Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day005.02
Last-Modified: 2000/08/01

   MR IRVING:  The reason it is dated December 30th is because
my card index is organized according to the date that
        something was allegedly shown to Hitler, not the date of
        the document.  It is a telegram from Muller, the Chief of
        the Gestapo, back to Himmler on combating the high level
        achievement in Serbia, and it has been sent by Himmler to
        Hitler to have a look at.  It is in the big Fuhrer
        typeface, and you will notice, my Lord, that on this
        occasion Fiefer has endorsed the document twice, laid
        before December 30th, laid before December 31st.  In other
        words, twice he has put it on Hitler's breakfast tray
        outside his door.  He is not looking at it.  Is this not,
        my Lord, precisely the point I made yesterday, that Hitler
        had other things on his plate?  He was fighting the battle
        of Stalingrad.  He had a quarter of a million men trapped
        in Stalingrad.  He was waiting for it to break through.

.          P-9



        He had the battle crews out in the Arctic.  He had all
        these things going on.  Here is Himmler's message lying
        outside his breakfast room door twice, and the adjutant
        putting a note on it, saying he has twice put it out
        there, twice he has laid it before him.  He would not have
        had to do it twice if it was read the first time, my
        Lord,.
                  I suggest this casts serious doubt on the
        proposition that we can accept that the other document was
        necessarily shown to Hitler.  I would not put it any
        stronger than that.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Just let us keep an eye on the reality.  You
        did accept yesterday, as I understand it, that the
        shooting of Jews and others on the Eastern Front was a
        programme which was systematic and co-ordinated by Berlin,
        and Hitler was aware and approved of what was going on.
   MR IRVING:  The shootings of Russian Jews, my Lord, yes.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes.  So, in a sense the issue whether a
        document was laid before Hitler and read by him becomes
        relatively speaking insignificant, in this context.
   MR IRVING:  I disagree, with respect.  I think that this shows
        how flaky the whole system was.  What Mr Rampton would
        like to describe as being a cast iron, watertight
        bureaucratic system with reports going this way and
        messages coming back, it breaks down at the very top level
        when you are dealing with a man, the head of state

.          P-10



        himself, who has other things on his plate. I would
        suggest that there is a very strong reason to suspect that
        this is precisely the reason why Himmler slid that figure
        in, because he apprehended quite likely that the boss was
        not going to read it.
                  That may possibly be going too far to impute
        that to him, but certainly this indication that on this
        very day documents were being put to Hitler twice and not
        being read can indicate that that 29th December document
        cannot, therefore, necessarily have been taken as having
        been read and submitted no doubt to Adolf Hitler or taken
        cognisance of it.  That is the only point I want to make,
        my Lord.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Thank you very much.  Is that it?
   MR IRVING:  That is it.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Would you like to go back into the witness
        box?
   MR RAMPTON:  Can I say two things before that happens?  We
        would very much like to see the German version of the
        Kovno train message, if it exists, if Mr Irving has it?
        That was page 6 of the first of these.
   MR IRVING:  My Lord, it was actually mailed to the instructing
        solicitors, about three weeks ago.
   MR RAMPTON:  What, the German?
   MR IRVING:  In a bundle.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  The German version of what?  Did you say page

.          P-11



        6?
   MR RAMPTON:  Page 5 I meant.
   MR IRVING:  I will certainly supply it again.
   MR RAMPTON:  That would be very kind.  If we have had it
and it
        has not got to me, that is entirely our fault.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am still puzzled.  Page 5 is in German.
   MR RAMPTON:  Oh, 5?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  You said 6 and then I thought you said 5.
   MR RAMPTON:  I did say 5.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  That is in German.
   MR RAMPTON:  I say no, I am looking at a different document
        with "05" at the bottom.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Are you not looking at the clip?
   MR RAMPTON:  No, to this previous one.
   MR IRVING:  The little bundle probably.
   MR RAMPTON:  Does your Lordship remember the train load of
        Berlin Jews to Kovno?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes, I do.
   MR RAMPTON:  J3.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am putting this latest clip into the
back
        of J.  I know Miss Rogers is keeping track.
   MR RAMPTON:  Tab 5, my Lord.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I have something in tab 5 already anyway.
        They are all going in there.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am sorry, Mr Rampton.  You are back on
        what?

.          P-12



   MR RAMPTON:  I raised the question whether or not the
German of
        this report, or message No. 35 on page 5, exists and,
if
        it does, whether I can see it.  If we already have it,
        then enquiries are perhaps futile.
   MR IRVING:  I will certainly produce another copy tomorrow.
   MR RAMPTON:  That is very kind.  The other thing I should
        mention because I said I would and your Lordship asked
me
        to is this.  We spoke to Professor van Pelt yesterday.
He
        says at this late stage it would be extremely
difficult
        for him to alter his arrangements and come later on in
the
        case.  So, with your Lordship's permission, I will
adhere,
        if I may, to my schedule, which is to start
        cross-examination about Auschwitz on Monday when he
will
        be here.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I must ask Mr Irving whether that is
going to
        cause him problems.
   MR IRVING:  I shall just burn the candle at both ends which
is
        nothing new.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  No, but I am conscious that you have a
fair
        old burden, being effectively, as it appears, on your
        own.  You say if things are getting on top of you.
   MR IRVING:  It is proper that we should continue with
        Auschwitz.
   MR RAMPTON:  I am very grateful for that.  The other thing
        which arises out of that is that Mr Irving said, I
think
        yesterday, that at some stage he would like to have an

.          P-13



        argument about the significance and relevance of
Auschwitz
        so far as this case is concerned.  Plainly, if I am
going
        to start cross-examining on Monday, we ought to have
that
        argument this week and the question is when.  I
understand
        Professor Watt is coming on Thursday.  Have I got that
        right?
   MR IRVING:  That is correct, but I think he will be
relatively
        brief.
   MR RAMPTON:  He will, at least, as far as I am concerned.
We
        might perhaps do that on Thursday also, because then
we
        will know what the framework is before Monday.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes.  Can you just, so I can think about
it,
        give me in a couple of sentences what you understand
the
        argument to be about?
   MR RAMPTON:   It has been our case all along -- the book is
        about Holocaust denial.  Auschwitz in Mr Irving's
        utterances and certainly in our eyes is at the centre
of
        Holocaust belief.  It is therefore at the centre of
        Holocaust denial.  Mr Irving has flatly denied that
there
        were any gas chambers for killing human beings at
        Auschwitz.  We say he has done that on the basis of
really
        no evidence whatsoever.  It illustrates two things:
First
        of all, his casual attitude to an important matter of
        history and, secondly, his political attitudes and
        sympathies.  That has been in our case from the very
        beginning and still is.

.          P-14



   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes, I understand all of that, but what
might
        be going to disappear from the case?
   MR RAMPTON:  Only this, that Mr Irving may be going to
        concede -- this is what I do not know because for one
        reason he never answered our Auschwitz questions -- as
we
        contended and as I have already said in open court,
that
        the Liechter report is bunk.  If he is, then I cut a
great
        swathe through my cross-examination.  I throw three
        quarters of it out of the window.  I do not need it.
That
        why it is important to know what he says.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  It does not sound to me like a terribly
long
        argument I am not going to ask you, Mr Irving, to
answer
        it now.
   MR IRVING:  I would just draw attention to the fact that
this
        court is seized only with the issues as pleaded and
not
        with the issues as portrayed by Mr Rampton.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am not going to pursue this now but the
        fact is that, on the proceedings as I understand them
at
        the moment, you rely quite heavily on the Liechter
report
        for your proposition that there were no gas chambers
at
        Auschwitz.
   MR IRVING:  I think that your Lordship will realize the
error
        of that statement, if I may respectfully put it like
that,
        when we come to the cross-examination both of myself
and
        of the expert witnesses.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Then we obviously do need to have an
argument

.          P-15



        about this, because I have, to an extent anyway,
        misunderstood the position.  Let us carry on.  Would
you
        like to come back?
                  < Mr David Irving, recalled.
                  < Cross-Examined by Mr Rampton QC.
   A.   My Lord, I did produce also the Himmler diary so that
you
        could see the actual page I worked from, if you wish
to
        see the quality of the photocopy.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Does it carry the matter much further?
   A.   Only if your Lordship intends to attach much weight to
        Mr Rampton's suggestion that I deliberately and
wilfully
        misread that word.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am not saying I am not so, if you want
me
        to have a look at it, I will. I doubt whether it will
be
        significantly different from the photocopy I have in
the
        file.
   A.   Well, we will leave it.
   MR RAMPTON:  Mr Irving, you have left behind, I am sorry,
your
        little clip that you brought with you this morning.
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Somebody will give it to you.  The only page I am
        interested in at the present is page 3.
   A.   Page 3, yes.
   Q.   I have only two questions, three questions possibly.
Did
        any such cases occur in practice?
   A.   We have a document which we can produce to the court

.          P-16



        showing that the Germans were instructed actually to
build
        special camps for these special category -- I am
sorry,
        this is not an answer to that particular question.
Were
        any actually sold?
   Q.   Yes.
   A.   No, not to my knowledge.
   Q.   Do you know what sort of cases were envisaged?
   A.   Not on the basis of this document which I produced,
no.
   Q.   Do you know what the scale of this proposal was meant
to
        be?
   A.   This document does not show that.
   Q.   No.  You do not know from extraneous sources the
answers
        to any of my questions?
   A.   The answer is?
   Q.   Those two last two questions:  Do you know not the
answer
        from other evidence?
   A.   Not that I wish to repeat just from memory, which may
be
        uncertain on oath.
   Q.   Thank you very much.  Now I would like to return, if
        I may, to something that cropped up yesterday.  It is
in
        fact the only topic that cropped up yesterday that I
am
        going to return to, save for continuing with the table
        talk but that is not really a repetition.  Could you,
        please, be given Hitler's War 1977, the first volume.
My
        Lord that is D 1 (i).
   A.   I have it here.

.          P-17



   Q.   Would you please turn to page 341?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   The left hand page that is.  Here again you are
purporting
        to give a translation of the table talk of 25th
October
        1941, are you not, in the second paragraph?
   A.   On the right hand page, you mean?
   Q.   No, 331?
   A.   Yes, 331.
   Q.   In my copy it is the left hand page.
   A.   Odd numbers are always right hand pages in books.
   Q.   That may be so.  Here you purport, do you not, to give
a
        translation of the table talk of 25th October 1941.
Is
        that right?
   A.   I have just reproduced the remarks noted by the
adjutant,
        yes.
   Q.   Take it slowly.  The answer to my question I think is
yes,
        is it not?
   A.   I cannot see the word "translation" in that paragraph.
   Q.   You have put it in quotes in English.  The quotes
start at
        "from the rostrum" and end at "terror is a salutary
        thing", do they not?
   A.   Yes, but the word "translation" does not occur there.
You
        are saying that I am purporting that this is a
        translation.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  It obviously is.  Let us move on.
   A.   I apprehend that he intends to attach importance to
the

.          P-18



        word "translation".  This is why.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:   Let us wait and see.
   MR RAMPTON:  That version, let us call it, was -- for this
        fact on its own I make no criticism -- taken straight
        from the Weidenfeld and Nicholson?
   A.   It was an accurate transcript of the original official,
        shall we say, translation of the Hitler's table talk that
        I produced to his Lordship this morning.
   Q.   At that date you did not have the Genoud original?
   A.   In 1977 nobody had them except Mr Genoud.

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor