The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day023.11

Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day023.11
Last-Modified: 2000/07/24

    A.   I have withdrawn that page.

    Q.   You are hoping that Professor Longerich is going to cure that little snag?

     A.   I have withdrawn that page and the previous page, and the
         top half of the following page and replaced them with a
         new section, which is on pages 8 to 12 of my letter of the 10th January.

    Q.   Page 425, I am hoping this is going to take less than 15
         seconds, Magnus Brach (?) says that the Madagascar plan
         was a pure hypocrisy, a verbal smoke screen born out of
         thought games. I am looking at the phrase "thought games",

                                 .          99

          would you agree that this is the same as saying it is a pipe dream?

     A.   He is not -- we are not talking about the Madagascar plan,
          but about the Hitler table talk of the 24th July
          mentioning the Madagascar plan, when, as we know, Hitler
          had long since abandoned it.  He says "pure hypocrisy",
          I had better give the whole quote. "The talk on the 25th
          July by Hitler about sending the Jews to Madagascar was
          pure hypocrisy, at best a verbal smoke screen of Hitler's
         born out of thought games, a smoke screen with which he
         took up a known topic which had also once been the subject
         of concrete planning in order not to call the measures
         which are actually going on against the Jews by their name."

    Q.   Page 426, paragraph 1, which is the lower paragraph 1 on
         the page, an examination of?

    A.   Yes.

    Q.   I may have a mistake here. I have a note here, you say
          that I omit the reference when in fact --

    MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Well, if you do not, we should look at it.

    A.   It must be a different page or something.

    MR IRVING:  Must be looking at a different page. In fact, I
         have commented, it is, in fact, printed in full.  Where am
         I accused of omitting a reference?  But let us move on. In other words --

    MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Take your time, do not rush, Mr Irving.

                                 .          100

     MR IRVING:  In that case we will have a look.  388.  "It is a
          life and death struggle between the Aryan race and the
          Jewish bacillus" is the reference I am accused of omitting.

     MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am not sure what are you looking for.  The
          allegation against you by Professor Evans is that you did not --

     MR IRVING:  I left out --

     MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Presumably in the Goebbels book refer to the
         passage which Goebbels has talking about Hitler as being a
         persistent pioneer and spokesman of radical --

    MR IRVING:  Here, too, the Fuhrer is the staunch champion and
         promoter of a radical solution, and I am accused of having
         omitted it and in fact it is on page 308 of the Goebbels biography?

    A.   Which page of my report is this?

    MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Page 426.

    MR IRVING:  Ah.

     MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Well, at least that is where I assumed you were.

    MR IRVING:  Yes.  Yes, it is staring me in the face, three
         lines from the bottom of the main text.

    A.   Right.

    Q.   It has also been shown how Irving manipulated the diary
         entry in order to omit the Goebbels' reference to Hitler
         as the persistent pioneer and spokesman of a radical

                                 .          101

          solution to the Jewish question"?

     A.   Yes.

     Q.   If you look at page 388 of Goebbels book it is there.

     MR JUSTICE GRAY:  388 or 308?

     Q.   388, it is there.

     MR RAMPTON:  To be fair to the witness, this is a reference
          back to -- I do not see a reference to the Goebbels book here.

     MR IRVING:  Hitler's War.

    MR RAMPTON:  I think it is a reference back to Hitler's War?

    A.   Yes, I was about to say that, my Lord.  I do not deal with
         the Goebbels book in this section.

    MR RAMPTON:  No, I think that is right.

    MR IRVING:  But you agree that it is in the Goebbels biography
         because this, page 388, and it is relevant as concerns
         Goebbels, but not very relevant as concerns Hitler; is
         that a fair statement?

    A.   But you omit it from Hitler's War.

     Q.   Yes.

    A.   Yes.

    MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Well, do you accept it is not very relevant
         as far as Hitler is concerned?

    MR IRVING:  Do you accept that the entry incriminates Goebbels,
         but does not incriminate Hitler?

    A.   No, I do not, no.

    Q.   In law, would it incriminate Hitler?

                                 .          102

     A.   I am not a lawyer, Mr Irving, I am an historian.

     MR JUSTICE GRAY:  What do you mean by "in law", Mr Irving?  Do
          you mean as hearsay as regards Hitler?

     MR IRVING:  In a criminal case, would that be accepted?

     MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I do not think it matters whether it would or
          it would not.  We have to look at hearsay in an historical
          context.  We have spent most of the morning looking at it.

     A.   Particularly in the so-called Schlagerberger memorandum.
         It is hearsay twice removed.  You rely very, very heavily on that.

    MR IRVING:  Professor Evans, when were faced with an abundance
         of documentation and materials and you are obliged to
         write a book that does not contain eight pages of sludge
         every now and then would you agree that the first kind of
         thing that you would chop out would be the hearsay and you
         would leave the hard core stuff in like the police decodes
         and material like that?

     A.   But you do not do that, Mr Irving.  There is masses of
         hearsay. As I said the so-called Schlagerberger memorandum
         is nothing but hearsay twice removed.

    Q.   I will ask the question again.

    A.   If it suits you, Mr Irving, you will put this hearsay in.
         If it suits you to discredit it because it is hearsay
         because it does not conform to your arguments you will
         leave it out.  You have double standards in dealing with

                                 .          103

          this evidence.

     MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Well, the question, I will ask it again is;
          as a historian, Professor, do you agree that if you are
          cutting down a published work for a new edition, the first
          thing that goes is hearsay evidence?

     A.   I cannot agree with that as a general, global statement,
          my Lord.  It depends on what you are writing about, and,
          of course, it depends on what the quality of other
          evidence bearing on this particular problem is.  There are
         occasions when we have to rely on hearsay evidence, though
         one would perhaps rather not.

    MR IRVING:  Page 427, please, the last sentence.  You say there
         is a number of documents and sources which strongly
         suggest that Hitler knew all along.  So at the end of all
         this all can you do is say the document strongly suggests
         something; is that right?

    A.   Yes.  It seems to me a reasonable statement.  I think
         history is about balances of probability, I think.

     Q.   It is a rather damning statement for the defence in this
         action though because what you do not say, and apparently
         you can not say, is that there is a number of documents
         which prove beyond reasonable doubt that Hitler knew, or
         even prove on the balance of probabilities. It is just
         saying you strongly suggest it, after all this huffing and
         puffing and after 55 years of searching through the
         archives and after millions of dollars which your defence

                                 .          104

          assistants have spent the most you can say is "strongly suggest"?

     MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Is that meant to be question?

     MR IRVING:  It is. Well, there was a --

     MR JUSTICE GRAY:  You know what I am getting at, Mr Irving.

     MR IRVING:  Well, sometimes the answers are also long, my Lord.

     MR JUSTICE GRAY:  True.

     A.   Am I supposed to try and answer that?

     MR JUSTICE GRAY:  No, I think you have answered it.

    MR RAMPTON:  So do I.

    MR IRVING:  In other words, there is nothing better than just
         strongly suggest that is how far we have reached?

    A.   I think they do strongly suggest and the point is, of
         course, that these documents, which do strongly suggest to
         the objective historian that Hitler knew all along, are
         not directly confronted by you and taken into account by
         you, but they are manipulated, misrepresented or
         suppressed.  That is the conclusion.

     Q.   My Lord, we are on page 428. We are now on the Himmler
         minute of 22nd September 1942, on which I have
         cross-examined this witness in connection with the chain of evidence.

    A.   Yes, I thought we dealt with this.

    Q.   So, really, there is just one or two little dotting Is and crossing the Ts?

    MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Is that the "abschaffung" of the French

                                 .          105


     MR IRVING:   No, my Lord, it is the Juden austvanderung which is one reason.

     MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Sorry, what date did you say?  December 1941?

     MR IRVING:   September 22nd 1942.

     MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Sorry.

     MR IRVING:   And it is Himmler's handwritten agenda for a
          conversation with Hitler on which he firmly noted down
         before going into see Hitler the topic of Juden
         austvanderung, emigration of the Jews; how are we to proceed?
                   Then there is a new topic underneath that about
         the settlement of Lublin.

    THE WITNESS:   Yes.


    MR IRVING:  It will be in my bundle in the chain of documents, my Lord.

     MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes.  What are you going to ask?  Are you
         going to ask more about that?

    MR IRVING:  One or two minor things, because he has dealt with
         it in some detail.  I am not going to ask about where they were going.
                   On page 430, these are ancillary documents to
         his argument on this, paragraph 4, line 2.  I am afraid
         you have not provided the document for this, so we are

                                 .          106


     A.   No.

     Q.   We are not in a position to judge the quality of this
          source.  It is not in the bundle.  I looked.  You have
          quoted it from Brightman and from Labotsnik's file.  Now
          we know from various sources, including Himmler's letter to his mistress?

     A.   That is generally publicly available, is it?

     MR RAMPTON:  That is not the first time Mr Irving has mentioned
         that correspondence.  It is evident he has either got it,
         or he has seen it, or knows where to find it.  We would be
         very much obliged if it were disclosed.

    MR IRVING:  I am sure you would.

    MR JUSTICE GRAY:  That is not really an answer, Mr Irving.  If
         you have it, it should have been disclosed.  Do you have it?

    MR IRVING:  My Lord, they are aware from the correspondence.
         It is not in my custody, power or possession.  I read
          through the entire file in Chicago.  It is in private
         hands and I have made a three page note which I
         have supplied to the Defendants now.

    MR JUSTICE GRAY:  And you have not taken copies of it?  Or of any of it?

    MR IRVING:  The gentleman concerned wanted a quarter million dollars for them.

    MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Have you taken any copies of any of it?

                                 .          107

     MR IRVING:  There is one page of which I have a facsimile which
          I provided. But I provided to the Defendants the note
          I took at the time on that, which is pretty full and
          extensive.  The reference, from memory, it is Himmler
          writes to this female in July 1942.  He is just about to
          set out on a swing round Lublin and Auschwitz and other
          places. He mentions Auschwitz by name and says there are
          ugly things that he has to do for Germany's sake.  But
          that is the sense of it.  I have not got the exact
         quotation.  But anyway we do know that he had set out.
                   He the question is, witness, at this time, this
         letter is just after Himmler had visited Lublin, Auschwitz --

    MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Mr Rampton, just pause a moment, if you can
         bear in mind that we have all got to get, or at least
         I have to get my bearings, Mr Rampton, it seems to me that
         cannot be taken any further.

    MR RAMPTON:  What cannot?

     MR JUSTICE GRAY:  You have had a synopsis.

    MR RAMPTON:  No, I sat down.  I have not seen it. I do not know
         when we had it but that is --

    MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Well, chase it up if you want to raise it again.

    MR RAMPTON:  That is my problem. That is not Mr Irving's problem.

    MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes, so are we back to the Himmler minute of

                                 .          108

          22nd September?

     MR IRVING:  July 22nd 1942, it is very interesting period, is it not, witness?

     A.   September?

     Q.   Yes, or July --

     A.   Page 430, yes.

     Q.   -- 430, yes.  Labotsnik has written a message in which
          apparently he says the Reichsfuhrer SS has given us so
          much new work that with it now all our most secret wishes
         are to be fulfilled; I am unhappy about this omission
         after the word "Reichsfuhrer SS" because we have
         established you have a bit of a track record of leaving
         things out, have you not, Professor?

    A.   No.

    MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Well, leave aside that is gratuitous as well,
         where is the document?

    MR IRVING:  We do not have the document, my Lord, I have not been shown it.

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

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and to combat hatred. Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.

As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.