Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day024.21
Last-Modified: 2000/07/24
Q. So Himmler was a weak man?
A. In a way Himmler had -- in a way Himmler had some
weaknesses. You are quite familiar, you wrote biographies
about the leading Nazis, and you I think are quite aware
of the fact where are his weakness.
Q. Himmler's brother Gebhardt told me that Heinreich was such
a coward that he would never have done this without
Hitler's orders. So he backs you. But the fact remains
that we are faced with these baffling documents, are we not?
A. Yes. The question is now whether these documents are
really sufficient enough to prove the case that the
Holocaust was carried out by Himmler behind Hitler's back,
you know, without his knowledge, without his approval.
Generally speaking, my impression is that it is impossible
to prove this case.
Q. You mention the transportation, that this could not have
been done without Hitler's orders?
A. All this, not only transportation but the whole magnitude
of this operation.
Q. But Himmler referred specifically to the fact that this
movement of the Jews from the West to East is going to
proceed stage by stage, is the Fuhrer's orders, September
1942 I think is the document?
. P-185
A. Yes.
Q. So that was covered by Hitler's orders, the actual
transportation movement. That was clearly covered by
Hitler's orders?
A. Yes, but all the over -- I can accept that, but it is not
only the transportation. It is the involvement of 10,000
people in police units, in SS units.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: The whole. You do not need to spell it out?
A. The whole operation.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: One can imagine how logistically complicated it was.
A. The Holocaust became known in 1942 to the Western world,
and of course it was used in the Allied propaganda, for
instance, they dropped leaflets on Germany, and so on. So
the whole idea that this process could be kept as a secret
when, you know, 22 officials in the Foreign Ministry alone
read one of the activity reports of 1941 which quite
clearly states that thousands of people are shot, and 22
diplomats were officially allowed to read this. Then to
argue that this was done behind Hitler's back, it seems to
me it defies reason.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. I have your very clear and full answer
on that. Mr Irving, I do not know whether you are going
to move on now?
MR IRVING: I have now reached effectively my planning for the
first report. I will conclude the cross-examination on
. P-186
the second report tomorrow, and then I shall be finished
with Dr Longerich tomorrow, if I may.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, you are really saying you would rather
break off now?
MR IRVING: Quite simply because we did zip through the
glossary. I think it does fall naturally in two stages.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am not sure about that, but if you say you
would like to break off now then I am perfectly happy with
that. Can we just see where we are going from here.
Mr Rampton, are we expecting to have any other witness on
Thursday? I suppose that depends on Mr Irving.
MR RAMPTON: No. I can start re-cross-examination Mr Irving on
Thursday, if we go short with Dr Longerich. If not I will
do that on Monday. I am expecting Professor Funke to be
here on Tuesday.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Have you got a whole day's further
cross-examination, do you think?
MR RAMPTON: Probably.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am not surprised.
MR RAMPTON: Probably, because I have not done the political
association. Considering the volume of material there is,
I am going to keep it short, but it is still bound to take
a bit of time.
MR IRVING: My Lord, ought I to question this witness about the
Schlegelberger document which he has not referred it in
his report?
. P-187
MR JUSTICE GRAY: He has not, you are quite right, and
I personally think there is absolutely no need, because if
there is one topic that has been investigated exhaustively
it is certainly that one.
MR IRVING: I do not want to be criticised for not having done so.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: I will not criticise you and I do not think
Mr Rampton will either.
MR IRVING: Your Lordship is aware I attach great importance to it.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I realize you do.
MR RAMPTON: I would point out, therefore, that it is likely
that I will place reliance on what Dr Longerich has
already said about that, which is that, in effect, he
thinks it is a document of no historical significance.
MR IRVING: Yes.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. The trouble is you cannot nibble at
these issues. I hope Mr Irving will not take that as an
invitation to open the whole issue.
MR RAMPTON: No, but it is only fair that I should say that.
I would use as corroboration for reliance on that what
Professor Evans has said about it.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Professor Evans?
MR RAMPTON: Yes.
MR IRVING: If Professor Evans wishes to have a chance to
amplify the reason why he considers it to be insignificant
. P-188
or less significant than do I, then this would be the opportunity.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think the answer to that is that he will
not want to.
MR RAMPTON: He is in Cambridge.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think you meant Dr Longerich, did you not?
MR IRVING: That was the correct inference, yes.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am sure he will not want to, but Mr Rampton
is entitled to rely on his commentary about it. Since
I know so clearly what the issues are each way on it,
I really see very little benefit to be derived from going
through all the points all over again.
MR IRVING: I have no desire to.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: If you want to I am not stopping you.
MR IRVING: But I thought it would only be fair in view of the
fact that he did express that negative opinion on it, if
he wished to have the opportunity to amplify on that that
he should, but if he does not so ----
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Just so it is clear, I am not for a moment
stopping you from cross-examining fully on your reasons
for saying why the Schlegelberger memorandum is a very
important document, but I will not hold it against you
that you did not cross-examine if you do not. I want to
be absolutely clear what my position on that is.
MR IRVING: If your Lordship will not then I shall not.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Good. I think that is a sensible outcome,
. P-189
because otherwise it is just a waste of time.
MR RAMPTON: Can I give your Lordship two more references to
close the day.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes.
MR RAMPTON: Day 2, page 262, lines 11 to 17, I will read it
out for Mr Irving's benefit so he knows exactly.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Of what?
MR RAMPTON: Of my cross-examination in the transcript.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Day 2?
MR RAMPTON: Yes, page 262. Again I am afraid for some reason
best known, perhaps it is that I merely lay the ground and
all the bright questions seem to be asked by your
Lordship. Maybe your Lordship has a better facility for
getting straight answers, I do not know. Anyway, page
262, line 11, Mr Justice Gray asks Mr Irving:
"Do you accept that means," this is about report
No. 51, "since it is addressed to the Fuhrer that it was
shown to him?"
Answer: "On a high probability, yes, my Lord.
I would have accepted that as being evidence that it had
probably been shown to Hitler, but I would also draw
attention to one, two or three details, if I may, since we
are looking at the document."
Then bottom of page 264, which is on the same
physical sheet of paper, line 23, again your Lordship is
asking the question:
. P-190
"To be asked what you think this would have
conveyed to Hitler, which is I think what Mr Rampton was
asking?"
Answer: "Firstly, I accept the document was in
all probability shown to Hitler. Secondly, I think in all
probability he paid no attention to it, the reason being
the date, the height of the Stalingrad crisis".
If there is going to be a retreat from that
position, it is going to have to have, in submission,
quite a good reason.
MR IRVING: Well, my response is that I think documents are
often shown to learned counsel which learned counsel
sometimes pay no attention to. I think Mr Carmen is an
example of that.
MR RAMPTON: I am not Mr Carmen for one thing, and I shall not
say what I feel about that.
MR IRVING: Also your Lordship will remember ----
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let Mr Rampton tell us more about it.
MR RAMPTON: For another thing, that is only to say that it
seems that that concession, and I advisedly use that word,
seems to remain in place.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Indeed it is fortified, because Mr Irving is
there saying that, all right, it may have been shown to
Hitler, but he paid no attention to it, well, that is
almost the same as saying it was not shown to him. But he
goes done in day 4 and 5 in the passages that you have
. P-191
referred to I think to accept that Hitler knew and approved.
MR RAMPTON: Yes, knew about the systematic mass shootings in the East.
MR IRVING: Your Lordship remember that I produced evidence to
you a day or two later showing that on precisely that day
or the day before one document of exactly the same nature
was shown to Hitler on two successive days, submitted to
him and obviously not read by him.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. I suspect the position will emerge that
you have slightly shifted your ground backwards and
forwards in the course of your answers to Mr Rampton.
MR IRVING: It is highly possible that one learns as one goes
along, and one would be incorrigible if one did not.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: I will not comment about that, but you have
now put your case actually in considerable detail to
Dr Longerich and we have now had his answers.
MR IRVING: Yes.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: So tell me what your final stance is, because
I would like to know, but the evidence is all in now.
MR RAMPTON: I would like to know too.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: So 10.30 tomorrow morning.
(The witness withdrew)
(The court adjourned until the following day)
. P-192
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.