indeterminate body which is half political and half military.
DR. LATERNSER: Yes, Mr. President, that is quite true. The third color is supposed to be black, and these areas indicated in black show the areas of the Wehrmacht and military commanders-in-chief. They are not men who had their commands at the front, but rather commanders-in-chief who had a certain territorial power, and I added that this kind of commander-in-chief, such as is indicated in black, does not fall under the circle of persons accused.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you mean that in what you call black are included the static military commands, non-operational? You don't mean there is anything political in the black?
DR. LATERNSER: No. But, Mr. President, those who had this power of command cannot be included among the people who are accused under the Indictment. The Prosecution has set up a list of the circle of persons accused in Exhibit Number USA-778. This may be found on Pages 15-22 of my document book. This list comprises 129 persons. I should like to submit Document General Staff Number 4, in which three tables are shown. These tables are set up in accordance with Exhibit USA-778. First of all, turn to Chart 1, please. It is on Page 24 of the document book. From this chart we can see, first of all, that on 1 March 1933 only one of the leaders indicted was in a high position. Point 2. On 1 March 1938, there were only seven. Point 3. On I September 1939, that is, at the outbreak of the war, there were 22. Point 4. This is an important point, as may be seen from Column 8. In November of 1944, the top figure of 52 was reached. Point 5. Only 9 generals and admirals were in one of the indicted positions throughout the entire war. Chart 2 is found on Page 25. It is a graphic presentation dealing with the duration of membership of the accused generals in the alleged group. You can see from Columns 2 to 5 that a long membership was something exceptional. You can see from Column 9 that the top figure of 21 held a position falling under the Indictment for only 2-21/-, years; whereas a total of 61 people belonged to the alleged group only for a period of less than one year. This figure of 61 results from the additions of Columns 12 to 18. Chart 3, found on Page 26 of the document book, shows, especially through Columns 4 and 5, that out of 129 generals and admirals, 100 served for less than 2 years in high positions, that is to say, the large majority of the military leaders involved. I now submit Document General Staff Number 6. It is found on Pages 27 to 33 of my Document Book 1. This document comprises a list of names of the various leaders involved.
DR. LATERNSER: From this list we can see just how many of the military leaders, at the time when important events took place, held positions which fall under the Indictment. Then, from Pages 27 and 29, you will see: (1) On 1 March 1933, that is at the time of the assumption of power, one general. (2) On 5 February 1938, which is the key date in the Indictment against the military personnel, only six generals, and (3), on I September 1939, 23 generals in the list (USA-778) drawn up by the Prosecution were in positions falling under this Indictment. Above all it is remarkable that on I November 1944, when we were mainly concerned with the defense of our boundaries, the highest membership in this group was reached-49 generals in all. With Document General Staff Number 7, a copy of which is found on Pages 34 to 40 of Document Book 1, 1 should like to give you a different perspective of the people involved. Last 2 on Pages 36 to 40 shows the membership in the alleged "group" during certain periods. From the first column we can see that before June 1941 33 generals had been in positions which the Indictment covers. Only 21 of that group are still alive. Up to the events of Stalingrad in February 1943, that is, in the period where offensive operations were still being carried out, 27 other generals were in such positions as are covered by the Indictment. From February 1943, until the end of the war, which was the period of strategic defense.
THE PRESIDENT: You said something about only a certain number of them being alive. That is not shown by the chart, is it?
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, that will be seen from another chart to which I will refer later. I was just saying that in the last period, from February 1943 until the end of the war, an additional 69 military leaders were in positions coming under the Indictment. With this document I should like to prove, first of all, that out of the 129 officers indicted, only 33, that is 25 percent, participated in the preparation of war, and were the only ones who could have done so. Point 2, 69 generals, which is more than 50 percent of the group involved, cannot have participated in plans of aggression. Point 3, 40 generals, which is 30 percent, found themselves in positions which are now under indictment only when it was a question of defending the fatherland's boundaries. From Number 5 on Page 35 you will be able to see that out of 129 generals 80 had formerly been members of the General Staff, whereas 49 of them had not belonged to it. I shall now turn to Document General Staff Number 8, which may be found on Pages 41 to 48 of my Document Book Number 1. By this document I should like to bring proofs of a varied nature: (1) From the first three columns of List 3, which are found on Pages 43 to 48, you will be able to see the number of dead, the number of those who are indicted individually or have been indicted, and the number of those officers who were only charged with the command of an army, and therefore did not definitely hold a position which falls under the Indictment. The sum total of these three columns is 56, as can be seen from Page 41, and in this way the number of 129 officers involved is reduced, and thereby also the practical consequences of a sentence, which could only affect, 73 people at the most. (2) The last two columns of my list give the number of those officers who before the end of the war had lost their positions either through an order, or death, or because they were captured. Seventy admirals and generals make up this number out of the total figure of 129. And in this connection...
THE PRESIDENT: I do not think it very much matters but the last column which contains the reason does not seem to accord with the evidence which has been given to us up to date. Perhaps it is a mistranslation. I do not know. General Field Marshal Von Brauchitsch and the reason given in the last column. It seems that the reason has been given to us ...
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, I propose to go on to explain these two columns and to tell the High Tribunal who in this list fell into disgrace. My intention was to give this explanation to the High Tribunal. I wanted to call the attention of the High Tribunal to the fact that it can be seen from the last two columns that 36 generals, because of serious differences of opinion with Hitler, or because of active resistance against Hitler, were removed from their positions. As can be seen from the explanatory affidavit attached to the list, those who fell into disgrace did so because of serious differences of opinion between themselves and Hitler.
THE PRESIDENT: All I wish to say is that no such suggestion was made to Field Marshal Von Brauchitsch when he was in the witness box.
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, I do believe that I can remember that he talked about serious differences of opinion between himself and Hitler.
THE PRESIDENT: It is an English word and it seems to be highly inappropriate. Go on.
DR. LATERNSER: In this figure of 36 generals who, were removed from their positions because of differences of opinion is included, as may be seen from the list, General Hoeppner, who was sentenced to death for having participated in the affair of 20 Ju15 1944; he was the same general who, according to the view of the editor of Document L-180, had collaborated closely ...
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Laternser, I see that the same word is applied to the Defendant Raeder, and my observation equally applies to him.
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, may I please deal with this matter briefly once more after the recess?
THE PRESIDENT: Certainly, Dr. Laternser. You can go on now.