Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day022.10 Last-Modified: 2000/07/24 Q.So a statement made by Admiral Canaris to the disadvantage of the Fuhrer should be viewed circumspectly, should it? A.Well, no more circumspectly, I mean, than those of other members of the resistance or any other source. One takes all these things on their own merits. I do not think you can simply discredit what members of the resistance said about Hitler simply because they were critical of him. Q.Not necessarily untrue but ---- . P-85 A.Though you would like to discredit everything that is critical that is said about Hitler. Q.In other words, a statement made by Canaris would not necessarily be untrue ---- A.No. Q.--- but you might want to have a document to back it up, another document, a second source? A.Yes, I think you have to make it clear that Canaris is who he is. Q.At the top of the following page, of course, you quote then what information came back from Canaris. A.Yes. Q."This man", Canaris, "who has constant access to the Fuhrer is said to have described the consequences and the terrible nature of these methods, namely the killings, to the F", Hitler, "once more compellingly" ---- A.Yes. Q.--- "whereupon he", Hitler, "is said to have said, 'You want to show weakness, do you, Mein Herr, I have to do that for after me there will not be another one to do it". A.Yes. Q.In other words, "I had to do the killings". A.Yes. Q.And this is Canaris' statement about what Hitler's response to him was? A.Yes. . P-86 Q.And is the fact that the channel of information that it comes through Admiral Canaris not sufficient to make one want possibly to quote that reference, but add a caveat at the end and say, "Well, of course, Admiral Canaris may have been reporting something genuinely, but it has to be borne in mind that he was later hanged as a member of the anti-Hitler resistance"? A.Well, I do not -- I mean, I do not think that it necessarily disproves it. I mean, the crucial thing really is that this, this is obviously a second-hand evidence and one has to make that clear, but I do not think, as I say, you should discredit, or I do not think you should say that I think it is unlikely that people who disapproved of Hitler and his methods simply made up things about him. I think the members of the German resistance were honourable men. Q.Yes. Are you aware of the fact that I have large parts of the private diary and official diary of Admiral Canaris and his second-in-command, Colonel Naruzon, also? They both kept diaries and I have parts of the Canaris diary which were in British Cabinet Office files right up to June 1943, covering this period, in other words? A.You mean they are in British Cabinet Office files? Q.Yes. MR JUSTICE GRAY: So what? What is the significance of that? MR IRVING: I was going to ask in the best way I can that if . P-87 there is no reference to any such remark by Adolf Hitler in that diary, would that be one reason, if this information had been before me at any time? A.Too many "ifs" there; I would have to see the diary with dates, but it does say here that he is, that he has said to have described the consequences ---- Q.Yes. A.--- whereupon Hitler is said to have said, so it is clear. I mean, it is an important piece of evidence, but it is very indirect and I think one has to make that clear. Q.So there are two parts of that statement, that he made the report to Hitler which is probably credible because that is why the report had been sent to him? A.Yes. Q.Whereupon, and this is the second part of the statement, Hitler is said to have said something? A.Yes. Q.And then at some point in time, two or three days later about, a message comes back out to Riga saying, "These shootings have to stop. These kind of mass killings, mass shootings have to stop". This is the first part. I know we will come to the part you want to come to next. A.We have to be clear about the dates here. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Sometime after 30th November 1941? A.That is right. . P-88 MR IRVING: Sometime after 30th November? A.January '42 being the letter. So we do not know exactly when this actually happened. It is a piece of supporting evidence for what is in the Bruns document. Q.Can you look at the end of the Bruns Report where Bruns describes going back at some time to see the man he refers to as Altenmeyer, but in fact his name was Altemeyer - --- A.Yes. Q.--- a 23 year-old SS gangster who was the big top brass on the spot. Altemeyer says, "We have received this new order saying that this kind of mass shootings have to stop", and then he adds a sneering comment afterwards which we will come to in a minute? A.Well, yes. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think perhaps one ought to read the whole of what is quoted? A.One should read the whole thing. MR IRVING: My Lord, I do want to take this in two parts, if I may? A.It would help, I think, if I read the whole thing. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think you should. A."Altenmeyer triumphantly shows me, 'Here's an order that has come that saying that mass shootings of this kind may no longer take place in the future. That is to be done more cautiously or discreetly". MR IRVING: Shall we take the first part of that first? If . P-89 this order has come, that this kind of mass shootings have got to stop, what does your supposition about whether, knowing what you now do about the report that went up from Canaris, through Canaris to the "F", to the Fuhrer, and that back comes this order saying, "This kind of mass shootings has got to stop", can you draw any conclusions from that? A.Yes, it would seem likely that the order derived from Hitler. Q.And is there any connection at all, do you think, with the police decodes we looked at yesterday from Himmler, December 1st 1941, where he orders Jaeckel straight to Fuhrer's Headquarters on December 4th and there is a meeting between the two of them on December 4th, "These arbitrary measures have got to stop. You have got to stick to the guidelines. I will severely punish actions like this." Do you see any connection between all this? A.Well, Himmler's meeting with Jaeckel was in his own headquarters. Q.Do you see any connection with this kind of general chain of events, that killings were going on and they stopped, that there are orders that these mass shootings have got to stop and there are reports to Hitler? Do you see, does your brain -- I know it is difficult for you to grapple with totally new concepts, but here is this matter. We are trying to work out who possibly may have ordered, . P-90 "These kinds of mass shootings have to stop"? MR RAMPTON: Well, I am sorry, that just ---- MR IRVING: Mr Rampton, I do wish you would stop interrupting every time we are doing something. MR RAMPTON: Counsel, I am afraid, as his Lordship will tell Mr Irving, has a right to intervene when the cross-examination is proceeding on a false and time wasting basis. He has a duty to the court and to his client and to the witness. It is not possible for that question to be answered as though the second sentence did not exist, in my submission. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I have well in mind the whole of it, and I think one has to take the whole of it in end, Mr Irving. MR IRVING: My Lord, we are very definitely going to come to the second sentence, but I do respectfully submit that I am taking this in the proper sequence, and we will give each part of that second sentence the weight that it deserves. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, you see, I do not really see that you can do that. If by taking half the sentence you really significantly distort the sense of the whole of it, it seems to me the question is being asked on something of a false premise. MR RAMPTON: Yes. MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is the difficulty. I think what you ought to do, if I may suggest it, is proceed the other way . P-91 round, as it were, and deal with the latter part of it, namely that the shootings are to be carried out more discreetly, and put your case. MR IRVING: If that will make my case more comprehensible to your Lordship, I will willingly do that. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I know what it is because you have just mentioned it.I think that is the right way of doing it, if I may say so, and it meets Mr Rampton's objection. MR IRVING: I appreciate why Mr Rampton keeps on interrupting and it is now becoming statistically evident that every time I am about to make what I consider to be an important point ---- MR JUSTICE GRAY: If I thought he were doing that, I would tell him to desist. MR IRVING: Because it does seriously disrupt the flow of cross-examination when this occurs. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, do not let it disrupt it any more. MR IRVING: Professor Evans, I referred just now to the message decoded on December 1st. There were, in fact, three messages, the first one on the morning of December 1st was from Jaeckel to Himmler saying: "I need to have six more tommy guns". Can you accept that as being the fact? We have seen them in court. A.Yes. Q.The next one from Himmler's staff to Jaeckel later on December 1st says: "You are to report back to the . P-92 Fuhrer". A.Yes. Q."And tell us what means of travel your are adopting". A.Report back, not to the Fuhrer. Q.And the second message is signed by Himmler himself, with what I aver is greater urgency, saying: "This kind of arbitrary action has exceeded the guidelines"---- A.No, it says: "Arbitrary actions". Q."Arbitrary actions" ---- A.It does not say: "This kind of arbitrary action", does it? Q.I do not want to ---- A."Eigenmachtigkeiten und zuwieder Handlungen," or something. Q."Und zuwieder Handlungen werden strengsens bestraft". A.Yes, exactly. Q.Is this not an indication that the shootings were done in disfavour at one of the highest levels, if I can put it like that? A.Yes, this relates to the shooting of the transport from Berlin by Jaeckel which ---- Q.Now we are coming to ---- A.Which Himmler, on 30th November, Himmler and Heydrich clearly wanted to be stopped and did not get to on time. Q.Now we are coming to the point which his Lordship attaches importance. Is there any hint in these messages that went . P-93 from one of these highest levels out to Jaeckel, that shootings could continue provided they were done in surreptitious way? A.The reference in those clearly refers to Jews who were transported from Berlin. It clearly relates to the trainload that came on 30th November and was shot, and it quite clearly relates to the shooting of Jews who were transported from Germany. Himmler and Heydrich wanted it to stop and, indeed, it does stop. What the Bruns document says is, in effect, that mass shootings must continue but more discreetly. They do not ---- Q.Can we remain with the hard evidence which is the decodes, please. A.I am sorry, the hard evidence is, "here is an order that has come saying that mass shootings of this kind" ---- Q.No, we are referring to the decodes. A. --- "may no longer take place in the future. That is to be done more cautiously". Q.Which is? A.You interpret that as saying Hitler seemingly intervened at once to order a "halt zu diese Masseneschiessungen" -- these mass shootings -- whereas the word actually says: "Der artige Masseneschiessung" -- this kind of mass shooting, and you leave out the sentence about this having to be done more cautiously.
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012
Home · Site Map · What's New? · Search Nizkor