CYIL vol. 15 (2024)

AVITUS A. AGBOR Not the last result of German resistance on the fronts, so unexpected to the enemy, is the fruition of a development which began in the pre-war years, the process of subordinating British policy to far-reaching Jewish points of view. It began long before this when Jewish emigrants from Germany started their war- mongering against us from British and American soil. This whole attempt aiming at the establishment of Jewish world domination, now increasingly recognizable, has come to a head at the very moment when the people’s understanding of their racial origins has been far too much awakened to promise success to the undertaking. 32 (3064-PS) On July 10, 1941, Fritzsche discussed the alleged inhuman deeds committed in different parts of the Soviet Union; and concluded that sighting those unimaginable deeds would naturally lead anyone to “make the holy resolve to give his aid in the final destruction of those who are capable of such dastardly acts.” With persuasion and conviction, Fritzsche argued in his declaration that [t]he Bolshevist agitators make no effort to deny that in towns, thousands, in the villages, hundreds, of corpses of men, women and children have been found, who had been either killed or tortured to death. Yet the Bolshevik agitators allege that this was not done by Soviet Commissars but by German soldiers. Now we Germans know our soldiers. No German woman, father, or mother requires proof that their husband or their son cannot have committed such atrocious acts. 33 (3064-PS) 2.3 Julius Streicher: owner and editor of Der Stürmer Over twenty defendant cases were presented by the Nuremberg prosecution. Streicher was the ninth in order. Having had eight defendants before him, a few questions arose as to whether his case would be the last of the prosecution’s “certain convictions”, 34 the first of the “trickier cases”, 35 or the “most debatable”. 36 For the prosecution, Streicher’s case was problematic: appearing as the ninth in order of the twenty-one cases, the prosecution considered it to be the last of it “certain convictions”, 37 or the first of the “trickier” cases 38 while some saw it as one of the “most debatable”. 39 For the individuals who observed the trials, numerous demeaning adjectives would befit the man Jackson would describe in his closing statement as the “venomous vulgarian”: 40 brutish, revolting, vulgar, porcine, and the “least appetizing” of all the defendants at Nuremberg. Fritzsche, Streicher’s co-defendant and prison mate, would consider Streicher as a “swine and one of the guiltiest men in the dock.” 41 Rebecca West, the British writer, gives 32 Ibid. 33 Ibid. 34 Taylor 382. Taylor‘s use of the phrase „certain convictions“ was because he expected Streicher‘s conviction to be certain. 35 TUSA, Ann and TUSA, John. The Nuremberg Trial (Atheneum 1984) 333. 36 Taylor 496. 37 Ibid 382. Taylor‘s characterisation here meant that the prosecution expected Streicher‘s conviction for the crimes to be certain rather than him admitting his guilt. 38 Tusa and Tusa 333. 39 Taylor 496. 40 Ibid 493. 41 Ibid 141. Streicher‘s presence and utterances during the trial were so disgusting to the other defendants to the

198