on that is that both you and Hitler and, the whole conference on the part of the Germans, showed a very stern and uncompromising attitude, and you presented the demands and gave a very short period of time for Great Britain to accept them. In fact, so short, that it was impossible for Chamberlain to go back to his cabinet and get the approval of the cabinet. It was that one minor point that caused the whole thing to fall. A. That can't be, because it was about Sudetenland. Q. Yes. A. But afterwards, after Berchtesgaden was the conference of Godesberg; after the Godesberg conference was the conference at Munich. You see there were three conferences. There cannot be the question of days, because Chamberlain then came to Godesberg. They had another conference with the Fuehrer, about which I told you before, and then afterwards at Munich. Q. That is right. A. One thing I can tell you certainly. I'm sorry I have no recollection of what the Fuehrer told me as to what he discussed with Chamberlain, I don't remember that, because the Fuehrer generally when he did that had a talk like that, he only informed me very shortly in a very few words. He said a few things about it. He never was very lengthy in his explanation of his talks with statesmen. Sometimes only weeks or months afterwards I really knew and heard what had been going on. So I don't remember at the moment, and I have already thought it over for a few months, I don't recollect what the Fuehrer told me about this conversation with Chamberlain. The general outline I remember, that I had the feeling that the Fuehrer was right. I didn't have the feeling that Chamberlain was discontent. That I should have said to Sir Horace Wilson, that this or this should be done, while the Fuehrer was discussing with Chamberlain-I didn't know what the Fuehrer would say to Chamberlain-that is to my mind quite out of the question. I would never commit myself or do anything without knowing what the Fuehrer had said to Chamberlain. May I point out to you again, once he discussed with me before what he was going to tell the statesmen; very, very seldom, very, very seldom, perhaps once. Then he said a few words, "I am going to say this or that." But at most of these conferences the Fuehrer went into the conference-it shows you how much he had all these matters in his head and in his hands, that he did not inform me before and only in short afterwards what had been discussed. *September 29, 1938. Excerpts from Testimony of Joachim von Ribbentrop, The Meaning of "Weltauffassung" Q. [In English] Do you have a definition for Weltauffassung? A. Weltauffassung? Q. Yes. When you say "World perception" do you mean that? A. That is very difficult really. I always translated it as world perception, but I don't know whether that is the right translation. Q. I have heard the term used so many times, and I cannot find anybody yet, who can tell me what it is. As a matter of fact, I have had some people tell me that that is the reason for the present disaster that has come upon Germany. Still nobody can tell me what it is. A. Well, to be quite frank, I think that it is to a certain extent right. I couldn't tell you myself. I mean really, definitely, I have so often thought about this during these last months, how this really all came about. I don't know, I think if you ask a dozen party people to give you a definition of the word Weltauffassung, you probably would get different opinions. I mean you would get from everyone a different one. Of course, some fundamental things are quite clear: It is a question to have the National tendencies and; secondly, to have Socialistic tendencies. I mean these are the good parts of the Weltauffassung, national states. Q. How could it be a good part of something, when you don't know what that something is? A. What it means as a whole. I mean if you ask me for a real definition, I would not be able to give it to you. Q. I was told that the German women don't use rouge on their lips because of Weltauffassung. A. That is not right. Q. Everything seems to be done in the name of that. A. That is not quite right, because I have seen women in the Fuehrer's presence, who had rouge on, and the Fuehrer didn't mind it at all. That is not true. That is absolutely not true, but there were radical fools who went in that direction. Q. Do you think that he knew what it was? A. Personally, to be quite frank, I cannot give you a definite real definition of that word. Q. Do you think of anybody who could give us a definition on it? How about Rosenberg? A. I should ask Rosenberg, because he was always considered the Dogmatica of the Party. He may know about it, but I heard the Fuehrer say, about Rosenberg's book, that he didn't understand it. Q. Everything was done in the name of that particular thing and yet nobody seems to know what it means. A. I am not surprised. I told you that before. Q. You say "world perception" and by that you mean the same as Weltauffassung; is that correct? A. It is the translation which I always used. I don't know whether that is right or not. Q. What is in your mind when you say world perception? Q. Yes; in other words, what do you mean by world perception? A. What the Fuehrer and the party meant, and were aiming at, I could not tell you. I couldn't give you an answer, I don't know. But what sectors it comprised, of course, there is the racial question, the religious question, socialism, nationalism, and so on. I mean those are vague sectors, which are comprised, were meant by this word, but a definition, what is really meant as to these various sectors, I could not tell you. I don't know. I never have known and I never could find out. IV. WILHELM KEITEL Testimony of Wilhelm Keitel, taken at Nurnberg, Germany, 28 September 1945, 1530-1700, by Col. John H. Amen, IGD, OUSCC. Also present: Pfc. Richard W. Sonnenfeldt, Interpreter; Pvt. Clair A. Van Vleck, Court Reporter. The Truth about Rommel's "Suicide" Q. Do you appreciate the fact that you are still under oath? A. Yes, I am conscious of the fact. Q. Are you going to tell the truth? A. Yes; that is self-understood. Q. You are not going to commit perjury today? A. Only if I don't know something, I must be able to say so. Q. How is your recollection today? Better or worse than it was yesterday? A. Through those many years my memory is not such as I hoped it to be. Unfortunately, I did not keep any diary and thus I have only a few recollections. Q. Does it go back as far as October of '44? A. I hope so. Q. So do I. Do you know General Burgdorf? Q. What is his first name? A. I don't know his first name. The only thing I know is that he was a successor of General Schmundt. Q. That is right. What was his official position? A. Chief of the Army Personnel Office. Q. For how long a time did he hold that position? A. Ever since the death of General Schmundt; that is, since August, 1944. Q. Did you have many dealings with him? A. I really had few dealings with him, but he was constantly in the headquarters and he also took over the functions of the Chief Adjutant to the Fuehrer. I saw him almost every day. Q. At the headquarters? A. Yes; in the headquarters. Q. That included October '44, did it not? A. Yes, certainly. He was in the headquarters with few interruptions since August 1944. He was in the habit of leaving for a few days, every once in a while, to go to the Main Personnel Office of the Army, which was not at the headquarters. Q. Then he would come back again; is that right? A. Yes; he returned then. Q. Did you also know General Maisel? A. Yes. General Maisel was one of the assistants in the Personnel Office of the Army. He had either a department, or a group of offices there. Q. What was his official position? A. I believe he was deputy to General Burgdorf. Q. During what period of time? A. I believe from the moment when Burgdorf became the Chief of the Personnel Office of the Army, Maisel as the senior officer present, became his deputy. Q. Did you have occasion to see him around headquarters, frequently? A. No, I only saw him very rarely in the headquarters because he worked constantly as a Director in the Personnel Office of the Army. As far as I know, he only was very rarely at headquarters. Q. When did you last see General Burgdorf? A. In Berlin, in the Reichschancellory. Q. When? A. That must have been either on the 22d or the 23d of April. I don't know exactly which day, but it must have been either the 22d or the 23d of April. Q. '45? A. Yes; 1945. That is April of this year. Q. What has happened to him, if you know? A. That I do not know. I never heard from him again. I don't know whether he is a prisoner of war or even if he is alive. Q. When did you last see General Maisel? A. It must have been either at the end of August or in September 1944. I know that for certain, I saw him there. Q. You saw him after that too? A. I cannot remember that. I only saw him at conferences, when I asked him to report to me in Berlin. I don't believe that I ever saw him again after September. Q. I say you did, in case it is of any interest to you. A. I cannot recollect that at the present time. Q. Are you acquainted with a Captain Alldinger? A. Possibly you could tell me with which department he was. Was he with the Personnel Office, or some adjutant, or what? Q. Possibly I could and possibly I couldn't. In any event, I am asking you whether you knew him or not? A. The name is not unknown to me. However, I cannot remember either his face or his functions. There was also a General Alldinger who was a general from Wurttemberg and I know him well. Q. You know what I am leading up to, don't you? A. No; that I don't know. Q. You have no idea at all? A. I don't know, for I had nothing to do with the Personnel Office of the Army. I only saw Burgdorf every day. Alldinger, I don't know. The name is not strange to me, but I don't know just what functions he had. Q. Don't you remember a little job that was pulled off by those two generals in October of 1944? Forget about Alldinger. A. Burgdorf and Alldinger, yes. The two generals: Burgdorf and Maisel? |