 |
[Wehr...] macht. These
discussions generally took place in the offices of the Wehrmacht, not in my
offices. It frequently happened that in addition to the actual subject of the
discussion other matters were talked about which did not directly belong to my
professional activities. This was done confidentially. Very often I could not
avoid being a witness in the conversations carried on by numbers of officers or
that I was present during telephone conversations, which these gentlemen
carried on on these occasions. In the course of a number of weeks I learned
that certain troop movements were going on, but I could not clearly learn their
exact plan. I could not learn what their exact aim was. Furthermore, I learned
about more of these troop movements on the basis of certain development work
which was carried on by the Wehrmacht in collaboration with IG. Certain tests
were to be carried out with IG products, but they had to be postponed because
the formations which were necessary for the carrying out of these tests had
changed their home station for unexplained reasons.
“Beyond that,
I also recall that tests of smoke buoys for the Navy had to be postponed
because of the fact that the units were transferred. I think it is necessary
for me to add that to my affidavit." [Tr. p.
572.] |
No substantial qualification was made on cross-examination. From
testimony of this character, there is the strong suspicion that the sources of
confidential knowledge and information available to and relied upon by persons
holding the elevated positions of Vorstand members gave them at the very least
the same amount of knowledge as could be acquired by the witness Wagner. Farben
— and that means in the first place the members of the Farben Vorstand
— had at their disposal their own far-flung intelligence system, employed
for and capable of judging the course of events in many sections of the globe;
it is difficult to believe that such smoothly operating intelligence work could
have failed to detect the meaning of events within Germany in the summer of
1939.
However, the proof does not positively establish that members of
the Vorstand of Farben actually knew that aggressive war would be waged, though
its possibility must have been a constant consideration with them.
The
prosecution has never advanced the contention in this case that there existed
common knowledge throughout Germany of Hitler’s plans for the waging of
aggressive war. On the contrary, the prosecution has explicitly denied any such
contention relying rather upon allegations to the effect that these defendants,
by virtue of their positions within Farben and by virtue of the special
knowledge which they possessed arising out of the tasks with which they were
charged, |
1236 |
. 
