EichmannTrialEN's video: Eichmann trial - Session No 90

Session no. 90 / 10/07/1961 The continuation of the cross-examination of The Accused by the Attorney General for the prosecution. 1. Denies joining the nazi party for its anti-Jewish policy, but for the fight to overturn the treaty of Versailles, even though he admits that the active front was concentrated on the fight against the Jews. 2. Admits knowledge of the slogan to the effect of, in the case of war, whoever the winner is the Jews will be exterminated, allegedly delivered in a speech by Hitler to the Reichstag. 3. The war against the Jews was declared a few days after the outbreak of the war, seeing the Jews as a threat to the fatherland, although enemies in his opinion should be fought and not exterminated and definitely not physically exterminated. 4. Exchanges between the Attorney General and the accused as to the precise meaning of the word extermination-physical or otherwise. 5. Verifies the negative opinion of Wisliceny against the Jews to be correct. 6. Belief that dr. CHAIM Weizmann with the Jews led the war against German y. 7. Comendation by Wisliceny for his national socialist opinions and his superior opinion as to his study of Hebrew. 8. Believes himself to be the mastermind of the plan to give some land to the Jews within the framework of his service and used this as his reason for visiting Palestine in 1937, which was approved by his superiors. 9. The reasons for his visit to Palestine in 1937 being to see how people lived there and to establish contact and form a relationship with Haj Amin el Husseini. 10. Reference made to a part of his confession where he says that he must take responsibility regarding a report in connection with his trip to Palestine, which he says was written by dr. Six and merely checked for spelling mistakes by himself, this being the reason for his name being mentioned on the report, although the bulk of the ideas were his. 11. Questioned about various things that he wrote and his attitude against the Zionist enterprise. 12. Denies knowledge of his alleged insistence to curb Jewish immigration into Palestine, even though documents have been presented to attest to this, he calls for one document to be a forgery, insisting that he was the one to oppose this policy against emigration. 13. The definitive ban on emigration and the fact that orders had to be followed, denies his alleged objection to the immigration of Hungarian Jews to Palestine, he had superiors to make this decision. Incomplete