Himmler for outstanding service in the Einsatz, but you have no explanation, particularly in view of what you have told the court now for a whole morning?
A I repeat the promotion with this particular text. I have not received. I I had received it, and I inspected it. I would have said so, here. Even if such a promotion was made, I cannot explain why it says special merits and does not say what it means. The Einsatz was mentioned, but it doesn't state the function and, aside from this, there is no special abnormal explanation of what I have just said. I cannot state -
THE PRESIDENT: Did you receive that document?
THE WITNESS: This document I never received. I cannot have received it.
THE PRESIDENT: You knew that you were promoted, didn't you?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: And how were you notified of the promotion?
THE WITNESS: I received a memorandum from Streckenbach and a special order.
THE PRESIDENT: And you say that you didn't receive this letter from Himmler?
THE WITNESS: No.
THE PRESIDENT: what is your explanation, why you didn't receive an important document of that character?
THE WITNESS: Your Honor, I am just saying that I did not receive this special order. Even if I had received it-
THE PRESIDENT: So then there is a possibility that yon did receive it?
THE WITNESS: No.
THE PRESIDENT: You volunteered that even if you had received it, then what? If you had received it, now, what were you going to say?
THE WITNESS: If I had received it, I would say that I have not received it in its form. I do not see any reason why, if such a document is availably and if I actually did receive it, I see no reason why, I should say I didn't.
THE PRESIDENT: Himmler's letters usually got to their destination, did they not?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: There is no reason why this should not have reached you in a normal course of affairs?
THE WITNESS: In any case, I didn't receive it. I have already said that I got my promotion at the beginning of December. It is possible that a explanation is contained in the fact that I got my promotion late, or that for some reason or other it was not received by me. I don't want to deny that I have been promoted, and furthermore I want to say that if I had received this order, I would have said so. I see no reason to deny the receipt of a letter, if I actually received it.
THE PRESIDENT: And you offer no explanation as to why a letter of this importance would not have reached you?
THE WITNESS: From the fact that this was a late promotion, it would be possible that this letter did not reach me.
THE PRESIDENT: I did Not catch that.
THE WITNESS: Apart from the fact that only in the beginning of December I was promoted to Oberfuehrer, that is, not immediately, at the 9th of November, apart from this fact. I have no further explanation. That is what I meant, and I mean. That is to say, that it is possible through this late promotion, I never received this order. When I got my promotion I got a memorandum and I get an order and from these two facts, I assumed that I had been promoted.
THE PRESIDENT: But you offer no explanation as to why a letter of this importance would not have reached you in a normal chouse of affairs?
THE WITNESS: I have no technical explanation for it.
MR. FERENCA: Your Honor, on the letter it says, "for outstanding service in the Einsatz."
Q (By Mr. Ferencz) How do you interpret that?
A I have no interpretation for it. Apart from the fact that, as I have said before, all promotions on the 9th of November probably contained the same statements. The same letters were received. archives, and had no connection with the Einsatzgruppen, how do you explain the word "Einsatz" in there. Did the word Einsatz refer to your activity in the Security Police?
A There are various explanations which could be used. The one is that the promotion was not specified sufficiently by the office of Himmler. A second explanation is that the office, that is the Streckenbach office chose this particular explanation to got me promoted.
Q Doesn't that mean the Security Police Einsatz in the Best?
A Can you repeat the question, please?
Q I say, doesn't that term "Einsatz" refer to your activity with the Security Police Einsatz in the Last? sure, by Himmler. It was suggested and proposed by Streckenbach or Heydrich; I am not certain what reasons there were to use this term. moted for outstanding service, after what you have told us about Heydrich's opinion of you?
A I don't know. I never looked at the proposal that Heydrich or Streckenbach made to Himmler. I don't know whether it was just a routine matter to promote me at the 9th of November and put promotion orders into this form.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, I havehere in my notes that you said that "Heydrich reproached me severely, because I had tried to leave the SD, that he would turn around and recommend you for promotion for the wonderful work you did in the SD?
THE WITNESS: Am I suppose to give an explanation, Your Honor?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, there seems to be an inconsistency in your declaration, first, you said that Heydrich reproached you severely, and in answer to a question put by Mr. Ferencz, you said that "possibly Heydrich recommended me for promotion." That seems an inconsistency to the Tribunal. If it doesn't to you, then we will pass on to something else.
Q (By Mr. Ferencz) Did you receive notice of your promotion to Brigadier General in the SS? service with the Einsatzgruppe?
A You mean promotion to Brigadefuehrer? No, that promotion took place in 1945.
Q But in the correspondence concerning your promotion, didn't it say that Franz Alfred Six, Doctor, or Professor, was exceptionally good with the Einsatgruppe in the last and therefore should have been promoted?
A You mean my promotion to brigadefuehrer or Oberfuehrer?
Q I mean in your promotion to Brigadefuehrer; when they told about all your great activities with the SS didn't they also say that you had performed exceptional service with the Security Police and with the Einsatzgruppe in the East?
Court No. II-A, Case No. IX.
A. There is a period of four years in between 1941 and 1945. In 1945 I got my promotion on the 30th of January. It is quite unimaginable that in 1945, again special merits in the past should be mentioned in my promotion.
Q To you it is unimaginable. Let me refresh your imagination and I will read to you, and I will give you the copy to read in a moment.
Q "Reich Main Secruity Office, Berlin, 2 October, 1944, Subject: SS Oberfuehrer Dr. Alfred Six,"is that you?
A. Yes, that is I, That is 1944.
Q "1. Memorandum. The Reich Main Security Office requests the promotion of SS Oberfuehrer Dr. Six to Brigadefuehrer effective 31 January 1945". Then follows a long description of your Party membership, your SS membership, the badges and decorations you have on and it also says, "SIPO Einsatz." "SIPO" means "Security Police", does it not? That refer to the Einsatzgruppe on the Eastern front, does it not? thing which is not true, it says further on that "in his professional career on 9 November 1941, S was promoted by the RFSS" which means the Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler" to the SS Oberfuehrer for outstanding service in the Security Police, Einsatz in the East" and so on. I am going to give you this letter so that you can take a look at it. Will you explain, please, to the Tribunal, why it is that this SS correspondence refers to your activities with the Security Police, Einsatz from 22 June to 28 August, 1941, specifically saying East Einsatz and again refers to your promotion by Himmler, because of your outstanding service in the Security Police, Einsatz in the East, when you just went to collect archives and you didn't even do that well, you tell us.
A. The proposal was made by Erlinger, by Erlinger as deputy. That is, that is another man. This is not Streckenbach. Therefore, evidently in his proposal list, he must have referred to this list of the 9th of November, because the wording is exactly the same as the promotion list of November, and when I consider -
Q. Just a moment: The wording is not the same. Let me refresh your memory on that too. The letter from Himmler said "For Outstanding service in Einsatz" and the letter you have before you says "For outstanding service in Security Police Einsatz in the East." It is a little more specific. You haven't answered my question: In view of the story you have been telling us, that you were just collecting archives, how do you explain all this referring to your outstanding service with the Police and with the Einsatz in the East?
A. It says here, I repeat; "for special merits in the Security Police East" he was promoted. I see no large difference between the word Einsatz and Einsatz in the Security Police and the fact that I was a member of the Security Service and that for this Security Service I was in charge of Vorkommando Moscow is without doubt because Office VII was a part of the Security Police and the SD and, therefore, there is no special emphasis or difference as compared against the term used in 1941. It is only a special term which refers to my activity at that time.
Q. Tell me this. You notice it says, "SIPO Einsatz, 22 June 1941 to 28 August 1941, East Einsatz." Now you told us that on the 22nd of June you were ordered to establish the Vorkommando Moscow.
You told us that on the 20th of August, eight days sooner than your records show, you left the Vorkommando Moscow and that Vorkommando Moscow was not part of an Einsatzgruppe, even though the reports show it to be part of an Einsatzgruppe. Now here the letter again indicates that you were active with the Einsatzgruppe.
A. It does not say so, Mr. Prosecution.
Q. It says, "SIPO Einsatz," for those dates you gave plus eight more days.
A. Yes.
Q. East Einsatz.
A. Yes.
Q. Does that mean archive collecting to you?
A. In any case the fact exists that Office VII established the Vorkommando Moscow and that they acted also for their purposes in the East. This is not in contrast because otherwise it should read here "within Einsatzgruppe B." The fact that Vorkommando Moscow was active for the Reich Security Main Office, I never doubted for one moment. I merely said that it was not a part of Einsatzgruppe B.
Q. How do you reconcile your story that you were reprimanded by your superior officers; that you never were a part of an Einsatzgruppe, certainly not Einsatzgruppe B, with the fact that in your personal files you have a letter from Himmler promoting you for your outstanding service in the Einsatz and that in your letter recommending you for promotion to Brigadefuehrer in the SS gives the dates of your activity with the Einsatz and when it says more specifically that you were promoted for outstanding service in the Security Police Einsatz in the East , to me that doesn't resemble archive collecting either. That is, perhaps you can explain it, the same as you have explained everything else?
years after my appointment, that is, in 1941. Furthermore, it is a fact that another man proposed this and it is not the same man who made the proposal in 1941.
Q. So two people made the same mistake, Himmler and Erlinger, is that what you are saying?
A. No, the second is based upon the first, so to speak. The second used the same basis.
Q. And Himmler made the first mistake and Erlinger copied Himmler, although he didn't have the dates of the Einsatzgruppe, he out them down somehow or other, in order to get you a promotion, he told you the dates, which you conveniently forgot, since that was the week they were doing all the killing.
A. Himmler was sent the suggestions. The suggestions were made by the personnel offices. The basic files used are the same, and it is known that the proposals always painted a very beautiful picture and they emphasized all the details to get the promotion through.
Q. Is that the best explanation you have for that?
A. Apart from the fact that the proposal is based on the same basis as the one of the 9th of November, and that there were two different people who made these proposals on the same basis, and that it is also true that Himmler signed them, I have no further explanation. But I must say again that from this it does not become evident that Vorkommando Moscow was a part of Einsatzgruppe B.
got the dates 22 June 1941 to 28 August 1941, for your activity in the Security Police Einsatz in the East? You have told us that you left on the 20th of August, and that our documents showing killings after the 20th of August, and even immediately after, happened as soon as you left. And here you have an official letter saying, that you were with the Security Police Einsatz. until the 28th of August. Where did Erlinger get that information? that on the 20th of August I actually left, and not on the 28th, and I can only say tint after all the witnesses, the living witnesses, who saw when I departed, are more credible than the stated figure in the document books, the probative value of which I do not know, I shall prove that I left on the 20th of August. I think I can find manifold proof of this. My question is:
Q Do you know how Erlinger got that date, 28th of August 1941?
A I do not know ether he received the date, the 28th. It might have been the 20th. It can be a mistake in typing. It may be any mistake. I can only state, and I shall prove, that I left on the 20th, and the men who can bear me out are manifold. I do not know where Herr Erlinger is. Otherwise, he would have to bear me out on that. least as far as that 28th goes?
Q I also notice in this latter that it says, "SS Oberfuehrer Dr. Six is an active and proven National Socialist." Do you notice that?
Q That is true, isn't it?
Q Now let us go back a little bit. When did you first learn of the order to annihilate the Jews?
A You mean the year 1941?
Q That's right.
Q Where?
Q From whom? Einsatzkommnado 9 in Minsk.
Q Tell us something about it, That was the conversation like? He had a certain scientific knowledge and training; he spoke Russian -training concerning the killing of Jews, too. these particular questions were carried out, and he asked mo whether he would be employed in this here, too. out executive measures. executive measures, as yon call thorn -- I call them the murder of defenseless Jews -- is that what you wean by executive measures? measures.
Q What do you mean by executive measures.... writing letters to Himmler, or reading archives. What does executive measures mean? interrogations, etc. including shootings.
Q Interrogations and imprisonment, etc. By etcetera you mean taking people out and shooting them down, isn't that correct?
A He didn't ask me that. He gave me that one answer, and that had nothing to do with it.
Q Now, Professor Dr. Six, you are telling us about executive measures, and you say that means imprisonment, interrogations, etcetera. Isn't it a fact, known to you now and known to you then, that executive measures meant taking the Jews out,all of them, and killing them? Now answer that question.
A I wasn't present. used.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Ferencz, he already answered that basic question, and now he is getting off on a side track. You asked him when did he first learn of the order to annihilate Jews. He said between July 7th and July 10th. Now, that is the answer to the question. He learned of the order to annihilate Jews at that time. Now proceed from that point. BY MR. FERENCZ: the Jews? executions of Jews.
QA Is that all you said to him? He says -- "Will you carry out executions of Jews?" -- and the first time you hear this you said, "My Commando does not carry out executions of Jews." Is that all?
A I said, we are not concerned in it. It is not our task, nor our assignment.
Q If that was the first time you heard of it, weren't you surprised, didn't you ask him "What do you mean -- executions of Jews?" or was it customary to have someone come to you and tell you, "I am carrying out executions of defenseless peoples" -- and you didn't ask him anything about it? Please try to be a little more credible.
and he told me that he had found it out at his garrison -- I don't know what name he mentioned -- he had been told then that it was an assignment; and I learned it then, and I told him that this was not our task.
Q You didn't tell him, "That sounds to me like a shame and a scandal" -- did you?
A I told him we had nothing to do with it; it is not our assignment. or shame, or displeasure, at this prospect of German soldiers or troops murdering defenseless people? measures. elimination of Jewry you never had any knowledge. Tell me, between yesterday and today, when did you suddenly acquire this knowledge?
A What general measures; what special measures?
Q Let me read you from the transcript. You were being questioned about your activities of Vorkommando Moscow, and the question was, "Well, then, before your march with the Advance Commando Moscow, did you receive any knowledge about the execution order? Answer: Yes. Question: When? Answer: when the leaders of other Commandos arrived, these questions --"
Q "......these questions naturally were mentioned and discussed. But I myself -- and I have to make a point in stating this -- had no knowledge about the general elimination of Jewry. Especially about the extermination of Women and children. As I said, I had no knowledge, and never received any knowledge."
When did you change your mind, between yesterday and today? about information. I emphasized I received information from the leaders of the Commandos, but I received no instructions. I made a difference between instruction and information. "instruction" and "knowledge"?
Q Does than transcript say "knowledge"?
A Then it would have to be examined. I said information and instruction.
Q Information and instruction, is what you said?
A Dr. I said I received information, and I have not received instruction.
Q Let me read it to you again: "As I said, I had no knowledge and never received any knowledge." Does that mean "instructions" to you?
Q Now it should. I agree. You didn't say it yesterday, though. Now, to whom did you protest about this general order about the elimination of the Jews? certain personality. The only possibility to lodge a protest would have been in Berlin; therefore, I never discussed this question in the given situation, and I could never actually protest.
Q Isn't it a fact that you were in favor of the elimination of Jewry, and therefore you didn't protest?
Q It isn't a fact that you were in favor of the elimination of Jewry? You just said no. Now, are you changing your answer to yes? shootings of the Jews.
Q When did you agree to the elimination of the Jews?
A I don't know what you mean.
Q You didn't agree in June or July. Isn't it a fact that you did agree at some time to the general elimination of the Jews? is that correct?
A What do you mean - agree to it? That I just said, "I agree to the shooting of the Jews." Is that what you mean?
Q I mean this. You heard of the order, or you gained knowledge, of the program to exterminate the Jews. You said you didn't protest to anybody because there was nobody there to protest to; whereas, it is actually a fact, and you know it, that you didn't protest because you were in favor of the program. Now, isn't that true? East because there were no superiors to whom I could protest.
Q Didn't you in fact tell the others that it was & good thing to eliminate the Jews, that it was necessary - as a good National Socialist didn't you further Hitler's program?
Q You did not?
Q What kind of a National Socialist were you? You read the report that you were a good National Socialist. You admit that you knew Hitler's program concerning the Jews.
Are you now trying to tell us that you were not in favor of that program? I could say - I tried to express it. I have no possibility now, or at least words do not suffice, for the expression of what I have to say. a loss of words. Isn't it a fact that as a good National Socialist you favored the program to exterminate the Jews? That you spoke in favor of it... if you want me to be more specific. Yes or no?
Q Then let me show you that you are a liar. I have here a confidential report made at the Works Session of the Consultants on Jewish questions on German missions in Europe. 3 and 4 April 1944. Krummhuekel.Do you remember that?
Q Were you there?
Q Did you make a speech? it. going to put to me.
Q You have seen the document, haven't you?
A No, I never saw it. And I always doubted the authenticity of it.
Q Well, let me read it to you. Perhaps you will remember. This was a session of members of the Foreign Office, was it not, to discuss the Jewish question. Is that correct?
A No. It was not. It was a session of the Foreign Office in which an information office was to be erected to deal with the question of a counter intelligence on so-called Jewish propaganda.
Q Did you make a speech on the Jewish question at that time? contained in the minutes....I just spoke about the Jewish organizations as such.
Q But you did say something about the Jewish question. You remember that? speech can be proved outside the context of the speech, and I can therefore, without a confidential agent, menage to remember what I said at that time. Therefore, it is of main importance for me, and it is only relevant what I know and what I can produce here as evidence.
Q At that meeting didn't they discuss the measures which were being taken to murder all the Jews? I was only for two hours at this meeting, and I left immediately afterwards. Therefore I could not have knowledge on any questions that were dealt with there from own experience or later informations. but while you were there, nothing happened, is that correct? bear me out, and they will say that after two hours, after I had delivered my short speech which lasted 30 minutes, I left.
Q Forty people weren't discussing the same subject, were they? They were 40 of a kind, were they?
Q Let me read you something. These are the minutes of the meeting, end it says here, in parenthesis: "As to the details of the state of the executive measures" -- and we just discussed executive measures -"in the various countries reported by the Consultant, are to be kept secret.
It has been decided not to enter them in the protocol." Now, let me read the minutes of what you said.... I will only read parts of it, though they are all consistent.
A It is a excerpt, Mr. Prosecutor. It is not the complete text.
Q No?
A The Minutes are not signed. They are not signed with a name.
Q For a man who hasn't seen this report you certainly know a lot about it.
A I am only asking. You said it was a confidential report. that it is Unsigned, that it is just an abstract; and a minute ago you said you never saw it. Now let me read what it says for the benefit of the Court - the Court doesn't know it. by now I know what it says in this report, what it is supposed to say and what it does not say.
Q Your knowledge of archives is amazing, Professor. It says here, under Professor Six: "Elimination of Eastern Jewry to deprive Jewry of biological resource. The Jewish question must be solved not only for German but also internationally". Jewish question you mean going for all documents in the archives and go study them somewhere. what did you mean by that? uttered, and I have no confidence in confidential reports which bear no signature, and I have no confidence in a witness who cannot be cross examined in this Court. Furthermore, I have heard about the participants and I have asked for affidavits to be made out, because this statement is so extensive and of such importance that it appeared to me even during the first days of my interrogation - and I thought that it must be corrected as from then.
Q What kind of a National Socialist were you if you didn't believe in those ideals? You mean that you repudiated Hitler? Is that what you are trying to tell us now? You were a good National Socialist but you did not believe in what Hitler proclaimed end carried out throughout the world? Is that what you are trying to tell us?
Q Yes or no. Then you can explain it.
A May I have this question repeated. It is very complicated.
Q It is not very complicated. You said you didn't make those statements, statements furthering the annihilation of the Jews. Your reports have shown that you were a good national Socialist. I am asking you if you repudiated the Hitler doctrine for the annihilation of the Jews.
A Evidently I said that, yes. I give an affirmative -
Q You say now that you repudiate Hitler's doctrine?
MR. FERENCZ: I have no further questions, your Honor.
DR. ULMER: Why I ask that this last document, so-called Krummhuebler Speech, be shown to me -- or has it been submitted? I never saw it.
MR. FERENCZ: I will introduce the document in evidence, Your Honor, and at that time the defense counsel will have access to it.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
(A recess was taken.)
MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. MAYER: Counsel for Defendant Klingelhoefer: tomorrow, Tuesday, and the day after, Wednesday, in order to prepare his examination, I ask that he be excused from the sessions?
THE PRESIDENT: The Defendant Klingehoefer will be excused from attendance tomorrow and Wednesday in accordance with the request by his counsel.
DR. MAYER: Thank you, Your Honor.
DR. ERICH M. MAYER: Counsel for Defendant Braune: Braune.
THE PRESIDENT: The Defendant Braune will be excused from attendance in court tomorrow in accordance with the request of his defense counsel.
DR. KOESSL FOR DR. GAWLIK: For the Defendant Seibert: from attendance in order to prepare his defense.
THE PRESIDENT: The Defendant Seibert is excused from attendance in Court tomorrow Tuesday and Wednesday.
DR. ULMER: For the Defendant Dr. Six:
May I address a few brief questions on re-direct examination?
THE PRESIDENT: You may proceed:
DEFENDANT, DR. SIX BY DR. ULMER: research? against Jewdom for Streicher or for whom was it prepared? ly the Jewish philosophy and Jewish Arab philosophy and the German philo sophy, concerning mysticism and other philosophies that was the program which I was to develop in this research but it never really come to that.
Q What scientific publications did Ovvice VII make during that time?
A Five or six books were published. I will give a few, for example, "Die Illuminaten", that is Free Masonary, an organization between 1790 and 1820, and another one was called the "Golden Rosen Kreuzer", that is a mystic organization in the 18th century; then the influence of the Great Prussian Landes Logen, and the participation of the dynasty in Germany, altogether there were five or six books.
Q About Jewry no publications were made?
Q Now another problem. How strong was an EinsatzKommando with executive tasks compared with the personal of your Archive Commando which amounted to 23 men? whole commando in front of me and, therefore, I can only say, what I heard, that the so called Sonder Commando had 80 to 100 men and an Einsatz Commando about 200 men, but I did see that with my own eyes.
Q And with the Vorkommando Moscow you were Standartenfuehrer?
Q At that time what was your rank as a soldier in the army? Waffen SS. I had been out on leave and had been requested for this task.
Q What was your military rank in the Waffen SS at the time? relieved only later. as an organization? or police troop?