[A] The President’s question is in response to the foregoing answer of the Defendant Rosenberg, in which the interpreter said “to bring about an agreement” instead of “to promote understanding”.
DR. THOMA: Mr. President, I asked the defendant that question because he took steps to come to a positive understanding with England and worked toward that goal. The defendant is accused...
THE PRESIDENT: But what was the understanding about?
DR. THOMA: We were concerned with the fact that the defendant went to London in order to...
THE PRESIDENT: I want you to ask the defendant. I don’t want you to tell me.
DR. THOMA: I have just asked him, Mr. President.
The defendant is accused of having participated in the Norwegian action, in that he advocated the violation of Norwegian neutrality.
[Turning to the witness.] Please answer the question. How did you meet Quisling?
ROSENBERG: I met Quisling in the year 1933, when he visited me, and I had a discussion of 20 minutes’ duration with him. Subsequently, an assistant of mine, who was interested in Scandinavian culture and had written books about it, corresponded with Quisling. It was all of 6 years before I saw Quisling again, and I did not intervene either in the Norwegian political situation or in the Quisling movement until he visited me in June of 1939, when the tension in Europe had increased, and expressed his apprehensions about the situation in Norway in the event of a conflict. He said it was to be feared that Norway would not be able to remain neutral in such a case, and that his home country might be occupied in the North by Soviet troops and in the South by the troops of the Western powers, and that he viewed things with great concern. My staff leader made a note of his apprehensions and then reported them to Dr. Lammers, as it was his duty to do.