Arthur R. Butz – The Hoax Of The Twentieth Century

Chapter 5: The Hungarian Jews
having access to documents denied the German lawyers, was able to prove in
court that Kempner had threatened to hand Gaus over to the Russians if Gaus did
not cooperate with the prosecution, a frequent and effective threat that had certain
variations. Häfliger, one of the defendants in Case 11, was a Swiss citizen, but according
to his trial testimony, he was told by interrogator Sachs that if he stood on
his Swiss nationality he would be turned over to the Russians, and Sachs urged
him “to note that there were no diplomatic relations between Russia and Switzerland.”
Much more to the point is the fact that von Thadden, under cross examination
by defense attorney Dr. Schmidt-Leichner, admitted that Kempner, in connection
with an execution that had supposedly been carried out by German authorities
in France:
“had made me understand that there were two possibilities for me, either
to confess or to be transmitted to the French authorities, before a French tribunal,
where the death penalty would be sure for me. A delay of twenty four
hours was accorded me, during which I had to decide.”
A Swiss journalist wrote at the time that Kempner and colleagues were attempting
to misrepresent Nazism as a “concoction of the German upper classes”
in order to destroy the pre-Nazi social structure of Germany. 293
Rogge had a long and interesting career, but a thorough summary would carry
us too far afield. In fairness to him, we should say that his behavior in connection
with the “sedition” cases should not lead one to assume that he was insensitive in
regard to civil liberties, because when the first postwar steps were being taken to
set up an anti-Communist internal security program, Rogge started yelling about
“witch hunts” and, in the following years, became Chairman of the New York
State (Henry) Wallace for President Committee, a perfectly logical appointment,
because Rogge embodied all that was unique in that movement’s approach to
dealing with the Soviet Union. Characterized by the left wing Nation in 1950 as
“the lone independent in various Communist-operated congresses, committees,
and delegations,” he had traveled to Moscow in March to attend the “World Congress
of Partisans for Peace.” He explained to the Soviets that the cold war was
equally the fault of both sides, and stood up in a formal meeting in the Kremlin
and quoted Thomas Jefferson, actions that were not appreciated by his Soviet
hosts. The Nation commented further that 294
“It is easy to put down O. John Rogge as a quixotic busybody, a fuzzyminded
liberal so out of touch with reality that he believes the ills of the world
to be merely the result of unfortunate misunderstanding. […] He has shown
why the Russian rulers regard with suspicion even their own followers who
have had contact with the West.”
293
294
Utley, 172, 177; Gaus (Case 11 transcript, 5123-6167) denied the coercion but, as Magee commented
in court, “we have the questions and answers that the witness gave” in the relevant interrogation.
The von Thadden and Häfliger declarations were made in the sessions of March 3 and
May 11, 1948, respectively, and the corresponding parts of the trial transcript are quoted by
Bardèche, 120ff, who gives other examples of coercion and intimidation of witnesses at Nuremberg.
New York Times (Nov. 8, 1947), 10; (Apr. 4, 1948), 46; Nation (May 27, 1950), 528; (Dec. 2,
1950), 499.
205