A. No.
Q. Then I want to ask you, General, about the destruction of Warsaw, and the wholesale killing of the Jews there. Did you ever hear of the report by Globocnik? You know Globocnik, don't you? He was an SS man.
A. Yes, I know Globocnik.
Q. Did you hear of his final report on the clean-up of the Warsaw Ghetto?
A. To the best of my belief and knowledge, no, I have no knowledge of it.
Q. I could read to you for hours from it, the horrible details, but I am just going to read you two sentences from Globocnik's report. This was his report to Himmler. "Of the total 56,000 Jews caught about seven thousand were exterminated within their former ghetto in the course of the large-scale action, and 6,929 by transporting them to Treblinka too which, "he says, means fourteen thousand Jews exterminated altogether. Beyoun the number of 56,000 Jews an estimated number of five to six thousand were killed by explosions or in fires." This action was carried out by SS men, General, and he reports that a total of sixty Waffen-SS men were killed in cleaning out the Warsaw Ghetto because the Jews put up such a terrific fight. You are not proud of such a report as this on the records of the SS, are you?
A. No, I am not proud of those atrocities at all.
DR. SEIDL (For Defendant Oswald Pohl): Your Honor, the translation came through to the effect that we are dealing here with a report by SS-Gruppenfuhrer Globocnik. However, this report has not been provided with any document number. However, if I understood the contents of the report correctly to which the Prosecutor was referring, then this was not the report of Gruppenfuehrer Globocnik but it was the report of Brigadefuehrer Stroop.
BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q. Dr. Seidl is correct, witness; the Action Reinhardt was carried out in Warsaw by Globocnik who was an SS man. This report, however, was written by Stroop. Do you know Stroop? He was also an SS man.
A. Yes.
Q. And Eicke? Do you think he represents the best of German youth? The best that the SS could offer? He ran the concentration camps in which thousands of Jews were exterminated.
A. May I ask you when and where they were slaughtered under the responsibility of Eicke?
Q. Well, they were murdered from 1939 on up until the time when he was removed from his position.
A. If that is correct, and the Prosecution must be in the possession of the appropriate documents, then of course I can only object to these actions in the sharpest manner.
Q. And about the beautiful designs that were made by the SS? You told us about Himmler's designing porcelain horses that didn't have to be supported by flowers or some other instrument, so that they could stand on their hind legs. Can you tell us if the same designer designed this piece of porcelain as designed the shrunken heads at Dachau? This was also carried on by the SS. You heard about the shrunken heads of the inmates, didn't you?
A. I have only heard it here, and I have read it in the book by Kogon; I have read it with horror. Of course I cannot say myself if it is true or not.
Q. If it is true, it is nothing to be proud of, is it?
A. No, in no way whatsoever.
Q. Now, you have told us about the character of the defendant Pohl. Proof in this case shows that under the WVHA and under the supervision of the defendant Pohl in the stone quarries people were worked eleven, fourteen hours a day; people were worked until they were no longer able to work. They were killed while they were working, and when they were no longer able to work they were sent out to extermination camps, in the concentration camps under the defendant Pohl.
Thousands and thousands of people --- six hundred thousand, Pohl says -- that in 1944 those people were enslaved and imprisoned; the property was taken away from them. People who loved life and fought for life just as hard as you and I do, General. What about a man like Pohl? Is this the best that the SS had to offer? Is this the man that you are proud of?
A. I have already repeatedly told the Prosecution today and yesterday that in my conviction Pohl did not have anything whatsoever actively to do with these things, and up to now the Prosecution has in no way led me to believe that Pohl, who was only responsible for the direction of the allocation of labor, and was only organizationally and schematically brought into connection with these things -- that Pohl is really guilty in the sense. The prerequisite for the fact that I declared myself prepared to appear here as a witness in one of the most important of the SS trials on his behalf, and on behalf of his comrades, was his answer to a question which I asked him on his word of honor; whether he had anything to do with it. And I asked him whether my concept was correct or not, and he confirmed that I was correct, on his word of honor. Since I have known him for many years only as a very decent human being, and since, as one of the few survivors, I still know exactly the organizational connections; I refuse to the utmost to leave a comrade when I am personally convinced of the fact that he never issued an order for a killing or for an arbitary commission of inhumane acts.
Q. General, we have not a single order which Pohl issued for the execution of a person, and I would be very much surprised if we were to find one. But in the concentration camps which were run by Pohl thousands of people were killed and worked to death. I don't intend now to try to convince you of the guilt of Pohl. I think that is completely beyond the realm of our purpose here. But I say to you, that if no crimes were committed there, then concentration camps never existed; no one ever died in a concentration camp.
You told us that Pohl had a difficult job. I ask you, General, if it wasn't an impossible job. Wasn't it a job that was completely beyond the scope of human capabilities, to enslave thousands and thousands of people and make them slave laborers and to regulate every movement of their lives? It was an impossible job, wasn't it?
And, General, wasn't it a crime in itself to undertake such a gigantic and impossible task?
A. It is correct that it was an impossible task which was heaped on a single man, and it was impossible from the technical point of view, and from the load of work.
Q. That answers my question. I have no further questions.
BY JUDGE PHILLIPS:
Q. General, in this letter that you wrote, the reply to the letter that you received on the 28th of July, 1942 in regard to the transportation of Jews from Lublin to Treblinka, you say in this letter this: "I have contacted the department concerned myself so that the smooth carrying out of all of these measures seems to be guaranteed."
What do you mean by that?
A. In only referred to the actual transportation movement, the actual movement of the people.
Q. Whom did you contact?
A. I can only reconstruct this now according to the file notes which are contained in this letter with my signature.
Q. I am not talking about the file notes. I am talking about what you said. I want to know what you meant by what you said. That is what I want to know.
A. I meant that I had sent copies of this letter to Brandt, Globocnik and Obergruppenfuhrer Krueger for the smooth carrying-out of all of these movements of the population.
Q. I am asking you what this sentence means; "I have contacted the departments concerned."
Now, what departments did you contact?
A. As far as I can answer this question so quickly, I meant the agencies which have been listed here, and which were concerned with the transportation movement as far as the technical execution was concerned.
Q. Wasn't the Reichsfuehrer SS concerned considerably about this?
A. If Dr. Brandt received a copy, then it was automatically to be submitted to the Reichsfuehrer.
Q. Did you contact him and ask him something about it?
A. This procedure was carried out in writing because it is stated here that a copy of this letter was sent from Gunzenmueller to Dr. Brandt and all persons concerned.
Q. Where were you when you sent this letter, when you wrote this letter?
A. I was in the Fuehrer's headquarters --- and give me a moment to look at it --- yes, I was at the Fuehrer's headquarters. It was located in Winniza in the Ukraine, and the Reichsfuehrer SS was at least 25 kilometers away, at Berditschew, if he was not located elsewhere. That is why all the persons concerned received a copy of this letter, and that settled the case.
Q. What would these people, these Jews -- 5,000 a day -- be, as you called them, Chosen People? That is what you called them: The Chosen People.
A. Yes, they probably were Jews.
Q. I say, you called them The Chosen People. You meant the Jews, didn't you?
A. I am not certain, but probably I meant the Jews by that.
Q. Well, General, you answered a letter about Jews in which the letter calls them Jews. You come back and call them Chosen People.
There is no quibbling about that.
A. Yes; the Jews themselves proudly call themselves the Chosen People.
Q. I said but what you called them. And you meant the Jews when you said that, didn't you?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. Now, were they being sent, from 5,000 a day, to Treblinka. Why were they being sent there?
A. I don't know, but it was done by order of the Reichsfuehrer.
Q. Why didn't you find out? If you were thanking somebody for doing that, why didn't you find out why they were being taken there?
A. With the innumerable orders which had to be taken care of during the day it was sufficient for me to know that the Reichsfuehrer had given such and such an order; that the Reichsfuehrer had ordered such a movement of transportation. And actually because it was purely a transportation matter and not an extermination measure, the State Secretary in the Reich Ministry of Transportation had to furnish the necessary transportation and, therefore, it was one of my tasks which brought me to contact the proper agency, so that the necessary transportation could be furnished. I did this in good faith, and that is the way I worked on it.
Q. Were you thanking them for yourself and in the name of the Reichsfuehrer SS for carrying on this program? And you tell this Tribunal that you didn't know what this program was?
A. Yes.
Q. And you expect us to believe that?
A. I can only ask you to believe it -- not only because of the personal impression which the Tribunal has, but on the basis of the actions which I really carried out as long as I acted independently. I have really put a good system into effect for two years in Italy, where I was also forced to have a concentration camp -- and I can assure the Tribunal that here not a single person died, and that over-
Q. I am not talking about that. I am talking about this particular matter. I am not interested in that at all. I am interested in this particular letter that you wrote in which you say that you knew nothing about it: the extermination program of the Jews.
A. Yes.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: You know nothing of why they were being transported, this shipment?
WITNESS: No, I didn't know.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: And you didn't ask anybody why? That's all.
WITNESS: As far as I can recall.
CROSS EXAMINATION (Continued) BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q. General, I didn't think there was any doubt that you knew what these people were sent there for or I would have gone into the matter further. You talked about 70,000 Jews being sent in 14 days to Treblinka. You know today that Treblinka was one of the biggest extermination centers, don't you?
A. No, I have heard it now.
Q. How big a place is Treblinka. Is Treblinka a place that can accommodate 70,000 people?
A. I don't even know where Treblinka is located. I only knew that Auschwitz and Lublin were extermination camps, but the name "Treblinka" is new to me.
Q. I might tell you that it seems to me that if you didn't know you should have found out that it couldn't possibly accommodate this many people and that in this place, Treblinka, thousands and thousands of Jews were exterminated and that this was one of the largest extermination camps.
RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. SEIDL (Attorney for defendant Pohl):
Q. Witness, the letter which has been submitted to you comes from the State Secretary of the Reich Ministry of Transportation. You have answered in reply to it with a letter of the 13th of August, 1942. In this letter which originates with you are referring to a movement of the population which was to be carried out as quickly as possible at that time. Did you assume at the time that the Jews would be sent to Ghettos and camps, or what did you think about it?
A. I thought of a movement of the population into camps and nothing else.
Q. At the time you did not know that these Jews were to be brought into extermination camps?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. The prosecution then asked you what responsibility the defendant Oswald Pohl had with regard to the concentration camps and the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps. The prosecution has submitted a document, I think with the file number 1063-PS, as Exhibit 39. This is a letter of the chief of the Security Police and the SD of the 30th of May, 1942. It is addressed to all agencies of the Security Police and the SD and it deals with the incorporation of the agency of the Inspectorate of the Concentration camps into the SS-WVHA. It is located in Document Book 2. It is on page 69 of the German text. This document appears to be of considerable importance to me. I would like to read to you the contents of this document, which consists of two paragraphs, and I quote:
"By order of the Reichsfuehrer SS and Chief of the German Police of the 3rd of March, 1942, the agency of the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps was removed from the SS Operational Main Office and was transferred as Amtsgruppe D into the SS-WVHA.
"This measure serves the direction of the labor allocation in war time and - as I expressly emphasize - it remains without influence on the RSHA with regard to the confinement and release of prisoners and on granting leave to prisoners, and so on."
Here we are dealing for the first time with the confinement of prisoners and here we are talking about the release of prisoners. Furthermore, this letter deals with the granting of leave to prisoners and so on. I now ask you, witness, doesn't this order, which has been presented by the prosecution, show quite clearly that the purpose of the incorporation was purely of an administrative nature and that this responsibility was to be marked--
MR. ROBBINS: May it please the Tribunal--
THE PRESIDENT: That is a question to be answered by the Tribunal, not by the witness. We can interpret the letter, I think as well as the witness can, and decide what it means.
MR. ROBBINS: May I also say, Your Honor, that this is not the order which incorporated the Inspectorate into the WVHA, but it is just a letter which is reporting about the incorporation.
DR. SEIDL: In this letter from the Chief of the Security Police and the SD to the agencies of the Security Police, reference is taken to the order of the Reichsfuehrer SS of the 3rd of March, 1942, and it would be appropriate - and it would be favorable for the defense - if I could obtain possession of this order by the Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler, and probably this decree would show very clearly in what field the responsibility of the defendant Oswald Pohl was to be limited with regard to the concentration camps.
MR. ROBBINS: The prosecution would like to have the order also. We have made an extensive search for it and we haven't been able to find it and, if we do find it, we will give it to Dr. Seidl.
BY DR. SEIDL:
Q. Witness, I have read the contents of this letter to you in order to refresh your memory. I now ask you the following question: What considerations were decisive for the order of the Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler to subordinate the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps to the defendant Oswald Pohl and to what extent was his responsibility to be limited?
A. The order shows quite clearly that the main and predominating thought was to centralize the allocation of prisoners.
MR. ROBBINS: Obviously, the witness doesn't understand the question or the nature of the document which was read to him. It wasn't the order incorporating the Inspectorate. It is just a letter talking about the incorporation.
THE PRESIDENT: Even if it was the order, Dr. Seidl's question is, "Please tell us what was in Himmler's mind when he made the order?"
How does this witness know what was in Himmler's mind when he wrote a paper, which we haven't even seen?
DR. SEIDL: I did not ask the witness what Himmler was thinking about, but I did ask him whether perhaps Himmler had made any remarks toward him - toward the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: You didn't ask him that. If you had asked him that, that would be all right. If you had said, "Did Himmler tell you what his plan was in issuing this order?", there would have been no objection.
DR. SEIDL: Your Honor, that is the way I meant the question and I have the impression that this is the way the witness understood it. Of course, he can only know what somebody told him and in my opinion the witness has correctly understood the sense of my question, that perhaps Himmler had made some sort of a remark or perhaps that he himself had read the order by Himmler, which we seem to be lacking so much at this time.
BY DR. SEIDL:
Q. Now, please answer this question, witness.
A. I cannot recall the order which we are discussing here, but I can remember with certainty that the Reichsfuehrer SS described to me the central direction of the allocation of labor as the reason for carrying out the incorporation or annexation.
Q. You then further testified that the supreme central agency for the handling of all administrative matters in connection with the concentration camps was the Inspectorate and that the Inspectorate was to maintain that position. That is what you meant with regard to the food, clothing, the billeting, and so on, isn't it?
THE PRESIDENT: Don't you think that might be just a little leading? You've told him a long story with a number of items in it, and then you say to him, "Nicht wahr?"
DR. SEIDL: I do not have that impression, Your Honor.
THE WITNESS: Well, shall I answer the question in spite of everything?
THE PRESIDENT: Oh, yes, go ahead.
A. I meant by this that the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps in its own competence had to take care of supplying the prisoners, and it was to be responsible for that purpose.
Q. You then further mentioned the Reich Ministry of Agriculture. Did the Reich Food Department have anything to do with the WVHA with regard to its organization or in any other respect?
A. No. These are two completely different agencies and offices. One of them is an agency of the Reich.
Q. In connection with food you mentioned the agency for supplying the concentration camp prisoners.
A. Yes, because I wanted to express the fact that as far as I know these state institutions were supplying the entire German population and also the German Wehrmacht, the prisoners of war, and all inmates, and that this was not the task of Oswald Pohl.
Q. Do you know what Reich ministry or what Reich authority had to supply the food rations for all penal institutions and the concentration camps?
A. I cannot say under oath what agency this was, but it was an agency outside the competence of Pohl. It was an authority of the Reich.
Q. You have been asked about the position which Kammler had within the WVHA. Did you ever hear anything about a special staff of Kammler?
A. I only know that Kammler during the last years of the war occupied himself with the "V" weapons or had something to do with them. This was a special assignment.
Q. Do you know to whom Kammler was directly subordinated in his capacity as chief of this special staff, or don't you know this for the reason that since 1943 you were in Italy?
A. I happened to meet Kammler early in February 1945 at Himmler's headquarters at Birkenwald near Prenzlau. At that time I asked him what he was doing and how he was getting on. In the course of the conversation he told me that he was working on the V-1 and V-2 weapons. I therefore gained the impression that he was not a member of the SS anymore but that he belonged to a staff of the Wehrmacht. I didn't know if this was the Luftwaffe, the Speer organization, or the OKW. I didn't ask him for that information at all because I was not interested in it.
Q. What agency alone was able to have people sent to concentration camps for security reasons?
THE PRESIDENT: We know the answer to that.
DR. SEIDL: Well, Your Honor, there's another question coming up which I did not want to ask without this preliminary question.
Q. Would it not have been appropriate to incorporate the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps into the RSHA?
A. Certainly. If the executive or the police aspects had been placed into the foreground, then of course it would have belonged in the RSHA. However, since the allocation of labor was placed into the foreground, as far as the direction was concerned, it was incorporated into the WVHA.
Q. You further testified - and this is to be my final question that Eicke in his field, with regard to the administration of the camps, did not want any interference by anybody and that he was Glueck's heir. What did you mean by that and what subsequent effects did this have?
A. I can only recall that on one occasion for this reason a difference existed between Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl and Gruppenfuehrer Eicke. Both of them were very pronounced personalities with strong wills, and Pohl wanted administrative order and wanted to be able to extend a reasonable amount of influence. However, Eicke refused to comply with this. The Reichsfuehrer ordered both of the men to come and see him. This is one of the few exceptional cases which I can recall at the moment.
He ordered that both men were to discuss the matter with each other in my ante-room until they had reached an agreement. Only then was I permitted to take them to Himmler. Since both of them were very strong-headed, the discussion lasted for three hours. I was not allowed to give them any water or refreshments. After three hours they were allowed to see the Reichsfuehrer.
DR. SEIDL: Then I have no further questions.
DR. FICHT: Your Honor, I should like your permission to examine the witness once more tomorrow. I think there are several questions to be discussed here.
THE PRESIDENT: If there is to be further examination, it will be done tomorrow. I thought possibly the witness was finished. Dr. Seidl, do you want Rudolf Brandt immediately after this witness?
DR. SEIDL: If after the conclusion of the interrogation of the witness Wolff the witness Rudolf Brandt can be called here, solely for cross examination, I should be very grateful to the Tribunal if this could be done. I do not believe that the interrogation of the witness Rudolf Brandt will take up very much time.
THE PRESIDENT: All right. he will be the next witness then. We shall now recess until tomorrow morning at 9:30.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is in recess until 0930 tomorrow morning.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 0930 hours, 5 June 1947.)
Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America, against Oswald Pohl, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 5 June 1947, 0945-1630, Justice Robert M. Toms, presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal II.
Military Tribunal II is now in session. God save the United States of America and this Honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the Court.
KARL WOLFF - Resumed REDIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued)
MR. ROBBINS: May it please the Tribunal , may I mark the document which I examined the Witness Wolff on yesterday for identification? This is the letter from Ganzenmueller to Wolff and Wolff's reply, which is Document NO-2207. I should like to mark that as Prosecution's Exhibit 549 for identification.
THE PRESIDENT: The two documents together will be 549?
MR. BOBBINS: Yes, your Honor.
DR. SEIDL: (For Defendant Oswald Pohl) Mr. President, in connection with the document which the Prosecution have just mentioned, and which was submitted to the witness yesterday, I would like to put one question to the witness.
BY DR. SEIDL:
Q. Witness, have you still your copy of the document?
A. Yes.
Q. Will you please look at the letter which you yourself wrote in reply to State Secretary Ganzenmueller's letter and which is dated 13 August , 1942. What are the dictation initials in the top lefthand corner?
A. These initials are BA/MZ.
Q. And what does that stand for, what does that show concerning the letter?
A. That shows that I did not dictate the letter myself, and I would be grateful if I could briefly explain how this letter came about, and about another important matter. I told the Tribunal yesterday that I received Ganzenmueller's letter at the Fuehrer's Headquarters in Winitza in the Ukraine, The field headquarters of the Reichsfuehrer-SS was at a distance of some 125 kilometers to the north of there near Schitomir, north of Bertitschew. As the Fuehrer's Headquarters were short of space it was not possible for me to have a stenotypist or a secretary at my disposal because such a person could not be accommodated. For that reason I had to, at the time, deal with the correspondence that reached me in a manner that on any reply I have to give I would put down the essential words on the original letter and send it along with the next mail to Himmler's field headquarters, to Schitomir, and there a letter would be drafted and would be sent back to me for my signature. From the handwritten notes by me on the letter of 28th July, it becomes clear that the orders for a reply were given by me on 2 August. Now, until the 13 letter reached me for my signature and left my office again the date became 13 August. Therefore, It took me eleven days. Nos, it is important for me to tell the Court that this letter was not dictated by me, and if I had been in a position to dictate it myself I would first of all have remembered it better than is the case in this way. Secondly, I would have given it a more decent form and clearer contents than was done here by our secretary. But more important is the stamp on the original letter of State Secretary Ganzenmueller of 28 July. There is a stamp called "Secret". That classification is the lowest degree usual in German official correspondence when matters are dealt with of security or secrecy nature. The other forms, "Top Secret, Most Secret," or anything like that, which pointed out that only the commander in chief or his chief of staff were allowed to see this document, that it must only reach an officer and must be forwarded by an officer, all this is lacking here, which proves that State Secretary Ganzenmueller did not regard this business as a strictly secret matter.
Still more important is that my reply to Ganzenmueller's letter was completely open without any classification of the slightest secrecy. It was forwarded perfectly normally through the open public mails. I would, therefore, ask you to conclude from this that I acted in good faith, that this was a purely technical transportation movement at that time, in which I saw nothing unusual at that time, because at the time large transfers of armament enterprises from the Reich to the General Government, and also within Poland itself, were going on, in order to have these armament enterprises evacuated from the intensifying British air raids.
As a third factor here, I would like to remark that as far as I can remember dimly, the Prosecution yesterday, when they read this letter aloud, did not give part of one sentence. That is how I remember it rather dimly, unconsciously as it were, and therefore it did not reach the transcript which was taken down yesterday, I am far from saying this definitely, but I would be grateful if the Court would go into this matter, whether my memory serves me right, or if the Court could see to it that this passage, which is so important for me and my veracity, which is in the middle of my letter of the 13 August, whether that statement is completely contained in the record or not. The sentence reads, and I quote: "and that this enables us to speed up this movement of the population." That sentence shows and attempts to express my attitude at the time and the whole context of the letter.
THE PRESIDENT: General, the whole letter is in the record.
THE WITNESS: Is yesterday's transcript in the hands of the President already?
THE PRESIDENT: Oh, yes. Efficiency, yes.
THE WITNESS: I admire you all the more.
Q. (By Dr. Seidl) Witness, I can recall myself that this passage reached the transcript. I would like to ask you now, the secretary, "B" who drafted the letter, and who used the expression "movement of population" did that person have any indication or any cause to use that expression from your own notes?
A. He chose that expression himself, and the letter does not give it at all.
Q. On my copy of Ganzenmueller's letter to you the file notes made by you are not contained. All it says here in brackets is "handwritten notes illegivle", and nothing is said of the movement of population , is that correct?
A. It is not there in my own handwriting. But may I say another thing? Judge Phillips, when I gave incomplete statements, which was all I could do under the circumstances, had cause to doubt my veracity. I should be most obliged to Judge Phillips if after today's decisive addition, as I see it, which I shall give today, if he could tell me whether he still maintains these doubts today. Might I remark that if these doubts are being maintained it would practically mean that this would have the same unfortunate consequences which lest year were caused by my transfer to a lunatic asylum, a fact which I described to the Tribunal during the Milch trial on 18 February.
A. Once again, therefore, as far as the possibilities are concerned for me to enlighten and tell the truth, these possibilities could be taken away from me, which would mean in effect that I would be silenced again at a moment in the trials which will become of the utmost importance later.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: I accept your explanation of it.
DR. SEIDL: I have no further questions for the witness.
BY DR. HAENSEL (Counsel for the defendant G. Loerner):
Q. General, I have a few small questions, and I would like to ask you at the beginning that you should confirm to me that I have not had the honor yet to put these questions before you previously. Perhaps, I hope, this will not be unpleasant to you and that our conversation will be in the nature of a first night.
General, I would like to ask you about something which is not contained in the files here, but which may well be of decisive importance to this court. If I ask you about specific importance of the man in relation of others, can you imagine what I mean? What I am aiming at is I would like to ask you whether you have any personal impressions of the importance of Pohl in relation to his collaborators. Was he high above them, or was he only a formal chief in his office?
A. That question is very easy for me to answer in a simple manner, to the best of my conviction. Oswald Pohl was an outstanding leader personality in the office which he had built up throughout the years; namely, the WVHA. His willingness to bear responsibility, his willingness to take over all important positions, whenever he decided on some issue which the office chiefs had reported to him. Nobody counted in the Main Office except himself.
Q. Did you ever see him lose his temper?
A. Very rarely, but I did - yes. He could really let go at times.
Q. And then nobody could oppose him?
A. No, unless the opposing party wanted to risk great disadvantages.
Q. Now, yesterday or the day before yesterday you told us that Pohl could not do all the work in his office alone; he had to have assistants and colleagues.