Alfred Rosenberg ya kasance muhimmin mutum wajen samuwar akidar Nazi da kuma cikin shugabancin Nazi. Ko da yake ba shi da tasiri sosai a fagen siyasa, littafinsa mai muhimmanci, Der Mythus des 20. Jahrhunderts (Tatsuniyar Karni na 20), ya gabatar da wani tsari mai zurfi da fadi na mayar da mutane marasa mutunci, abin da ya sa aka tsane shi. A tushen akidar National Socialism akwai wani hangen tarihi game da sabuwar duniya, akidar da ta sanya fahimtar kan dan adam a matsayin wanda ke da alaka da kabila da gwagwarmayar mamaye kabilanci. Littafin ya bayyana cewa:

Alfred Rosenberg was an important character in the formation of Nazi ideology and within the Nazi leadership. Though he was not so politically relevant, it was his seminal work, Der Mythus des 20. Jahrhunderts (The Myth of the 20th Century), which came to present a thorough and far-ranging strategy of dehumanisation for which he earned his disrepute. At the root of the worldview of National Socialism is a historical vision of a new world, a worldview that positioned human self-understanding as characterised by race and struggle for ethnic domination. The book describes:

"Zamani da yanzu suna bayyana a cikin sabon haske, saboda haka muna da sabon aiki na gaba. Ayyukan tarihi da na gaba ba sa nufin gwagwarmayar aji ko yaƙi tsakanin koyarwar Coci ba, sai dai rikici tsakanin jini da jini, tsere da tsere, al'umma da al'umma. Wannan kuma yana nufin fafatawa tsakanin dabi'un ruhaniya."64

“Present and past are suddenly appearing in a new light, and as a result we have a new misson for the future. The actions of history and the future no longer signify class struggle or warfare between Church dogmas, but rather the conflict between blood and blood, race and race, people and people. And this means combat between spiritual values.”64

Rosenberg's work formed an image of the Jewish person as a "parasite", defining them as an 'anti-race' who were not fully human and could not be part of a German or even global social identity. Jews were furthermore devoid, he argued, of a metaphysical and cultural dimension and could not be prescribed to a human race, rendering them instead animal-like. Jews were henceforth often compared to rats in Nazi propaganda - including art pieces, posters, speeches and films. The same kinds of animalistic imagery were prevalent in Rwanda when Tutsis were called "cockroaches" and so too were black slaves in the Americas, viewed as subhuman animals. Interestingly, in all the aforementioned instances, we observe a pattern of referencing animals that are mostly feared, such as snakes, rats and lizards. It was this Othering, such a castigating of others as disposable and less-than-human entities that both made possible and accelerated the development of genocidal tendencies. The untermenschen for the Nazis was not a description to describe those who were like subhuman entities, but to describe those who were subhuman. Principal prosecutor Telford Taylor of the 1946 Ga cikin Hausa: Aikin Rosenberg ya samar da hoton mutumin Bayahude a matsayin "kwari mai cin jini" (parasite), yana bayyana su a matsayin "anti-kabila" waɗanda ba cikakkun mutane ba ne kuma ba za su iya zama wani ɓangare na al'ummar Jamus ko ma ta duniya baki ɗaya ba. Haka kuma, ya yi iƙirarin cewa Yahudawa ba su da wani ɓangare na ruhaniya ko al'adu, don haka ba za a iya danganta su da jinsin ɗan adam ba, sai dai suna kama da dabbobi. Saboda haka, sau da yawa ana kwatanta Yahudawa da beraye a farfagandar Nazi - ciki har da zane-zane, fastoci, jawabai da fina-finai. Irin wannan kwatancin dabbobi ya yi yawa a Ruwanda, inda ake kiran 'yan Tutsi "kyankyasai", haka kuma an kwatanta bayi baƙaƙe a Amurka da dabbobin da ba su kai mutum ba. Abin lura shi ne, a dukkan misalan da aka ambata, ana ganin wani tsari na amfani da dabbobin da mutane ke tsoro, kamar macizai, beraye da kadangaru. Wannan "Othering" - wato ɗaukar wasu a matsayin abin zubarwa da ƙasa da mutum - ne ya sa ci gaban ɗabi'un kisan kare dangi ya yiwu kuma ya hanzarta. Kalmar untermenschen da Nazi ke amfani da ita ba bayanin waɗanda suke kama da halittun da ba mutane ba ce kawai, a'a bayanin waɗanda suke ba-mutane ne gaba ɗaya. Babban mai shigar da ƙara Telford Taylor na shari'ar 1946

Rosenberg’s work formed an image of the Jewish person as a “parasite”, defining them as an ‘anti-race’ who were not fully human and could not be part of a German or even global social identity. Jews were furthermore devoid, he argued, of a metaphysical and cultural dimension and could not be prescribed to a human race, rendering them instead animal-like. Jews were henceforth often compared to rats in Nazi propaganda - including art pieces, posters, speeches and films. The same kinds of animalistic imagery were prevalent in Rwanda when Tutsis were called “cockroaches” and so too were black slaves in the Americas, viewed as subhuman animals. Interestingly, in all the aforementioned instances, we observe a pattern of referencing animals that are mostly feared, such as snakes, rats and lizards. It was this Othering, such a castigating of others as disposable and less-than-human entities that both made possible and accelerated the development of genocidal tendencies. The untermenschen for the Nazis was not a description to describe those who were like subhuman entities, but to describe those who were subhuman. Principal prosecutor Telford Taylor of the 1946

Shari'ar Likitocin Nuremberg ta fara da wannan sanarwa:

Nuremburg doctors’ trial opened with this statement:

"Waɗanda ake tuhuma a wannan shari'a an tuhume su da kisan kai, azabtarwa da sauran munanan ayyuka da aka aikata da sunan ilimin kimiyyar magani. Adadin waɗanda aka cutar da waɗannan laifuka ya kai ɗari-ɗari na dubban mutane. Ƙalilan ne kawai har yanzu suna raye; wasu daga cikin waɗanda suka tsira za su bayyana a cikin wannan ɗakin shari'a. Amma yawancin waɗannan mutane marasa sa'a an kashe su nan take ko kuma sun mutu a lokacin azabtarwar da aka yi musu ... Ga masu kashe su, waɗannan mutane talakawa ba daidaikun mutane ba ne kwata-kwata. An kawo su da yawa a lokaci ɗaya, kuma an yi musu mugun hali fiye da yadda ake yi wa dabbobi."65

“The defendants in this case are charged with murders, tortures and other atrocities committed in the name of medical science. The victims of these crimes are numbered in the hundreds of thousands. A handful only are still alive; a few of the survivors will appear in this courtroom. But most of these miserable victims were slaughtered outright or died in the course of the tortures to which they were subjected ... To their murderers, these wretched people were not individuals at all. They came in wholesale lots and were treated worse than animals.”65

Kalmomi biyu na ƙarshe sun soki manufar Nazi ta mayar da Yahudawa saniyar ware, wato ɗabi'ar ɗan Adam, a lokacin Holocaust. Irin wannan shirin kisan kiyashi mai tsari sosai ba za a iya bayyana shi sosai da kalmomi kaɗan ko ta hanyar komawa ga mutum ɗaya kaɗai ba. Tunani mai canzawa a ma'auni na masana'antu ne ya saita hanyar aiki, da kuma tunanin mutane a matsayin ƙasa da ɗan Adam, wanda ya share fagen ayyukan ta'addanci marasa misali da Taylor ya bayyana. Da zarar Yahudawa da Romawa suka zama, a tunanin jama'a, untermenschen, kuma aka cire su daga tsarin haƙƙoƙin ɗabi'a na yau da kullum da ke ɗaure mutane tare. An horar da mutane su yi tunanin cewa Yahudawa da Romawa ba mutane ba ne, amma beraye masu cuta waɗanda kawar da su larura ce ta al'umma.

The last two sentences strike at the horrific policy of Nazi dehumanisation of Jews in the Holocaust. Such a sophisticated program of extermination cannot however be adequately explained in a few words or with reference to a single architect. It is a changed thinking on an industrial scale that sets the agenda for action, and the thinking of humans as less than human that paved the way for the unspeakable atrocities that Taylor described. Once the Jews and Gypsies became, in the public mind, the untermenschen, and thus excluded from the normal system of moral rights that bind humans together. People had been conditioned to think that Jews and Gypsies were no longer human but infected rats whose disposal was a social necessity.

Saboda haka, yana da muhimmanci sosai ga Musulmi ya kasance yana da kyakkyawar fahimtar tarihi game da al'ummomin da yake hulda da su. Sanin abubuwan da suka yi tasiri sosai a zamantakewa da tarihin mutane na iya buɗe hanyoyin tausayawa da kyakkyawar fahimta. Yanayin tarihinmu yana da alaka bayyananniya da yadda muke kallon duniya da sauran mutane; yana kuma zama wani ɓangare na halayenmu da dabi'unmu. Fahimtar wahalar da wasu suka sha yana iya saukaka mana ganin abubuwa daga mahangar wasu da kuma kara godiya. Daga shari'ar Nuremberg an koyi abubuwa da yawa game da ilimin halayyar "Othering" (ware mutane a matsayin baki) da kuma mayar da wadanda Holocaust ya rutsa da su saniyar ware kamar ba mutane ba, haka kuma game da ilimin halayyar masu aikata laifin. Mummunan cin zarafin iko yana bayyana a shaidun masu aikata laifi na Nazi wadanda suka matsa kaimi kan manufar wulakanta Yahudawa a matsayin al'amarin manufofin zamantakewa. Wulakanta su wani muhimmin bangare ne na tayar da abin da ya fara a matsayin kiyayya da cin zarafi zuwa ware su a ko'ina, wanda ya kai ga kisan gilla da aka yi musu.

In light of the above, it is very important for the Muslim to have a good historical understanding of the peoples with who he or she engages. Knowing of events that have immense socio-historical importance for people can open avenues for empathy and better understanding. Our historical contexts have an obvious bearing on our attitudes towards the world and towards others; they form part of our characters and personalities. Understanding the pain that others have endured can better facilitate perspective taking and harness appreciation. Much was learnt from the Nuremburg Trials about the psychology of Othering and dehumanising of the Holocaust victims, as well as the psychology of the perpetrators. The gross abuse of power is reflected in the testimonies of Nazi perpetrators who had insisted on a policy of debasing Jews as a matter of social policy. Their degrading was a fundamental component of eliciting what began as intolerance and abuse into a widespread othering, culminating in their mass murder.

A cikin shari'un, Gitta Sereny ta tambayi Stangl, "idan za a kashe su ne ko ta yaya, menene amfanin dukkan wulakancin, me yasa azabtarwar?" Stangl ya amsa, "Don a horar da waɗanda a zahiri suka zama dole su aiwatar da manufofin. Don ya zama mai yiwuwa a gare su su aikata abin da suka aikata."66

In the trials, Gitta Sereny asked Stangl, “if they were going to kill them anyway, what was the point of all the humiliation, why the cruelty?” Stangl replied, “To condition those who actually had to carry out the policies. To make it possible for them to do what they did.”66

Abin da masu gadin Nazi suka nuna shi ne cewa dole ne a shafe ainihin mutuntakar wadanda suke kashewa. Sun bukaci a mayar da su 'marasa mutunci', 'kamar dabbobi', kuma halayensu dole ne su dace da zanen batanci da suka yada a cikin al'ummarsu – a kafofin watsa labarai, a makarantu da kuma tsakanin talakawan jama'a. Abin da manufar ta kara bayyanawa shi ne kyamar kisan kai ta halitta da ke cikin dan Adam. Ba abu ne mai sauki ba a aikata kisan kai a irin wannan yawan masana'antu, don haka dole ne a shirya tunani, a horar da shi don yarda cewa bindigar tana nufin bera ko kwari kawai, ba wani mutum mai daidai da shi ba.

What the Nazi guards revealed was that the human identity of their victims needed to be effaced. They needed to become ‘unhuman’, ‘animal-like’ and their behaviour needed to fit the caricature they had promulgated in their social environment – in the media, in schools and among the lay population. What the policy further reveals is the natural, innate abhorrence to murder. It was not so easy to commit murder on such an industrial scale and so the mind had to be programmed, conditioned to believe that the barrel points only at a rodent, a pest and not at an equal human being.

Yana da muhimmanci ga Musulmi ya san mahallin tarihin ɗan Adam baki ɗaya, ya san lokacin da kuma inda zai kasance mai lura da ji, ya kuma fahimci wani yanayi musamman a cikin faɗin tasirinsa. Abu ne mai sauƙi, a kowace alaƙa ta mu'amala, har da wadda ke tsakanin Musulmai, a wasu lokuta mutum ya wuce abin da ake buƙata, ya ketare iyakokin abin da yake da kyau da karɓuwa. Idan ba mu bambanta tsakanin mutane ba, za mu iya fuskantar haɗarin yi wa wasu cikakken zane mara kyau da bayani na gaba ɗaya, har mu kai ga ganin wasu a matsayin baƙi a dabi'ance kuma har abada, duk da cewa suna cikin addini ɗaya da mu. Da irin wannan tunani, mu'amala da wasu tana zama matsala, domin mukan fada cikin irin matsalar da wasu ke da ita game da Musulmai, wato ganin wasu yadda aka koya mana kuma aka horar da mu mu gan su.

It is essential for the Muslim to be aware of the broader contexts of human history, to know when and where to be sensitive and how to understand a specific context in light of its broader resonances. It is quite easy, in any relational context, including one between Muslims, to sometimes go beyond what is required and to overstep the boundaries of what is decent and acceptable. In our failing to make distinctions between people, we can run the risk of caricaturing them completely and in very general terms to the point where we see others as inherently and permanently Othered despite belonging to the same faith. With such a frame of mind, engaging with others is problematised since we fall into the same problem that others have of Muslims - of seeing others as they have been indoctrinated and conditioned to see us.

Labarin 'ya'yan Adam guda biyu yana da muhimmanci ba kawai saboda abin da ya bayyana game da sha'awar da za ta iya kai mutum ga kisa ba, har ma saboda abin da mai kisan zai iya ji, da abin da lamiri yake fada a lokacin da ake aikata laifin. Binciken Milgram da littafinsa Obedience to Authority (Biyayya ga Hukuma) yana ba mu kyakkyawar fahimta game da alaka tsakanin aikata munanan ayyuka da biyayya, da kuma alakar aikata zalunci da rashin damuwa. Daya daga cikin mahalarta binciken biyayya na Milgram ya tuna: "Abin dariya ne yadda mutum yake fara mantawa cewa akwai wani mutum a wajen, duk da cewa zaka iya jin sa. Na dade ina mai da hankali ne kawai kan danna maballan da karanta kalmomin."67

The story of the two sons of Adam is revealing not only for what it describes of the impulse that might drive a person to murder, but also about what that murderer can feel, what the conscience speaks as the crime is committed. Milgram’s study and work Obedience to Authority provides us with a good understanding of the relationship between committing acts of evil and of obedience, as well as the relationship between the committing of acts of cruelty and of indifference. One of the participants in Milgram’s obedience studies recalled: “It’s funny how you really begin to forget that there’s a guy out there, even though you can hear him. For a long time, I just concentrated on pressing the switches and reading the words.”67

Filin fahimta tsakanin mai aikata laifi da wanda aka cutar da shi yana kunkuntar, don haka jin nesa da rashin damuwa suna sa aikin ya bayyana ba shi da muni sosai kuma ya zama mai karɓuwa.

The cognitive field between the perpetrator and his victim is narrowed and so feelings of detachment and indifference enable the act to appear less heinous and more acceptable.

Akasin haka, idan akwai kusanci tsakanin wanda aka cutar da wanda ya aikata cutar, mai aikatawa yana kara sanin alamomin da ɗan adam ya sani – azaba, jini, rashin jin daɗi, da jin tsoro. Yana iya gani da lura da wanda aka cutar, kuma a cikinsa yana iya fara ganin wani sashe na kansa – tushen tausayi. Wannan kuma Kanal Barry Bridges ya nuna a cikin wannan magana:

Contrastingly, when there is proximity between victim and perpetrator the latter is more conscious of human codes of recognisability – pain, blood, unease, and feelings of fear. He can see and observe his victim and in him he can begin to relate to some of himself – the breeding ground of empathy. This is echoed by Colonel Barry Bridges in the following statement:

"Zan iya bambanta tsakanin kasancewa matuƙin jirgin yaƙi da kasancewa wanda ke yaƙar abokan gaba fuska da fuska a ƙasa. A yanayin sama, abu ne mai tsafta, mai nisa, kuma ba shi da cikakken tsanani na mutum. Kana ganin jirgi; kana ganin manufa a ƙasa – ba kana fuska da fuska da gumi da motsin zuciyar yaƙi ba, don haka ba ya zama mai motsa zuciya ko na kai tsaye a gare ka, kuma ina ganin hakan yana da sauƙi ta wannan fuskar – ba ka shafuwa.”68 (Colonel Barry Bridges na Rundunar Sojin Sama ta Amurka)

“I would draw one distinction between being a combat aviator and being someone who is fighting the enemy face-to-face on the ground. In the air environment, it’s very clinical, very clean, and it’s not so personalized. You see an aircraft; you see a target on the ground – you’re not eyeball to eyeball with the sweat and the emotions of combat, and so it doesn’t become so emotional for you and so personalised. And I think it is easier to do in that sense – you’re not affected.”68 (Colonel Barry Bridges of the U.S. Air Force)

In Beziehung zu dem, was ein Täter empfinden mag, wenn solche Verbrechen aus nächster Nähe begangen werden, und zu der Last, die dies auf das menschliche Gewissen legt, untersucht Christopher Browning in seiner sehr aufschlussreichen Studie darüber, was sich bei den gewöhnlichen Deutschen veränderte, die den Holocaust möglich machten, Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland (London, 1992), Folgendes. Was veränderte sich in den Herzen Zehntausender gewöhnlicher Soldaten und Polizisten, Geschäftsleute, Lastwagenfahrer, Schriftsteller und Lehrer, von denen nur eine Minderheit Mitglieder der NSDAP war? Diese Menschen, die Millionen Juden zusammentrieben und planmäßig ermordeten? Browning beschreibt das Zusammentreiben von 1.800 Juden im Dorf Józefów in Ostpolen. Bei dieser Aktion sollten die Juden im arbeitsfähigen Alter in ein Lager in Lublin geschickt werden, während die Frauen, Kinder und Alten an Ort und Stelle erschossen werden sollten. Viele verweigerten an jenem Tag den Befehl. Leutnant Heinz Buchmann gehörte zu ihnen. Er war 1937 der NSDAP beigetreten und war 1942 Kommandeur des ersten Zuges der ersten Kompanie. Als er vom bevorstehenden Massaker an Zivilisten hörte, erklärte Buchmann, er werde „auf keinen Fall an einer solchen Aktion teilnehmen, bei der wehrlose Frauen und Kinder erschossen werden.“69

In relation to what a perpetrator might feel when such crimes are committed from proximity and the bearing this has on a human conscience, Christopher Browning explores in his very revealing study about what changed in the ordinary Germans who made the Holocaust happen, Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland (London, 1992). What changed in the hearts of tens of thousands of ordinary soldiers and policemen, businessmen, truck drivers, writers and teachers, only a minority of who were members of the Nazi party? These people who rounded up and methodically executed millions of Jews? Browning describes the rounding up of 1,800 Jews in the village of Józefów, east-central Poland. In the operation, Jews of working age were to be sent to a camp in Lublin whilst the women, children and elderly were to be shot on the spot. Many refused the order that day. Lieutenant Heinz Buchmann was one of them. He had joined the Nazis in 1937 and by 1942 was commander of the First Platoon of First Company. When hearing of the impending massacre of civilians, Buchmann protested that he “would in no case participate in such an action, in which defenceless women and children are shot.”69

Wasu maza kimanin goma zuwa goma sha biyu kuma sun mika bindigoginsu, mutum goma sha biyu daga cikin 500. Umarnin ranar shi ne a harbi wadanda suka yi rauni da ba za su iya tafiya zuwa kasuwa ba, da duk wanda ya yi kokarin boyewa, sai dai a lokuta da yawa maza sun ki harbin jarirai a lokacin aikin. Cikin firgici da radadin yanayin da kuma euyayyar laifi, wani dan sanda ya ce: "…daga cikin Yahudawan da aka harba a unguwarmu babu jarirai ko kananan yara. Ina so in ce kusan kowa ya kauracewa harbin jarirai da kananan yara ba tare da an fada ba." Wani dan sanda kuma ya lura cewa: "…ba tare da an fada ba, kusan dukkan mazan da abin ya shafa sun guji harbin jarirai da kananan yara. Duk tsawon safiyar nan na iya lura cewa yayin da ake kwasar su, mata da yawa na dauke da jarirai a hannunsu, suna jagorantar kananan yara da hannu."70

Some ten to twelve other men also turned in their rifles, a dozen men out of 500. The orders that day were to shoot those too frail to walk to the marketplace and anyone trying to hide, though in many cases men shied from shooting infants during the operation. Alert to the ghastliness of the scene and emotional guilt, one policeman said that “…among the Jews shot in our section of town there were no infants or small children. I would like to say that almost tacitly everyone refrained from shooting infants and small children.” Another policeman likewise noted that “…tacitly the shooting of infants and small children was avoided by almost all the men involved. During the entire morning I was able to observe that when being taken away many women carried infants in their arms and led small children by the hand.”70

Wani ɗan sanda ya amince cewa ya gano cewa babu ɗaya daga cikin waɗanda aka kashe – mata, tsofaffi, marasa lafiya, jarirai – da zai koma gida da rai a ranar. Mazan ba su shiga tsakani ba. Wasu, duk da haka, sun yi nadamar rashin ƙi tun farko, suna kwatanta kisan da "abin ƙyama."71 Wasu sun roƙa cewa su ma uba ne masu 'ya'ya, don haka ba su iya ci gaba ba. Akwai kuma wasu da suka nemi guje wa aikin a ranar. An san jami'an da ba kwamishinoni ba, dauke da bindigogin harbi na hannu, da "harbi ta gefen" waɗanda aka kashe.72 A lokacin aikin, wasu mazan sun ɓuya a lambun wani firist na Katolika, wasu kuma sun yi yawo a kasuwa, saboda ƙin kama Yahudawa; wasu kuma sun jinkirta shiga ta hanyar ɗaukar lokaci mai tsawo suna binciken gidaje, don su guje wa kasuwannin da za su shiga cikin ƙungiyoyin harbi. Wani direba da aka ba aikin kai Yahudawa dazuzzuka ya yi tafiya ɗaya kawai kafin ya roƙi a sauke shi. Maza da yawa sun koka a ranar cewa ba za su iya harbin mata da yara ba, saboda haka an sauke da yawa daga aikin. Wani soja, Walter Niehaus, an umarce shi ya harbi wata tsohuwa, amma ya kasa ci gaba bayan kisanta, "jijiyoyina sun gama lalacewa gaba ɗaya saboda wannan harbi ɗaya."Wasu sun ce, "Na yi rashin lafiya sosai har ban iya ci gaba ba"; "dukkan wannan aikin ya zama mini abin ƙyama har na koma wurin shugaban ɗan tawagata na ce masa ina rashin lafiya, na nemi a sallame ni."73

One policeman confessed to finding that none of the victims – women, elderly, sick, infants, would return home alive that day. The men did not intervene. Some however regretted not having refused earlier, describing the killings as “repugnant.”71 Some pleaded they too were fathers with children and were unable to continue. There were others still who sought evasion on that day. Non-commissioned officers armed with submachine guns were known to have “shot past” their victims.72 During the operation, other men hid in a Catholic priest’s garden, others hung around a marketplace, because of their reluctance to round up Jews; others delayed their participation by spending additional time in the searching of houses so they could avoid the marketplaces in which they would participate in the firing squads. A driver assigned to take Jews to the forest made only one trip before he asked to be relieved. Many men complained that day that they could not shoot at women and children, and consequently many were relieved from the operation. One soldier, Walter Niehaus was instructed to shoot an elderly woman and was unable to continue after her murder, “my nerves were totally finished from this one shooting.” Others decried, “I had become so sick that I simply couldn’t anymore”; “the entire business was now so repugnant to me that I returned to my platoon leader and told him that I was sick and asked for my release.”73

Ɗaya daga cikin labaran da suka fi tayar da hankali da Browning ya ambata shi ne na Franz Kastenbaum, wanda daga baya ya furta irin rawar da ya taka cikin mummunan aikin da Reserve Police Battalion 101 ya yi.

One of the most evocative accounts cited by Browning describes Franz Kastenbaum who confessed later to his damning participation with Reserve Police Batallion 101:

"Harbin kisan mutanen da aka yi wa harbi ya yi mini tsanani har na rasa harbi na huɗu. Ba zan iya sake nufin daidai ba. Ba zato ba tsammani na ji tashin zuciya, sai na gudu daga wurin harbin. Na bayyana kaina ba daidai ba yanzu. Ba haka ba ne cewa ba zan iya sake nufin daidai ba, sai dai a harbi na huɗu na yi kuskure da niyya. Sannan na shiga cikin daji, na yi amai, na zauna a jikin wata bishiya. Domin in tabbatar babu wani a kusa, sai na yi kira da ƙarfi cikin daji, don ina so in kasance ni kaɗai. A yau zan iya cewa jijiyoyina sun gaji gaba ɗaya. Ina tsammanin na zauna ni kaɗai a cikin daji kimanin sa'o'i biyu ko uku."74

“The shooting of the men was so repugnant to me that I missed the fourth man. It was simply no longer possible for me to aim accurately. I suddenly felt nauseous and ran away from the shooting site. I have expressed myself incorrectly just now. It was not that I could no longer aim accurately, rather that the fourth time I intentionally missed. I then ran into the woods, vomited, and sat down against a tree. To make sure that no one was nearby, I called loudly into the woods, because I wanted to be alone. Today I can say that my nerves were totally finished. I think that I remained alone in the woods for some two or three hours.”74