On 3 September 1944, Anne Frank and the seven others living in hiding at the Secret Annex were put on the last transport to Auschwitz, along with over a thousand other Jewish prisoners. One of the cruellest jokes (for lack of a better word) the Nazis played was to pretend these journeys were return trips
However, that transport was the last transport from Westerbork to Auschwitz. Anne Frank, her family, and friends weren’t the only ones on that transport. There were another 780 or so people on that train. I will not go into all of their stories. I will pick just a few of them—children like Anne Frank.
Louis Emanuel Levin was born in The Hague on 29 March 1929. He was murdered at Bergen-Belsen on 31 May 1945. He was 16 years old at the time of death.
Alexander van Leeuwen was from Tilburg and born on 12 April 1929. He died near Auschwitz on 15 March 1945, only a few weeks after the liberation.
Duifje Gans was born in Amsterdam on 13 June 1933. She was murdered at Auschwitz on 6 September 1944. She had reached the age of 11.
Duifje Gans was a daughter of Aron Gans and Rijntje van Gelderen. Her mother Rijntje van Gelderen died on 3 January 1939 in Amsterdam. Her father remarried Josephina Loyen a year later.
In September 1943, Duifje Gans was brought to Limburg in the Southern part of the Netherlands. Going into hiding, they were taken in by a family on the Stationsweg in Venray. On the night of 16–17 August 1944, three police officers from Eindhoven raided the home of the Loogman sisters in Venray and arrested ten-year-old Duifje Gans. The child cried terribly because, despite her young age, she knew very well what this arrest meant. Duifje went via the police station in Eindhoven, to Vught, and onto Westerbork.
Sjelomo Hamburger was born in Amersfoort on 22 January 1942. He was murdered at Auschwitz on 6 September 1944. He was two years old.
Sjelomo Hamburger was the son of Samuel Hamburger (a son of Salomon Hamburger and Jessie Hamburger-Hamburger from Amersfoort) and Marianne van Straten (a daughter of Louis van Straten en Minna Hes from Deil). Samuel and Marianne (aka Jenny) lived at Fahrenheitstraat 4 in Amersfoort. They were married on 25 August 1939 in Amersfoort, and their son Sjelomo was born there on 22 January 1942.
After the birth of their son, Samuel and Marianne decided to go into hiding with Sjelomo, to escape the persecution by the Nazis. However, on 8 June 1944, two-year-old Sjelomo was discovered by an Amersfoort policeman during a search for prohibited motion pictures in an attic room on the Schimmelpenninckstraat in Amersfoort. Sjelomo Hamburger had been hiding there since August 1942.
What happened to him afterwards is unknown. After his arrest at some point, he was transported to Westerbork, where he was deported with the last transport from Westerbork to Auschwitz on 3 September 1944. On arrival there, 6 September 1944, Sjelomo Hamburger was immediately murdered. His parents, Samuel and Marianne Hamburger survived the Holocaust by hiding.
Ursula Gerson was born in Münster, Germany, on 18 June 1936. She was murdered in Auschwitz on 6 September 1944. She was eight years old. She was the daughter of Ernst Gerson and Julia Gerson-Lippers.
Ernst Gerson’s and his family became victims of increasing aggression, intimidation and violence in the 1930s. Ernst was arrested and imprisoned several times on unclear suspicions.
During the Kristallnacht of 9–10 November 1938, the home of Ernst’s parents became the target of anti-Jewish aggression and violence. At that time, the decision to go to the Netherlands was made in mid-May 1938 to go to his wife’s sister, Bertha in Zwolle. As a result, the German government took away his German citizenship.
He was followed in June 1939 by his wife Sara Julia, daughter Ursula, his parents-in-law, the Lippers and Uncle Hugo. They went to the same Bertha, married to a Jewish Dutchman, Siegfried de Groot, from Zwolle.
The Gerson family then moved to Hattem at the end of 1939. At the time, Ursula attended the public primary school at Dorpsweg in Hattem.
In 1939, the same brother-in-law from Zwolle, Siegfried de Groot, started building a villa at 1 van Heemstralaan in Hattem. Due to the outbreak of the war, the first stone was not laid until January 1941 by both the children of Siegfried and Bertha. However, construction progressed slowly.
The Gerson family then found shelter with the Berends family near the Molecaten estate.
In September 1942, they were given another shelter on the Molecaten estate of Baron W. van Heeckeren van Molecaten. Several Jews were hiding in different places on this estate.
Ernst’s parents-in-law, Isidor and Martha Lippers-Stehberg and Uncle Hugo also found a hiding place in this shelter.
In the general police magazine of 17 September 1942, the mayor of Hattem already appealed for the arrest, detention, and arraignment of the Gerson family. It was reported that they had left their homes without the required permits.
Once again on February 25, 1943, the arrest of all members of the Gerson family and the in-laws was requested.
At the beginning of September 1944, the Gerson family and the 14-year-old Jewish boy Georg Cohn, who was also in hiding with them, were transported to Auschwitz after being betrayed via Westerbork on 3 September.
Sara Julia Gerson-Lippers, daughter Ursula, sister Bertha, brother-in-law Siegfried and their children, her parents, Uncle Hugo and Georg Cohn, did not survive the war.
The parents of Ernst and his brother did not survive the war in Germany and were murdered in the death camps.
Ernst Gerson miraculously survived the war after several concentration camps and returned to Hattem. After the war, he started again in the textile trade.
Annie Koekoek was born in Amsterdam on 5 December 1935. She was murdered at Auschwitz on 6 September 1944 at eight years of age.
Annie Koekoek and Mary Winnik hid in Velden, a hamlet near Venlo. They were picked up on Tuesday, 4 July 1944 by order of the Chief Warden from the addresses Vilgert 247 and 267. They were held in a Venlo police cell from 4 July, 5:30 p.m. to Thursday, 13 July, 5:15 a.m. They were then taken to Westerbork with Otto Sternheim (68 years old) from Arcen and the spouses Siegmund Moses (57 years old) and Regina David (64 years old) from Venlo. Annie Koekoek, along with the others, was taken from Westerbork to Auschwitz on Sunday, 3 September 1944—the last transport.
Mary Winnik was born in Amsterdam on 22 August 1937. She was murdered in Auschwitz on 6 September 1944. Reached the age of seven years.
The Winnik family, with the exception of the father, were arrested on 26 May 1943, and taken to Camp Westerbork. They returned to Amsterdam on 17 July. Father Winnik was arrested on 13 August 1943, and transported from Westerbork to Auschwitz on September 21, where he would die in January 1945. His wife, son Appie and daughter Mary had already been taken to hiding places. Under her own name but with a date and place of birth on 1 August 1938 in Rotterdam, Mary was placed with the Heuvelmans family in the Velden hamlet of De Vilgert. There, she was arrested on 4 July 1944, possibly after betrayal, and taken to Auschwitz via Westerbork.
I am passionate about my site and I know you all like reading my blogs. I have been doing this at no cost and will continue to do so. All I ask is for a voluntary donation of $2, however if you are not in a position to do so I can fully understand, maybe next time then. Thank you.
To donate click on the credit/debit card icon of the card you will use. If you want to donate more then $2 just add a higher number in the box left from the PayPal link. Many thanks.
Music soothes the savage beast, that is what Shony Alex Braun must have thought when he played for the SS.
Shony’s story may seem like he had it relatively easy life, playing for the SS. However, I believe that could not be further from the truth. It wouldn’t take much for the SS to suddenly take a dislike to his music, potentially causing his death. Additionally, he would have known the fate of many around him.
Shony was born to religious Jewish parents in a small Transylvanian city. He began to learn the violin at age 5. His town was occupied by Hungary in 1940 and by Germany in 1944. In May 1944, he was deported to the Auschwitz camp in Poland. He was transferred to the Natzweiler camp system in France and then to Dachau,
This is one of the memories he had of that time.
“When I got out of the barrack, I figured when my turn comes to play, I’m gonna play which I feel comfortable. I’m gonna play either a sonatina by Dvorak, which I performed, in fact, later I performed in Radio Munich, but which…or I’m gonna play, uh, a Kreisler composition. But when, when I saw what I saw, and the violin in my hand, my mind went completely blank. Nothing came to me. And I said to myself, “God, how is it that sonatina starts? How is, how is, how is the, the Kreisler piece starts? My God, how, how does anything starts?” I couldn’t think of anything. And now I noticed, from the corner of my eyes, that the murderer Kapo picked up his iron pipe again and was walking toward me. And I knew I’m gonna be killed. I knew it. So my right hand and my left hand all of a sudden started moving in perfect harmony. And the Strauss Blue Danube was heard coming out of my violin.
Now, how? I never thought of the Blue Danube. Never. I heard it, in fact, I, I am even, hate to admit to you, I never even played it really. I heard it many times from the Gypsies, and my brother, who was a fantastic accordionist in his high school group. But playing, I was not even allowed to play anything else but classical. And the Kapo looked at, eagerly, to, to the SS, “When shall I whack him? When shall I hit him?” Instead, the SS guard was humming the melody and was beating the rhythm with his fingers–like 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 3. And he, he just smiled and, “Let him live.”
The camp was liberated by US troops in April 1945. In 1950, Shony Alex Braun immigrated to the United States and became a composer and a professional violinist. On 4 October 2022, he died in Los Angeles, California.
I am passionate about my site and I know you all like reading my blogs. I have been doing this at no cost and will continue to do so. All I ask is for a voluntary donation of $2, however if you are not in a position to do so I can fully understand, maybe next time then. Thank you.
To donate click on the credit/debit card icon of the card you will use. If you want to donate more then $2 just add a higher number in the box left from the PayPal link. Many thanks.
Like in Germany proper and other Nazi-occupied countries, the Holocaust wasn’t a sudden process but a gradual one.
On 1 September 1941, the Nazis introduced several measures against the Dutch Jews. On that day, the Nazis announced that from that moment on, Jewish students and teachers were no longer welcome at ordinary schools. They had to attend Jewish schools sometimes set up, especially for that purpose.
Announcements like the one below were published in local and national newspapers: “Pursuant to the order given by the Reichskommissar for the occupied Netherlands area, as of 1 September 1941, pupils of educational institutions […] who are of Jewish blood or are regarded as such may only receive instruction from teachers who are also of Jewish blood or as such are considered.”
On 1 September 1941, the announcement was in the Dutch newspapers. For Jewish students and teachers, this means that they are not allowed to return to their school after the summer holidays. This applied to Catholic or Protestant students who, according to the Nazis, were also of Jewish descent. The education segregation was in line with numerous anti-Jewish measures introduced by the occupying forces since July 1940.
To make Jews easily recognizable on the street, all German Jews aged six and older had to wear a star on their clothing from 1 September 1941. In the Netherlands, the measure came into force on 3 May 1942. The so-called Star of David was a six-pointed star made of yellow cloth containing the word Jew. The Jews had to purchase the stars and it became a punishable offence for a Jew not to wear their star.
Translation of the above: The Star of David Attention is drawn to the fact that the Star of David must be worn on the left side at chest height. The star should also be worn in courtyards, in front gardens and at house and street doors.
This wasn’t just a measure against the Jews but would have an impact because they would no longer have political representation. On 1 September 1941, Seyss-Inquart abolished the municipal and provincial councils. The Aldermen and deputies then became employees of mayors and provincial commissioners, respectively. The measure—based on the German Führerprinzip— prompted a large number of mayors to submit their resignations.
On 22 and 23 February 1941, Amsterdam was raided. 389 Jewish men were arrested and deported. Only two of them survived. Recent research shows that more than 100 men were gassed in Hartheim Castle. Mauthausen was recorded as an official place of death.
The 389 men were initially deported via Camp Schoorl to Buchenwald. Most of them subsequently moved to Mauthausen. Later investigation showed that at least 108, but probably 150 men, whose officially registered place of death was Mauthausen, were, in fact, gassed in Castle Hartheim. Lists of unnatural causes of death were kept in the Mauthausen camp administration. The Veränderungsbuch, the mutation book from Mauthausen, contains the names of the men who were murdered during secret actions in the gas chamber of Hartheim Castle. With the aid of this source, the actual death dates [of the majority of victims] were found—27 were murdered on 1 September 1941. One of them was Simon van Bever.
Simon was the son of Samson van Bever and Sientje Smeer. He was born in Amsterdam on 20 March 1913. His occupation was a wholesale buyer. He married Betje Zwarts in Amsterdam on 6 February 1935, a daughter of Abraham Zwarts and Sara Wertheijm. The couple had three children: Samson, Sara and Sientje; together with their mother, were murdered on 9 July 1943 in Sobibor. Simon was murdered in Mauthausen, or Castle Hartheim on 1 September 1941.
++++++++++++WARNING: CONTAINS A GRAPHIC IMAGE++++++++++++
I am always surprised by why some well-educated people are capable of the most heinous acts.
Otto Ohlendorf came from humble beginnings but showed academic aptitude. He attended the Gymnasium in Hildesheim, which meant an excellent opportunity in education, preparing him for university. Otto then studied law at two fine institutions, the Universities of Leipzig and Göttingen and the University of Pavia in northern Italy. He graduated in July 1933 with a Ph.D. in jurisprudence.
[Like me, I presume most will not know what jurisprudence is. It is the philosophy and theory of law. The primary concern is what the law is and what it ought to be. That includes questions of how persons and social relations are understood in legal terms and the values in and of law. Work counted as jurisprudence is philosophical, but it includes work that belongs to other disciplines, such as sociology, history, politics and economics.]
Afterwards, Ohlendorf secured a position as Director of Research at the Institute for World Economy and Maritime Transport in Kiel. This deep interest in economics carried over into work for the Reich Trade Group, where he quickly ascended the ladder.
Despite having this education and privilege, where he could have used his knowledge for good, he decided to go a different way.
Ohlendorf joined the SD in 1936 and became an economic consultant of the organisation. Like other talented academics, he had been recruited by SD talent scouts. Attached to the SS with the rank of SS-Hauptsturmführer, by 1939, he had obtained the rank SS-Standartenführer and was appointed as head of Amt III (SD-Inland) of the Reich Security Main Office (RSHA),
In June 1941, he was named commander of Einsatzgruppe D. In that capacity, he was responsible for the murder of at least 90,000 people.
By June 1942, Ohlendorf’s unit had rampaged through the Crimea and Ciscaucasia, exterminating Jews and other Soviet citizens. This brutal behaviour won Ohlendorf a Military Service Cross.
Transnistria was conquered by the Germans and Romanians in the summer of 1941. Before the war, some 300,000 Jews lived in the region. Tens of thousands were murdered by the Einsatzgruppen D, commanded by Otto Ohlendorf, and by German and Romanian soldiers. After the occupation, Transnistria became a concentration point for deported Jews [at the command of Ion Antonescu] from Bessarabia and Bukovina. The few survivors of the mass murders in Bessarabia and northern Bukovina were mostly deported and concentrated in ghettos and camps in Northern and Central Transnistria.
After the war, Ohlendorf was the main defendant in the Einsatzgruppen D case at the Nuremberg trials. He openly and unabashedly admitted his murderous actions during the war and explained why he thought his actions were justified. He was sentenced to death and hanged in 1951.
It’s vital to listen to or read the accounts of the survivors of the Holocaust, but just as essential is to read the testimonies of the perpetrators—just to see how warped their ideology was. Below is a part of the transcript of Ohlendorf’s testimony.
International Military Tribunal
January 3, 1946
COLONEL JOHN HARLAN AMEN (Associate Trial Counsel for the United States): May it please the Tribunal, I wish to call as a witness for the Prosecution, Mr. Otto Ohlendorf …
[Witness Otto Ohlendorf took the stand]
THE PRESIDENT: Otto Ohlendorf, will you repeat this oath after me” “I swear by God the Almighty and Omniscient that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.”
[The witness repeated the oath]
COL. AMEN: Will you try to speak slowly and pause between each question and answer.
OTTO OHLENDORF: Yes.
COL. AMEN: Where were you born?
OHLENDORF: In Hohen-Egelsen.
COL. AMEN: How old are you?
OHLENDORF: Thirty-eight years old.
COL. AMEN: When, if ever, did you become a member of the National Socialist Party?
OHLENDORF: 1925.
COL. AMEN: When, if ever, did you become a member of the SA?
OHLENDORF: For the first time in 1926.
COL. AMEN: When, if ever, did you become a member of the SS?
OHLENDORF: I must correct my answer to the previous question. I thought you were asking about my membership in the SS.
COL. AMEN: When did you become a member of the SA?
OHLENDORF: In the year 1925.
COL. AMEN: When, if ever, did you join the SD?
OHLENDORF: In 1936.
COL. AMEN: What was your last position in the SD?
OHLENDORF: Chief of Amt III in the RSHA….
COL. AMEN: Did you tell us for what period of time you continued as chief of Amt III?
OHLENDORF: I was part-time chief of Amt III from 1939 to 1945.
COL. AMEN: Turning now to the designation “Mobile Units” with the army shown in the lower right hand corner of the chaart, please explain to the Tribunal the significance of the terms “Einsatzgruppe” and “Einsatzkommando.”
OHLENDORF: The concept “Einsatzgruppe” was established after an agreement between the chiefs of the RSHA, OKW,(High Command of the Armed Forces) and OKH(Upper Command of the Arm), on the seperate use of Sipo(security police) units in the operational areas. The concept of “Einsatzgruppe” first appeared during the Polish campaign.
The agreement with the OKH and OKW however, was arrived at only before the beginning of the Russian campaign. This agreement specified that a representative of the chief of the Sipo and the SD would be assigned to the army groups, or armies, and that this official would have at his disposal mobile units of the Sipo and the SD in the form of an Einsatzgruppe, subdivided into Einsatzkommandos. The Einsatzkommandos would, on orders from the army group or army, be assigned to the individual army units as needed.
COL. AMEN: State, if you know, whether prior to the campaign against Soviet Russia, any agreement was entered into between the OKW, OKH, and RHSA?
OHLENDORF: Yes, the Einsatzgruppen and Einsatzkommandos, as I have just described them, were used on the basis of a written agreement between the OKW, OKH, and RHSA.
COL. AMEN: How do you know that there was such a written agreement?
OHLENDORF: I was repeatedly present during the negotiations which Albrecht and Schellenberg conducted with the OKH and OKW; and I also had a written copy of this agreement which was the outcome of these negotiations, in my own hands when I took over the Einsatzgruppe.
COL. AMEN: Explain to the Tribunal who Schellenberg was. What position, if any, did he occupy?
OHLENDORF: Schellenberg was, at the end, chief of Amt VI in the RHSA; at the time when he was conducting as the representative of Heydrich, he nelonged to the Amt VI.
COL. AMEN: On approximately what date did these negotiations take place?
OHLENDORF: The negotiations lasted several weeks. The agreement must have been reached one or two weeks before the beginning of the campaign.
COL. AMEN: Did you yourself ever see a copy of this written agreement?
OHLENDORF: Yes!
COL. AMEN: Did you ever have occasion to work with this written agreement?
OHLENDORF: Yes!
COL. AMEN: On more than one occasion?
OHLENDORF: Yes; in all questions arising out of the relationship between the Einsatzgruppen and the army.
COL. AMEN: Do you know where the original or any copy of that agreement is located today?
OHLENDORF: No.
COL. AMEN: To the best of your knowledge and recollection, please explain to the Tribunal the entire substance of this written agreement.
OHLENDORF: First of all, the agreement stated that Einsatzgruppen and Einsatzkommandos would be set up and used in the operational areas. This created a precedent, because until that time the army had, on its own responsibility, discharged the tasks which would now fall soley to the Sipo. The second was the regulations as to competence.
COL. AMEN: You’re going too fast. What is it that you say the Einsatzkommandos did under the agreement?
OHLENDORF: I said this was the relationship between the army and the Einsatzgruppen and the Einsatzkommandos. The agreement specified that the army groups or armies would be responsible for the movement and the supply of Einsatzgruppen, but that instructions for their activities would come from the chief of Sipo and the SD.
COL. AMEN: Let us understand. It is correct that an Einsatz group was to be attached to each army group or army?
OHLENDORF: Every army group was to have an Einsatzgruppe attached to it. The army group in its turn would then attach the Einsatzkommandos to th armies of the army group.
COL. AMEN: And was the army command to determine the area within which the Einsatz group was to operate?
OHLENDORF: The operational area of the Einsatzgruppe was already determined by the fact that it was attached to a specific army group and therefore moved with it, whereas the operational areas of the Einsatzkommandos were fixed by the army group or army.
COL. AMEN: Did the agreement also provide that the army command was to direct the time during which they were to operate?
OHLENDORF: That was included under the heading “movement.”
COL. AMEN: And, also, to direct any additional tasks that they were to operate?
OHLENDORF: Yes. Even though the chiefs of Sipo and SD had the right to issue instructions to them on their work, there existed a general agreement that the army was also entitled to issue orders to the Einsatzgruppen if the operational situation made it necessary.
COL. AMEN: What did the agreement provide with respect to the attachment of the Einsatz group command to this army command?
OHLENDORF: I can’t remember whether anything specific was contained in the agreement about that. At any rate a liason man between the army command and the SD was appointed.
COL. AMEN: Do you recall any other provisions of this written agreement?
OHLENDORF: I believe I can state the main contents of that agreement.
COL. AMEN: What position did you occupy with respect to this agreement?
OHLENDORF: From June 1941 to the death of Heydrich in June 1942, I led Einsatzgruppe D, and was the representative of the chief of the Sipo and the SD with the 11th Army.
COL. AMEN: And when was Heydrich’s death?
OHLENDORF: Heydrich was wounded at the end of May 1942, and died on 4 June 1942.
COL. AMEN: How much advance notice, if any, did you have of the campaign against Soviet Russia?
OHLENDORF: About four weeks.
COL. AMEN: How many Einsatz groups were there, and who were their respective leaders?
OHLENDORF: There were four Einsatzgruppen, Groups A, B, C, and D. Chief of Einsatzgruppe A was Stahlecker; chief of Einsatzgruppe B was Nebe; chief of Einsatzgruppe C, Dr. Rasche, and later, Dr.Thomas; chief of Einsatzgruppe D I myself, and later Bierkamp.
COL. AMEN: To which army was Group D attached?
OHLENDORF: Group D was not attached to any army group but was attached directly to the 11th Army.
COL. AMEN: Where did Group D operate?
OHLENDORF: Group D operated in the southern Ukraine.
COL. AMEN: Will you describe in more detail the nature and extent of the area in which Group D originally operated, naming the cities or territories?
OHLENDORF: The northernmost city was Cernauti; then southward through Mohilev-Podolsk, Yampol, then eastward Zuvalje, Czervind, Melitopol, Mariopol, Taganrog, Rostov, and the Crimea.
COL. AMEN: What was the ultimate objective of Group D?
OHLENDORF: Group D was held in reserve for the Caucasus, for an army group which was to operate in the Caucasus.
COL. AMEN: When did Grooup D commence to move into Soviet Russia?
OHLENDORF: Group D left Duegen on 21 June and reached Pietra Namsk in Romania in three days. There the first Einsatzkommandos were already being demanded by the army, and they immediately set off for the destinations named by the army. The entire Einsatzgruppe was put into operation at the beginning of July.
COL. AMEN: You are referring to the 11th Army?
OHLENDORF: Yes.
COL. AMEN: In what respects, if any, were the official duties of the Einsatz groups concerned with Jews and Communist commissars?
OHLENDORF: The instructions were that in the Russian operational areas of the Einsatzgruppen the Jews, as well as the Soviet political commissars, were to be liquidated.
COL. AMEN: And when you say “liquidated” do you mean “killed”?
OHLENDORF: Yes, I mean “killed”.
COL. AMEN: Prior to the opening of the Soviet campaign, did you attend a conference at Pretz?
OHLENDORF: Yes, it was a conference at which the Einsatzgruppen and the Einsatzkommandos were informed of their tasks and were given the necessary orders.
COL. AMEN: Who was present at that conference?
OHLENDORF: The cjiefs of the Einsatzgruppen and the commanders of the Einsatzkommandos and Streckenbach of the RHSA who transmitted the orders of Heydrich and Himmler.
COL. AMEN: What were those orders?
OHLENDORF: Those were the general orders of the normal work of the Sipo and the SD, and in addition the liquidation order which I have already mentioned.
COL. AMEN: And that conference took place on approximately what date?
OHLENDORF: About three or four days before the mission.
COL. AMEN: So that before you commenced to march into Soviet Russia you received orders at this conference to exterminate the Jews and Communist functionaries in addition to the regular professional work of the Security Police and SD; is that correct?
OHLENDORF: Yes.
COL. AMEN: Did you, personally, have any conversation with Himmler respecting any communication from Himmler to the chiefs of army groups and armies concerning this mission?
OHLENDORF: Yes. Himmler told me that before the beginning of the Russian campaign Hitler had spoken of this mission to a conference of the army groups and the army chiefs – no, not the army chiefs but the commanding generals – and had instructed the commanding generals to provide the necessary support.
COL. AMEN: So that you can testify that the chiefs of the army groups and the armies had been similarly informed of these orders for the liquidation of the Jews and Soviet functionaries?
OHLENDORF: I don’t think it is quite correct to put it in that form. They had no orders for liquidation; the order for the liquidation was given to Himmler to carry out, but since this liquidation took place in the operational area of the army group or the armies, they had to be ordered to provide support. Moreover, without such instructions to the army, the activities of the Einsatzgruppen would not have been possible.
COL. AMEN: Did you have any other conversation with Himmler concerning this order?
OHLENDORF: Yes, in late summer of 1941 Himmler was in Nikolaiev. He assembled the leaders and men of the Einsatzkommanos, repeated to them the liquidation order, and pointed out that the leaders and men who were taking part in the liquidation bore no personal responsibility for the execution of this order. The responsibility was his, alone, and the Führer’s.
COL. AMEN: And you yourself heard that said?
OHLENDORF: Yes.
COL. AMEN: Do you know whether this mission of the Einsatz group was known to the army group commanders?
OHLENDORF: This order and the execution of these orders were known to the commanding general of the army.
COL. AMEN: How do you know that?
OHLENDORF: Through conferences with the army and through instructions that were given by the army on the execution of the order.
COL. AMEN: Was the mission of the Einsatz groups and the agreement between OKW, OKH, and RSHA known to the other leaders in the RSHA?
OHLENDORF: At least some of them knew it, since some of the leaders were also active in the Einsatzgruppen and Einsatzkommandos in the course of time. Furthermore, the leaders who were dealing with the organization and legal aspects of the Einsatzgruppen also knew of it.
COL. AMEN: Most of the leaders came from the RSHA, did they not?
OHLENDORF: Which leaders?
COL. AMEN: Of the Einsatz groups?
OHLENDORF: No, one can’t say that. The leaders of in the Einsatzgruppen and Einsatzkommandos came from all over the Reich.
COL. AMEN: Do you know whether the mission and the agreement were known to Kaltenbrunner?
OHLENDORF: After his assumption of office Kaltenbrunner had to deal with these questions and consequently must have known details of the Einsatzgruppen which were offices of his.
COL. AMEN: Who was the commanding officer of the 11th Army?
OHLENDORF: At first, Riter von Schober; later Von Manstein.
COL. AMEN: Will you tell the Tribunal in what way or ways the command officer of the 11th Army directed or supervised Einsatz Group D in carrying out its liquidation activities?
OHLENDORF: An order from the 11th Army was sent to Nikolaiev that liquidations were to take place only at a distance of not less than two hundred kilometeres from the headquarters of the commanding general.
COL. AMEN: Do you recall any other occasions?
OHLENDORF: In Simferopol the army command requested the Einsatzkommandos in its area to hasten liquidations, because famine was threatening and there was a great housing shortage.
COL. AMEN: Do you know how many persons were liquidated by Einsatz Group D under your command?
OHLENDORF: In the year between June 1941 to June 1942 the Einsatzkommandos reported ninety thousand people liquidated.
COL. AMEN: Did that include men, women, and children?
OHLENDORF: Yes.
COL. AMEN: On what do you base those figures?
OHLENDORF: On reports sent by the Einsatzkommandos to the Einsatzgruppen.
COL. AMEN: Were those reports submitted to you?
OHLENDORF: Yes.
COL. AMEN: And you saw them and read them?
OHLENDORF: I beg your pardon?
COL. AMEN: And you saw and read those reports personally?
OHLENDORF: Yes.
COL. AMEN: And it is on those reports that you base the figures you have given the Tribunal?
OHLENDORF: Yes.
COL. AMEN: Do you know how those figures compare with the number of persons liquidated by other Einsatzgruppen?
OHLENDORF: The figures which I saw of other Einsatzgruppen are considerably larger.
COL. AMEN: That was due to what factor?
OHLENDORF: I believe that to a large extent the figures submitted by the other Einsatzgruppen were exaggerated.
COL. AMEN: Did you see reports of liquidations from the other Einsatz units from time to time?
OHLENDORF: Yes.
COL. AMEN: And those reports showed liquidations exceeding those of Group D; is that correct?
OHLENDORF: Yes.
COL. AMEN: Did you personally supervise mass executions of these individuals?
OHLENDORF: I was present at two mass executions for purposes of inspection.
COL. AMEN: Will you explain in detail to the Tribunal how an individual mass execution was carried out?
OHLENDORF: A local Einsatzkommando attempted to collect all the Jews in its area by registering them. This registration was performed by the jews themselves.
COL. AMEN: On what pretext, if any, were they rounded up?
OHLENDORF: On the pretext that they were to be resettled.
COL. AMEN: Will you continue?
OHLENDORF: After the registration the Jews were collected at one place; and from there they were later transported to the place of execution, which was, as a rule, an antitank ditch or a natural excavation. The executions were carried out in a military manner, bu firing squads under command.
COL. AMEN: In what way were they transported to the place of execution?
OHLENDORF: They were transported to the place of execution in trucks, always only as many as could be executed immediately. In this way it was attempted to keep the span of time from the moment in which the victims knew what was about to happen to them until the time of their actual execution as short as possible.
COL. AMEN: Was that your idea?
OHLENDORF: Yes.
COL. AMEN: And after they were shot what was done with the bodies?
OHLENDORF: The bodies were buried in the antitank ditch or excavation.
COL. AMEN: What determination, if any, was made as to whether the persons were actually dead?
OHLENDORF: The unit leaders or the firing-squad commanders had orders to see to this and, if need be, finish them off themselves.
COL. AMEN: And who would do that?
OHLENDORF: Either the unit leader himself or somebody designated by him.
COL. AMEN: In what positions were the victims shot?
OHLENDORF: Standing or kneeling.
COL. AMEN: What was done with the personal property of the persons executed?
OHLENDORF: All valuables were confiscated at the time of the registration or the rounding up and handed over to the Finance Ministry, either through the RSHA or directly. At first the clothing was given to the population, but in the winter of 1941-42 it was collected and disposed of by the NSV.
COL. AMEN: All their personal property was registered at that time?
OHLENDORF: No, not all of it, only valuables were registered.
COL. AMEN: What happened to the garments which the victims were wearing when they went to the place of execution?
OHLENDORF: They were obliged to take off their outer garments immediately before the execution.
COL. AMEN: All of them?
OHLENDORF: The outer garments, yes.
COL. AMEN: How about the rest of the garments they were wearing?
OHLENDORF: The other garments remained on the bodies.
COL. AMEN: Was that true of not only your group but of the other Einsatz groups?
OHLENDORF: That was the order in my Einsatzgruppe. I don’t know how it was done in other Einsatzgruppen.
COL. AMEN: In what way did they handle it.
OHLENDORF: Some of the unit leaders did not carry out liquidations in the military manner, but killed the victims singly by shooting them in the back of the neck.
COL. AMEN: And you objected to that procedure?
OHLENDORF: I was against that procedure, yes.
COL. AMEN: For what reason?
OHLENDORF: Because, both for the victims and for those who carried out the executions, it was, psychologically, an immense burden to bear.
COL. AMEN: Now, what was done with the property collected from the Einsatzkommandos from these victims?
OHLENDORF: All valuables were sent to Berlin, to the RSHA or to the Reich Ministy of Finance. The articles which could not be used in the operational area, were disposed of there.
COL. AMEN: For exemple, what happened to gold and silver taken from the victims?
OHLENDORF: That was, as I have just said, turned over to Berlin, to the Reich Ministry of Finance.
COL. AMEN: How do you know that?
OHLENDORF: I can remember that it was actually handled in that way from Simferopol.
COL. AMEN: How about watches, for example, taken from the victims?
OHLENDORF: At the request of the army, watches were made available to the forces at the front.
COL. AMEN: Were all victims, including the men, women, and children executed in the same manner?
OHLENDORF: Until the spring of 1942, yes. Then an order came from Himmler that in the future women and children were to be killed only in gas vans.
COL. AMEN: How had women and children been killed previously?
OHLENDORF: In the same was as the men – by shooting.
COL. AMEN: What, if anything, was done about burying the victims after they had been executed?
OHLENDORF: The kommandos filled the graves to efface the signs of execution, and then labor units of the population leveled them.
COL. AMEN: Referring to the gas vans that you said you received in the spring of 1942, what order did you receive in respect to the use of these vans?
OHLENDORF: These vans were in the future to be used for killing of women and children.
COL. AMEN: Will you explain to the Tribunal the construction of these vans and their appearance?
OHLENDORF: The actual purpose of these vans could not be seen from the outside. They looked like closed trucks, and were so constructed that at the start of the motor, gas was conducted into the van causing death in ten to fifteen minutes.
COL. AMEN: Explain in detail just how one of these vans was used for an execution.
OHLENDORF: The vans were loaded with the victims and driven to the place of burial, which was usually the same as that used for the mass executions. The time needed for transportation was sufficient to insure the death of the victims.
COL. AMEN: How were the victims induced to enter the vans?
OHLENDORF: They were told that they were to be transported to another locality.
COL. AMEN: How was the gas turned on?
OHLENDORF: I am not familiar with technical details.
COL. AMEN: How long did it take to kill the victims ordinarily?
OHLENDORF: About ten to fifteen minutes; the victims were not conscious of what was happening to them.
COL. AMEN: How many people could be killed simultaneously?
OHLENDORF: About fifteen to twenty-five persons. The vans varied in size.
COL. AMEN: Did you revceive reports from those persons operating the vans from time to time?
OHLENDORF: I didn’t understand the question.
COL. AMEN: Did you receive reports from those who were working on the vans?
OHLENDORF: I received the report that the Einsatzkommandos did not willingly use the vans.
COL. AMEN: Why not?
OHLENDORF: Because the burial of the victims was a great ordeal for the members of the Einsatzkommandos.
COL. AMEN: Now, will you tell the Tribunal who furnished these vans to the Einsatz groups?
OHLENDORF: The gas vans did not belong to the motor pool of the Einsatzgruppen but were assigned to the Einsatzgruppe as a special unit, headed by the man who had constructed the vans. The vans were assigned to the Einsatzgruppen by the RSHA.
COL. AMEN: Were the vans supplied to all of the different Einsatz groups?
OHLENDORF: I am not certain. I know only in the case of Einsatzgruppe D, and indirectly that Einsatzgruppe C also made use of these vans…
COL. AMEN: …Referring to your previous testimony, will you explain to the Tribunal why you believe that the type of execution ordered by you, namely, military, was preferable to the shooting-in-the-neck procedure adopted by the other Einsatz groups?
OHLENDORF: On the one hand, the aim was that the individual leaders and men should be able to carry out the executions in a military manner acting on orders and should not have to make a decision of their own; it was, to all intents and purposes, an order which they were to carry out. On the other hand, it was known to me that through the emotional excitement of the executions ill treatment could not be avoided, since the victims discovered too soon that they were to be executed and could not therefore endure prolonged servous strain. And it seemed intolerable to me that individual leaders and men should in consequence be forced to kill a large number of people on their own decision.
COL. AMEN: In what manner did you determine which were the Jews to be executed?
OHLENDORF: That was not part of my task; but the identification of the Jews was carried out by the Jews themselves, since the registration was handled by a Jewish Council of Elders.
COL. AMEN: Did the amount of Jewish blood have anything to do with it?
OHLENDORF: I can’t remember the details, but I believe that half-Jews were also considered as Jews.
COL. AMEN: What organization furnished most off the officer personnel of the Einsatz groups and Einsatzkommandos?
OHLENDORF: I did not understand the question.
COL. AMEN: What organization furnished most of the officer personnel of the Einsatz groups?
OHLENDORF: The officer personnel was furnished by the State Police, the Kripo, and, to a lesser extent by the SD.
COL. AMEN: Kripo?
OHLENDORF: Yes, the State Police, the Criminal Police and, to a lesser extent, the SD.
COL. AMEN: Were there any other sources of personnel?
OHLENDORF: Yes, most of the men by the Waffen SS and the Ordnungspolizie. The State Police and the Kripo furnished most of the experts and the troops were firnished by the Waffen SS and the Ordungspolzei.
COL. AMEN: How about the Waffen SS.
OHLENDORF: The Waffen SS and the Ordungspolzei were each supposed to supply the Einsatzgruppen with one company.
COL. AMEN: How about the Order Police.
OHLENDORF: The Ordnungspolzei also furnished the Einsatzgruppen with one company.
COL. AMEN: What was the size of Einsatz Group D and its operating area as compared with other Einsatz groups?
OHLENDORF: I estimate that Einsatzgruppen D was one-half or two-thirds as large as the other Einsatzgruppen. That changed in the course of time since some of the Einsatzgruppen were greatly enlarged.
COL. AMEN: May it please the Tribunal, relating to organizational matters which I think would clarify some of the evidence which has already been in part received by the Tribunal. But I don’t want to take the time of the Tribunal unless they feel that they want any more such testimony. I thought perhaps if any members of the Tribunal had any questions they would ask the witness directly because he is the best informed on these organizational matters of anyone who will be presented in court…
THE PRESIDENT: Colonel Amen, the Tribunal does not think that it is necessary to go further into the organizational questions at this stage, but it is a matter that must be really decided by you because you know what nature of the evidence which you are considering is.
So far as the Tribunal is concerned, they are satified at the present stage to leave the matter where it stands, but there is one aspect of the witness’s evidence which the Tribunal would like you to investigate, and that is whether the practices by which he has been speaking continued after 1942, and for how long.
COL. AMEN: [To the witness] Can you state whether the liquidation practices that you have described continued after 1942 and, if so, for how long a period oftime thereafter?
OHLENDORF: I don’t think that the basic order was ever revoked. But I cannot remember the details- at least not with regard to Russia – which would enable me to make concrete statements on this subject. The retreat began very shortly thereafter, so that the operational region of the Einsatzgruppen became ever smaller. I do know, however, that other Einsatzgruppen with similiar orders had been envisaged for other areas.
COL. AMEN: Your personal knowledge extends up to what date?
OHLENDORF: I know that the liquidation of Jews was prohibited about six months before the end of the war. I also saw a document terminating the liquidation of Soviet commissary but I cannot recall a specific date.
COL. AMEN: Do you know whether in fact it was so terminated?
OHLENDORF: Yes, I believe so.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal would like to know the number of men in your Einsatz group.
OHLENDORF: There were about five hundredmen in my Einsatzgruppe, excluding those who were added to the goup as assistants from the country itself…
COL. AMEN: May it please the Tribunal. The witness is now available to other counsel. I understand that Colonel Pokrovsky has some questions that he wished to ask on behalf of the Soviets.
COLONEL Y. V. POKROVSKY (Deputy Chief Prosecutor for the USSR): The testimony of the witness is important for the clarification of questions in a report on which the Soviet delegation is at present working. Therefore, with the permission of the Tribunal, I would like to put a number of questions to the witness.
[Turning to the witness]
Witness, you said that you were present twice at a mass executions. On whose orders were you an inspector at the executions?
OHLENDORF: I was present at the executions on my own iniative.
COL. POKROVSKY: But you said you attended as inspector.
OHLENDORF: I said that I attended for inspection purposes.
COL. POKROVSKY: On your own initiative?
OHLENDORF: Yes.
COL. POKROVSKY: Did one of your chiefs always attend the executions for purposes of inspection?
OHLENDORF: Whenever possible I sent a member of the staff of the Einsatzgruppen towitness the executions but this was not always feasible since the Einsatzgruppen had to operate over great distances.
COL. POKROVSKY: Why was some person sent for purposes of inspection?
OHLENDORF: Would you please repeat the question?
COL. POKROVSKY: For what purpose was an inspector sent?
OHLENDORF: To determine whether or not my instructions regarding the manner of the execution were actually carried out.
COL. POKROVSKY: Am I to understand that the inspector was to make certain that the execution had actually been carried out?
OHLENDORF: No, it would not be correct to say that. He was to acertain whether the conditions which I had set for the execution were actually being carried out.
COL. POKROVSKY: What manner of conditions had you in mind?
OHLENDORF: One: exclusion of the public; two: military execution by a firing-squad; three: arrival of transports and carrying out of the liquidation in a smooth manner to avoid unnecessary excitment; four: supervision of the property to prevent looting. There may have been other details that I no longer remember. At any rate, all ill-treatment, whether pysical or mental, was to be prevented through these measures.
COL. POKROVSKY: You wished to make sure that what you considered to be an equitable distribution of this property was effected, or did you aspire to complete acquisition of the valuables?
OHLENDORF: Yes.
COL. POKROVSKY: You spoke of ill-treatment. What did you mean by ill-treatment at the executions?
OHLENDORF: If, for instance, the manner in which the executions were carried out caused excitement and disobedience among the victims, so that the kommandos were forced to restore by means of violence.
COL. POKROVSKY: What do you mean by “restore order by means of violence”? What do you mean by supression of the excitement amongst the victims by means of violence?
OHLENDORF: If, as I have already said, in order to carry out the liquidation in an orderly fashion it was necessary, for example, to resort to beating.
COL. POKROVSKY: Was it absolutely necessary to beat the victims?
OHLENDORF: I myself never witnessed it, but I heard of it.
COL. POKROVSKY: From whom?
OHLENDORF: In conversations with members of other kommandos.
COL. POKROVSKY: You said that cars, autocars, were used for the executions?
OHLENDORF: Yes.
COL. POKROVSKY: Do you know where, and with whose assistance, the inventor, Becker, was able to put his invention into practice?
OHLENDORF: I remember only that it was done through Amt II of the RSHA; but I can no longer say that with certainty.
COL. POKROVSKY: How many persons were executed in these cars?
OHLENDORF: I did not understand the question.
COL. POKROVSKY: How many persons were executed by means of these cars?
OHLENDORF: I cannot give precise figures, but the number was comparatively small – perhaps a few hundred.
COL. POKROVSKY: You said that mostly women and children were executed in these vans. For what reason?
OHLENDORF: That was a special order from Himmler to the effect that women and children were not to be exposed to the mental strain of the executions; and thus the men of the kommandos, mostly married men, should not be compelled to aim at women and children.
COL. POKROVSKY: Did anybody observe the behavior of the persons executed in these vans?
OHLENDORF: Yes, the doctor.
COL. POKROVSKY: Did you know that Becker had reported that death in these vans was particularly agonizing?
OHLENDORF: No. I learned of Becker’s reports for the first time from the letter to Rauff, which was shown to me here. On the contrary, I know from the doctor’s reports that the victims were not conscious of their impending death.
COL. POKROVSKY: Did any military units – I mean, army units – take part in these mass executions?
OHLENDORF: As a rule, no.
COL. POKROVSKY: And as an exception?
OHLENDORF: I think I remember that in Nikolaiev and in Simferopol a spectator from the Army High Command was present for a short time.
COL. POKROVSKY: For what purpose?
OHLENDORF: I don’t know, probably to obtain information personally.
COL. POKROVSKY: Were military units assigned to carry out the executions in these towns?
OHLENDORF: Officially, the army did not assign any units for this pupose; the army as such was actually opposed to the liquidations.
COL. POKROVSKY: But in practice?
OHLENDORF: Individual units occasionally volunteered. However, at the moment I know of no such case among the army itself, but only among units attached to the army (Heeresgefolge).
COL. POKROVSKY: You were the man by whose orders people were sent to their death. Were Jews only handed over for execution by the Einsatzgruppe or were Communists – “Communist officials” you call them in your instructions – handed over for execution along with the Jews?
OHLENDORF: Yes, activists and political commissars. Mere membership in the Communist Party was not sufficient to persecute or kill a man.
COL. POKROVSKY: Were any special investigations made concerning the part played by persons in the Communist Party?
OHLENDORF: No, I said on the contrary that mere membership of the Communist Party was not, in itself, a determining factor in persecuting or executing a man; he had to have a special political function.
COL. POKROVSKY: Did you have any discussions on the murder vans sent from Berlin and on their use?
OHLENDORF: I did not understand the question.
COL. POKROVSKY: Had you occasion to discuss, with your chiefs and your collegues, the fact that motor vans had been sent to your own particular Einsatzgruppe from Berlin for carrying out the executions? Do you remember any such discussion?
OHLENDORF: I do not remember any specific discussion.
COL. POKROVSKY: Had you any information concerning the fact that members of the execution squad in charge of the executions were unwilling to use the vans?
OHLENDORF: I knew that the Einsatzkommandos were using the vans.
COL. POKROVSKY: No, I had something else in mind. I wanted to know whether you received reports that members of the execution squads were unwilling to use the vans and preferred other means of execution?
OHLENDORF: That they would rather kill by means of the gas vans than by shooting?
COL. POKROVSKY: On the contrary, that they preferred execution by shooting to killing by means of the gas vans.
OHLENDORF: You have already said the gas van…
COL. POKROVSKY: And why did they prefer execution by shooting to killing in the gas vans?
OHLENDORF: Because, as I have already said, in the opinion of the leader of the Einsatzkommandos, the unloading of the corpses was an unnecessary mental strain.
COL. POKROVSKY: What do you mean by “an unnecessary mental strain”?
OHLENDORF: As far as I can remember the conditions at that time – the picture presented by the corpses and probably because certain functions of the body had taken place leaving the corpses lying in filth.
COL. POKROVSKY: You mean to say that the sufferings endured prior to death were clearly visible on the victims? Did I understand you correctly?
OHLENDORF: I don’t understand the question; do you mean during the killing in the van?
COL. POKROVSKY: Yes.
OHLENDORF: I can only repeat what the doctor told me, that the victims were not conscious of their death in the van.
COL. POKROVSKY: In that case, your reply to my previous question, that the unloading of the bodies made a very terrible impression on the members of the execution squad, becomes entirely incomprehensible.
OHLENDORF: And, as I said, the terrible impression created by the position of corpses themselves, and probably by the state of the vans which had probably been dirtied and so on.
COL. POKROVSKY: I have no further questions to put to this witness at the present stage of the trial…
THE TRIBUNAL (Gen. Niktchenko): In your testimony you said that the Einsatz group had the object of annihilating the Jews and the commissars, is that correct?
OHLENDORF: Yes.
THE TRIBUNAL (Gen. Niktchenko): And in what category did you consider the children? For what reason were the children massacred?
OHLENDORF: The order was that the Jewish population should be totally exterminated.
THE TRIBUNAL (Gen. Niktchenko): Including the children?
OHLENDORF: Yes.
THE TRIBUNAL (Gen. Niktchenko): Were all the Jewish children murdered?
OHLENDORF: Yes.
THE TRIBUNAL (Gen. Niktchenko): But the children of those whom you considered as belonging to the catagory of commissars, were they also killed?
OHLENDORF: I am not aware that inquiries were ever made after the families of Soviet commmissars.
THE TRIBUNAL (Gen. Niktchenko): Did you send anywhere reports on the executions that the group carried out?
OHLENDORF: Reports on the executions were regularly submitted to the RSHA.
THE TRIBUNAL (Gen. Niktchenko): No, did you personally send any reports on the annihilation of thousands of people which you effected? Did you personally submit any report?
OHLENDORF: The reports came from the Einsatzkommandos who carried out the actions, to the Einsatzgruppe and the Einsatzgruppe informed the RHSA.
THE TRIBUNAL (Gen. Niktchenko): Whom?
OHLENDORF: The reports went to the chief of Sipo personally.
THE TRIBUNAL (Gen. Niktchenko): Personally?
OHLENDORF: Yes, personally.
THE TRIBUNAL (Gen. Niktchenko): What was the name of this police officer? Can you give his name?
OHLENDORF: At that time, Heydrich.
THE TRIBUNAL (Gen. Niktchenko): After Heydrich?
OHLENDORF: I was no longer there then, but that was the standing order.
THE TRIBUNAL (Gen. Niktchenko): I am asking you whether you continued to submit reports after Heydrich’s death or not?
OHLENDORF: After Heydrich’s death I was no longer in the Einsatz, but the reports were, of course, continued.
THE TRIBUNAL (Gen. Niktchenko): Do you know whether the reports continued to be submitted after Heydrich’s death or not?
OHLENDORF: Yes.
THE TRIBUNAL (Gen. Niktchenko): Yes?
OHLENDORF: No, the reports…
THE TRIBUNAL (Gen. Niktchenko): Was the order concerning the annihilation of the Soviet people in conformity with the policy of the German government or the Nazi Party or was it against it? Do you understand the question?
OHLENDORF: Yes. One must distinguish here: the order for the liquidation came from the Führer of the Reich, and it was to be carried out by the Reichführer SS Himmler.
THE TRIBUNAL (Gen. Niktchenko): But was it in conformity with the policy conducted by the Nazi Party and the German government, or was it in contradiction to it?
OHLENDORF: A policy amounts to a practice so that in this respect it was laid down by the Führer. If you were to ask whether this activity was in conformity with the idea of National Socialism, then I would say “no”.
THE TRIBUNAL (Gen. Niktchenko): I am talking about the practice.
THE PRESIDENT: I understood you to say that objects of value were taken from the Jewish victims by the Jewish Council of Elders?
OHLENDORF: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Did the Jewish Council of Elders settle who were to be killed?
OHLENDORF: That was done in various ways. As far as I remember, the Council of Elders was given the order to collect valuables at the same time.
THE PRESIDENT: So that the Jewish Council of Elders would not know whether or not they were to be killed?
OHLENDORF: Yes…
THE PRESIDENT: Now, a question concerning you personally. From whom did you receive your orders for the liquidation of the Jews and so forth? And in what form?
OHLENDORF: My duty was not the task of liquidation, but I did head the staff which directed the Einsatzkommandos in the field, and the Einsatzkommandos themselves had already received this order in Berlin on the instructions of Streckenbach, Himmler, and Heydrich. This order was renewed by Himmler at Nikolaiev.
HERR BABEL: You personally were not concerned with the execution of these orders?
OHLENDORF: I led the Einsatzgruppe, and therefore I had the task of seeing how the Einsatzkommandos executed the orders received.
HERR BABEL: But did you have no scruples in regard to the execution of these orders?
OHLENDORF: Yes, of course.
HERR BABEL: And how is it that they were carried out regardless of these scruples?
OHLENDORF: Because to me it is inconceivable that a subordinate leader should not carry out orders given by the leaders of the state.
HERR BABEL: This is your opinion. But this must have been not only your point of view but also the point of view of the majority of the people involved. Didn’t some of the men appointed to execute these orders ask you to be relieved of such tasks?
OHLENDORF: I cannot remember any one concrete case. I excluded some whom I did not consider emotionally suitable for executing these tasks and I sent some of them home.
HERR BABEL: Was the legality of the orders explained to those people under false pretenses?
OHLENDORF: I do not understand your question; since the order was issued by the superior authorities, the question of legality could not arise in the minds of these individuals, for they had sworn obedience to the people who had issued the orders.
HERR BABEL: Could any individual expect to succeed in evading the execution of these orders?
OHLENDORF: No, the result would have been a court martial with a corresponding sentence.
Sweet angel Rudolf, you would have had 85 candles on your birthday cake today. How I wish I could have helped you blow them out. That would have been 85 candles—one for each year of your life. You weren’t given the opportunity to see five candles on your cake all those years ago.
Rudolf de Beer was born in Utrecht, the Netherlands, on 29 August 1938. He was murdered at Sobibor on 2 July 1943 at age four.
A young life was taken.
A future destroyed.
A murdered boy.
His weapon was a toy.
A life ended by hate.
Loved continued beyond life.
Loved by those who look into those mischievous eyes.
People often think that the Nazis came up with the concept of the concentration camps. In fact, it was the British, who invented concentration camps, which were first established in South Africa by the Brits during the Boer Wars in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
During World War II, the Nazis weren’t the only ones with concentration camps either. Italy had several Camps both inside of Italy and its colonies.
Ferramonti di Tarsia was one of those camps. The camp was located in Ferramonti, a rural locality 6 km south of Tarsia, by the river Crati. The area is next to the current A2 motorway exit Tarsia Sud. It was the largest of 15 concentration camps established by Italian Fascist leader Benito Mussolini during the summer of 1940.
The Italians began building Ferramonti on 4 June 1940, less than a week before Italy entered World War II. The arrest of Jews began on 15 June, and prisoners began arriving at the camp on 20 June. From 1940–1943, more than 3,800 Jews were imprisoned at the Camp: 3,682 were foreign-born Jews, and 141 were Italians. In general, Italian-born Jews were not imprisoned unless they participated in anti-Fascist activities.
At first, the physical conditions of the Camp were not that bad. However, as the situation of the Jews went downhill, so did the living conditions. Despite all this, Ferramonti was never a concentration camp like those that the Nazis ran. The relationship between the prisoners and camp staff was relatively peaceful. The prisoners were not tortured or executed and were allowed to receive packages, visit sick relatives, and participate in cultural activities. In fact, four couples were married at the Camp, and 21 children were born there.
Apart from a friendly fire incident in August 1943, which killed four internees, and two deaths from an explosion outside the Camp in December 1943, the only other deaths were from natural causes, and most survived their imprisonment unharmed. About seventy Chinese traders and street vendors were also placed at the Ferramonti Camp.
However, they may have had freedoms. Basically, despite the that the prisoners hadn’t committed any crimes, they were still incarcerated.
The prisoners at Ferramonti were released on 4 September 1943, six weeks after Mussolini was overthrown by his Fascist Grand Council.
Ferramonti di Tarsia was an exception.
In total, between the 1930s and 1943, more than 22,000 prisoners were murdered in the Italian Camps, and most of it took place in the colonies.
Oswald Kaduk was born on 26 August 1906. I think a line from an Iron Maiden song applies to him, “All the evil seem to live forever.” He died on 31 May 1997. He was a German SS member and served as Rapportführer at Auschwitz.
He was on trial during the second Auschwitz trial. Kaduk was a direct witness to the camp atrocities. He gave Jewish children a balloon before killing them with a phenol injection.
After the Germans surrendered, Kaduk worked at the Rebau sugar factory. In December 1946, he was found by a former prisoner and subsequently arrested by a Soviet military patrol. In 1947, a Soviet military court sentenced Kaduk to 25 years of hard labour, but he was released in April 1956. Kaduk then went to West Berlin to work as a nurse in a hospital. Despite his violent reputation at Auschwitz, he earned the nickname “Papa Kaduk” among his patients. Kaduk was arrested again in July 1959 and appeared at the Frankfurt-Auschwitz trial, where he was one of the main defendants. On 19 August 1965, a court sentenced him to life imprisonment for 10 counts of murder and at least 1,000 counts of conspiracy to murder. Due to the gravity of Kaduk’s deeds, the responsible Sprüchkammern rejected various pleas for amnesty. While in prison, Kaduk was interviewed on a television documentary about SS men stationed in Auschwitz. When asked about Holocaust denial, Kaduk replied: (Interviewer) Today, many people say that Auschwitz was a lie, that no one was gassed, etc. (Kaduk) I have to say, I don’t consider these people normal. We must stick to the truth. Some deny it, but what happened is what happened, and there is no dispute.” After being transferred to an open prison (Offener Vollzug) in 1984, Kaduk was released from Schwalmstadt prison in 1989 on health grounds (Haftunfähigkeit). At 90 years old, he died as a pensioner in Langelsheim, canton Harz.
A principal witness was Ludwig Woerl, who said he had been transferred from another camp to the infamous Auschwitz Arrest Bloc 11. There, one day, he testified, “a dozen little Jewish girls, aged 3 to 11, came up to me, begged me to save them from the gas chambers. They said they were strong and could work and didn’t want to die; I couldn’t help them. There was Oswald Kaduk, with gun in hand. That murderer Kaduk drove them away to the gas chamber.”
The photograph above is of Gezina de Leeuwe-de Jong with her four children. I presume the photo was taken by her husband and the father of the children, Louis de Leeuw. I reckon that’s why he is not in the picture.
He was a son of Barend de Leeuwe and Sientje van Minden. He married Gezina de Jong from Assen on 2 October 1935 in Rotterdam, a daughter of Bernhard de Jong en Rachel de Levie. Louis was a factory worker and lived with his family at 1e Looiersdwarsstraat 3 hs in Amsterdam and since 20 September 1941 at Landzichtlaan 17 in Rotterdam Overschie.
On 11 July 1942, Louis was arrested in Rotterdam.
On 18 July 1942, he was transported to AmersfoortLouie and murdered in Camp Amersfoort on 23 October 1942, at the age of 42.
The couple had four children, all murdered at Sobibor, along with their mother.
Gezina de Leeuwe-de Jong, born December 10 in Assne, the Netherlands. Murdered in Sobibor on 21 May 1943, she was 35 years old.
The son, Barend de Leeuwe was born in Rotterdam on 3 December 1937. Murdered at Sobibor on 21 May 1943 and reached the age of 5 years.
The daughter, Sientje Rika de Leeuwe, was born in Utrecht on 22 February 1936. Murdered at Sobibor on 21 May 1943. She reached the age of 7 years.
Their son, Philip de Leeuwe, was born in Rotterdam on 25 August 1939. He was murdered at Sobibor on 21 May 1943. He was 3 years old.
A family of regular people—murdered. They were not criminals, just a young family who were at the start of what should have been a bright future.
I am passionate about my site and I know you all like reading my blogs. I have been doing this at no cost and will continue to do so. All I ask is for a voluntary donation of $2, however if you are not in a position to do so I can fully understand, maybe next time then. Thank you.
To donate click on the credit/debit card icon of the card you will use. If you want to donate more then $2 just add a higher number in the box left from the PayPal link. Many thanks.
The photographs in this post are categorized as artefacts. I don‘t really like that description because the definition of an artefact is—an object made by a human being, typically one of cultural or historical interest. These objects may have been made by a human being, but more than that—they were personal belongings.
The narrative of the Holocaust is so much more than the murder of millions—all of the victims had possessions taken from them or had to part with them before they were transported personal belongings, which were held in their hands or worn by them. DNA residue would have been transferred on these belongings—at least on a few.
The photo above is of an accordion that Shabetai Shemi from Bitola (Monastir), Macedonia received as a gift for his Bar Mitzvah. The accordion was given to a friend for safekeeping when Shabetai was deported to the camps and—murdered.
Even before World War II, the writer and activist Anton de Kom fought with all his heart for equality between blacks and whites in the Dutch colony of Suriname. His book, Wij Slaven van Suriname (We Slaves of Suriname), became a symbol of resistance against colonialism.
The Dutch Colonial Government considered him dangerous and shipped him to the Netherlands in 1933. In 1940, Anton de Kom joined the Dutch Resistance in The Hague. He wrote anonymous articles for the left-wing illegal newspaper De Vonk (Lit. The Spark). His son Ad de Kom shared some memories of his father, “He usually wrote on Sundays. Then he settled back into an armchair in the sitting room with a stack of books and paper.” When Anton de Kom was arrested on 7 August 1944, he left this Pelikan fountain pen behind. After imprisonment in several camps, Anton de Kom ended up at the notorious Sandbostel POW Camp in Germany. He died there in 1945 under the most horrendous conditions.
Some Jewish children gave away their toys when they had to report for transport or went into hiding. Marbles were a child’s prized possession. The night before they were transported, a few children in the South of Amsterdam were known to have said, “Let’s just toss them!” They threw their marbles out the window, hoping other children in the neighbourhood would gather them up.
Shortly before going into hiding on 6 July 1942, with her parents and sister Margot in the Secret Annex on Amsterdam’s Prinsengracht, Anne Frank also left a few prized possessions behind. She gave her tea set, the book Nederlandsche Sagen en Legenden (Tales and Legends of the Netherlands) that she received on 12 June as a birthday gift, and this metal tin of marbles (shown above) to her neighbourhood friend, Toosje Kupers. The Frank family were eventually arrested in hiding. Otto Frank was the only one in the family to survive the concentration camps. After the war, Toosje Kupers saw Anne’s father several times. When Anne Frank’s diary was published in 1947, Otto Frank personally presented Toosje with a copy.
The everyday life of the Jewish Gold family, who lived in the village of Jutphaas near Utrecht, abruptly ended in April 1943. Father, Mother and their son Lothar were picked up from their home and eventually deported. They always had close contact with the neighbours across the street, the Steenaart family.
Father Julius Gold was a shoemaker. The night before leaving, he promised to make baby Willy Steenaart a pair of shoes. Along with that promise, Julius gave the Steenaart family his shoemaker’s box, filled with tools for safekeeping. The farewell words to the Gold family were those of a neighbourhood kid shouting, “Where are you going, Lothar?” to his friend as the family was driven away by a truck. The Steenaarts never received another sign of life from Julius Gold or his family. Later, Willy Steenaart took good care of the box and did not use a single tool. Lothar was murdered in the Sobibor Extermination Camp on 11 June 1943 along with his mother, Gerda. Julius died on 21 March 1945 in Melk, a slave labour sub-camp of Mauthausen.
History of Sorts 
You must be logged in to post a comment.