The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day003.14

Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day003.14
Last-Modified: 2000/07/29

   Q.   I will.  I am trying to get back to your state of mind in
        1970 something when you first wrote this passage which got
        replicated in 1991.  I look at what you had in front which
        you told us this morning was just the sheet.  You did not
        have the surrounding material.  German is an ordinary,
        Western European language.  They think like us, they speak
        somewhat like us, and the entry is:  "Jew transport
        Berlin", full stop, "no liquidation".  Now, if the
        "liquidation" refers to Jews, it refers to those Jews
        no other Jews?
   A.   Mr Rampton, you have four topics referred to in that
        conversation, one, two, three and four.  One, two and
        three are all totally different topics from each
        and it is very reasonable to assume that the fourth
        is probably also yet another fourth topic.

.          P-121

   Q.   That is interesting.
   A.   But you say there was no other document before me at
        time.  Of course, there were the rest of these
        logs.  For example, the reference to "no destruction
        the gypsies" which clearly shows the way which
        are going at the top.
   Q.   So you mean the fourth line, "Keine Liquidierung"
        refer to the verhaftung of Dr Jakelius?
   A.   Equally.
   Q.   What is the verhaftung of Dr Jakelius?
   A.   The arrest of Dr Jakelius. Dr Jakelius, my research
        established, was an euthanasia doctor in Vienna who
        been arrested for some reason.
   Q.   OK.  He has been arrested.  What is the Angleblich
   A.   Somebody who was, apparently, claiming to be a son of
        Molotoff.  Molotoff, the Foreign Minister, had no
   Q.   And then there is the "Judentransport aus Berlin"?
   A.   Then come -- yes.
   Q.   Then the fourth line is "Keine Liquidierung", so this
        could mean that none of those three groups,
categories, is
        to be liquidated.  Is that what you are telling us?
   A.   I do not think I said that.  I am saying that all four
        lines can be taken separately because the first three
        lines are quite clearly separate topics from each
   Q.   Let us go through it.  Plainly, it is an utter
nonsense to

.          P-122

        talk about the "angeblich sohn Molotoff" as being
        to an injunction against liquidation, is it not?
   A.   Subject to?
   Q.   Being subject to an injunction against liquidation?
   A.   Well, very clearly it is.  If somebody was the son of
        prominent Soviet leader, they would definitely be kept
        a very special confinement.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  He was thought at one time to have been
        that train.
   A.   The usual trick was that a prisoner would be taken and
        would claim to be Churchill's son or nephew or cousin
        something like, and knowing that they would not be
able to
        kill him.  But it would be dangerous to read too much
        into three words.  All we know is that Molotoff had no
        sons and that, obviously, there is no connection
        the Jakelius and Molotoff.
   MR RAMPTON:  No, but, of course, there is no full stop
        "Jakelius" either, is there, so it might be asserted
        he was arrested because he was pretending to be the
son of
        Molotoff, might he not?
   A.   I am not sure how much time the court wishes to...
   MR RAMPTON:  Well, this is fanciful.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am wondering whether we have not
        through this document sufficiently.
   MR RAMPTON:  Is it not?  The "Keine Liquidierung" refers to
         "Judentransport aus Berlin" whether there is a full

.          P-123

        or not.
   A.   This is your opinion, but it is not mine, Mr Rampton,
        I am writing my book in early 1970s and ----
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  It comes to this.  In the early 1970s you
        took that, as you now accept wrongly, to have been a
        reference to Jews generally?
   A.   At large or at larger than is justified.  I took it to
        transportation, the transporetation of the Jews as ---
   MR RAMPTON:  No, in the introduction it is "at large", not
        larger".  In the introduction it is all Jews.
   A.   Yes.  This was the inference that I drew ----
   Q.   This is the incontrovertible evidence that Hitler had
        ordered, no liquidation of any Jews anywhere.
   A.   Into account I take when writing that sentence my
        expertise based on all the other documents that we
have by
        that time already collected, and, of course, now we
know a
        great deal more which proves I was absolutely right to
        write what I wrote at that time.
   Q.   Mr Irving, we are not here to find out whether you
        right or wrong; if we were, we would be here until the
        next Millennium.
   A.   I doubt it.
   Q.   No doubt.  We are here to test your credentials, your
        honesty and your integrity, as an historian, a
        of these events.  The proposition which I put to you
        you to deny is that you deliberately distorted the

.          P-124

        of these two lines so as to make the reference to
        Liquidierung" without any warrant whatsoever appear to
        a reference to Jews everywhere?
   A.   This sentence would only stand up in court, in my
view, if
        you were able to establish that at the time I wrote
        sentences I knew different and better.  I think it
        be very difficult to make that stand.  To show that
        makes a mistake in interpreting a translation of the
        "transport", that one chooses the wider interpretation
        rather than the narrow narrower definition that we now
        know to be correct from the other documentation, this
        not a deliberate wilful and perverse distortion or
        manipulation or translation of a document.
   Q.   I put it to you, Mr Irving, that, on the contrary, it
        quite plainly is -- shall we leave it there -- which
        deny?  Just while we are on the question of full
        since you have raised it, if we go to page 14 in your
        little bundle, we see the rather worse photograph,
        I agree, of the same sort of document that the log for
        beginning of December, the first day of December?
   A.   Precisely, yes.
   Q.   Yes, and I do not know, this is not a very good copy,
        you certain whether or not there is a full full stop
        word ----
   A.   "SS"?
   Q.   --- "Verwaltung", yes, "SS"?

.          P-125

   A.   The second rune, you know what I mean by the rune, the
        lightening flash that the SS ----
   Q.   Yes, SS thing.
   A.   --- the second rune is right off the photocopy.
   Q.   I know.
   A.   So we cannot tell if there is a full stop or not.
   Q.   Have you got the original?
   A.   I have got it in my volume at the end -- the blue
        marked "Himmler Diary".
   Q.   Have you got that printed transcript of these
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  It is in this file, is it not?
   A.   Well, I am afraid that I do not trust this ----
   Q.   OK.
   A.   --- to that degree.  Let me just explain why I will
        trust this for being that kind of evidence.  On two or
        three occasions I spotted instead of writing "u." for
        "und", they have written out "Und" in full.
   Q.   My fault entirely.  I used the wrong document.  One
        make mistakes.  I quite agree.  Turn back to page 13
        your own documents, will you?  This is your carefully
        retranscribed version of the Himmler log?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Where you correct the mistake "Juden" to read properly
   A.  "Haben" with a small "h".
   Q.   And there is no full stop after "SS", is there?

.          P-126

   A.   It would have been highly improper of me to have put a
        full stop in if there was not one visible on the
   Q.   Exactly.  What would in German the sentence or phrase
        (because is not really a sentence) "VerwaltungsFuhrer
        SS haben zu bleiden" mean -- I mean "Juden zu
        I beg your pardon.  What would it mean?
   A.   Jews to remain.
   Q.   No, no.  I will read it in English: "Administrative
        officers, leaders, of the SS Jews to remain"?
   A.   Read like that, it would mean nothing at all.  It
would be
        quite meaningless.
   Q.   Exactly.  It would be a complete nonsense, would it
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Thank you.  Be patient with me, Mr Irving.  I am just
        going to a new topic now.  Mr Irving, you are
        I suppose and, in fact, I know you are, that Adolf
        made a speech I think to Reich and Gauleiters in
Berlin on
        12th December 1941.  I am still in the same period of
        short period of history.
   A.   4th December?
   Q.   Yes, 12/12/41.
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   We know that because there is a report of it in
        diary for 13th December, is there not?
   A.   There is a reference to it.

.          P-127

   Q.   Yes.  Well, there is rather more than that, I think.
        you got -- have you got your Goebbels book there?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  The answer is "no" can he be provided
with a
   MR RAMPTON:  Yes, please somebody give him a Goebbels.
   A.   It is here.  I have it here.
   Q.   If you turn to page 383 you see in the first complete
        paragraph you start like this: "Addressing the...
        still in Berlin Hitler opted for greater candour.  He
        confessed that he had spent sleepless nights...
whether he
        was doing the right thing in declaring war on
                  Then you quote Goebbels:  "The Fuhrer"
        reported to his diary "is convinced that he would have
        to declare war on the Americans sooner or later.  Now
        conflict in the Far East drops into our laps as an
        bonus". "He viewed the battle of the Atlantic" etc.
        down to the end of paragraph "an unavoidable hitch".
        Footnote 72.  In footnote 72, which is on page 646,
        explain that those references are taken from Goebbels
        diary on 13th December.
   A.   That is correct, and that is true.
   Q.   Yes.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Mr Rampton, I am sorry, what page?
   MR RAMPTON:  646, the footnote.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  No, what page in the text?
   MR RAMPTON:  383, I am so sorry.

.          P-128

   A.   The second paragraph.
   Q.   Then I ask you to note, I will wait until his Lordship
        it, I ask you to note on the same page in the second
        of the next paragraph these words, because I am coming
        back to this: "Returning by train on December 16th to
        Wolf's Lair" yes?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   So that you are saying means that -- I take it what
        you saying means that Hitler having addressed the
        Gauleiters on the 12th went back to the Wolf's Lair in
        East Prussia on the 16th?
   A.   Yes, I can easily check it from the war diary.
   Q.   No.  I am sure you are right about that, I am not
about to
        dispute it, you will be surprised to hear.
                  Could you now please be provided with a copy
        Professor Evans' report?  No, I am sorry that is the
        reference I beg your pardon.  Can somebody retrieve
        mistake by me, and give Mr Irving Professor Longerich.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  This point is dealt with by Evans?
   MR RAMPTON:  I know it is, but I have not got the reference
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I think it is page 320.
   MR RAMPTON:  I have put it away.
   A.   I am looking forward to it actually.
   A.   I am looking forward to it.

.          P-129

   MR RAMPTON:  It is very well known passage in Goebbels
        or seems to be.  Thanks perhaps in part to Mr Irving,
        I know not.  If you have got Dr Longerich's report
        could you turn to page 61 of the first part?
   A.   Yes, I have it.
   Q.   We are on 12th December still.  His report reads as
        follows, at the bottom of page 61, paragraph 17.3:
        day after the declaration of war on the USA on 12th
        December Hitler addressed the... of the party"; so far
        that correct, Mr Irving?
   A.   That is correct, yes.
   Q.   "In this speech he returned once again to prophecy of
        January 1939", that is the one in the Reichstarget
        the fate of Jews, is it not?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   "And now announced the approaching extermination of
        Jews living under German domination, as we can read in
        Goebbels diaries."
                  Now please look at footnote 156, and I am
        going to read it out because that is a strain for me
        worst still for the transcribers.  It is the original
        German.  Tell me if it is accurate, your German is
   A.   The German text is accurate apart from the fact it has
        transcribed some of the diacriticals incorrectly.
   Q.   Fair enough.

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.