Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day005.05
Last-Modified: 2000/08/01

   Q.   Yes.  Dr Korheir in which at I think about page, what was
        it, 20 -- I cannot remember the page number -- a long
        report, he gave a total for the number of Jews that had
        been killed up to that date, and he separated the Wartige
        from the General Government, and I think the total comes
        to about 1.4 million, does it not?
   A.   I am going to have to take issue with the way you describe
        the report.

.          P-37



   Q.   Well ----
   A.   Because this is going into the record, you said "had
been
        killed".
   Q.   Well the word actually used was "zondebehandlung"?
   A.   Yes, but Dr Korheir, not many years ago, wrote a
letter to
        Das Spiegel which is published in which he said that
at
        the time he wrote the report he had no notion that is
what
        that word means.  He was a straightforward
statistician,
        just doing a job on the basis of documents shown to
him.
   Q.   That is exactly my point.
   A.   But you said "killed".  Can we be precise about the
use of
        words.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  "Disposed of"?
   A.   Disposed of.
   MR RAMPTON:  You see, you must be patient because my
questions
        build on each other -- at least they usually do?
   A.   But that goes into the transcript of me agreeing to
you
        that you are saying that it said that.
   Q.   No, but perhaps you will agree in just a moment the
word
        actually used was "zondebehandlung"?
   A.   "Zondebehandlung zugefuhrt".
   Q.   I do not have the document.
   A.   That is the actual phrase that he uses.
   Q.   Himmler had the report typed up in the large Fuhrer
type
        so that Hitler could read it; whether he did or not is
        another matter, but he did, did he not?

.          P-38



   A.   It was not typed in the large Fuhrer type.  It was
typed
        in the small regular German office typewriter.  I have
        never seen a version in the large Fuhrer type of that
        report.
   Q.   I forget which of your books it is that I read it in,
but
        the assertion by you is that there was a copy prepared
for
        Hitler to read by Himmler?
   A.   An abridged version for Hitler.
   Q.   Just be patient, but is what you tell us in your book,
is
        it not?
   A.   You were speaking about the 20 page version.
   Q.   The which?
   A.   You were speaking originally about the 20 page
version.
   Q.   You had better give me a moment to find it.  The
trouble
        is that your books, like many books, are not as well
        indexed as they might be.
   A.   Blame the index now.
   Q.   I think it is in Hitler's War 1977.  You do not
remember
        the page reference, do you?
   A.   503 to 504.
   Q.   Well done, Mr Irving.
   A.   From the index.
   MR RAMPTON:  My Lord, it is part 2.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes.  Is this point raised anywhere in
the
        pleadings, as a matter of interest?
   MR RAMPTON:  No, it is not.  Actually, I noticed it
sometime

.          P-39



        ago, but this arises not as an example of distortion
by
        Mr Irving because it is not.  This is a true story.
It
        arises for the reason that I will make clear in a
moment
        which is directly relevant to the way in which we
would
        suggest that the table talks, the language used at the
        table talks was in some sense sanitized.  Perhaps I
should
        start at the second paragraph on page 503?  "Nor did
        Himmler evidently raise with Hitler the progress made
on
        the Jewish problem during their two hour mountain
stroll
        on March 30th".  This is 1943, is it not?
   A.   1943.
   Q.   I did say that.  "Hitler wearing a soft peek cap to
shade
        his eyes against the alpine glare.  Earlier in 1943,
        Himmler had submitted to him", that is Hitler, is it,
I do
        not know, "a statistical report on a similar
        topic... (reading to the words) ... he had sponsored
since
        Hitler's written order of October 1939.  The report
was
        typed on a special large face typewriter and clearly
went
        to the Fuhrer"?
   A.   That one.  In other words, the earlier report was.
   Q.   I follow you.  That is all right.  "But did Hitler
ever
        see the statistical report that the Reichsfuhrer had
        commissioned at the same time on the Final Solution to
the
        Jewish problem in Europe".  That is what the report is
        called, is it?
   A.   Yes, that is correct.

.          P-40



   Q.   "In dry tones Hitler's chief statistician, Dr Richard
        Korheir, had analysed the fate of the world's
estimated 17
        million Jews.  Europe's 10 million had dwindled by 45
per
        cent since 1937 owing to emigration and a high natural
        mortality rate and the enforced", and these are your
        quotes, are they, "evacuation"?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   That is not taken from Korheir?
   A.   He uses "evakierung" but, of course, I think we are
agreed
        that "evakierung" often has an ugly connotation.
   Q.   In 1977 you believed it had the ugliest of all
        connotations, did you not?
   A.   I repeat what I said.  It often has the ugliest,
almost
        sinister, connotation.
   Q.   "The evacuation that had begun with the prohibition of
        emigration ... (reading to the words) ... To Himmler's
        annoyance, on reading the 16 page document on March
23rd,
        he found that it stated expressis ^^ verbage", that is
in
        actual words explicitly, "on page 9 that of the
1,449,692
        Jews deported from the Eastern provinces, 1,274,166
had
        been subjected to 'special treatment'" -- now, that is
        zondebehandlung, is it not ----
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   --- "at camps in the General Government and a further
        145,301 similarly dealt with in the Warthegau.
Himmler
        knew too well that the Fuhrer had in November 1941
ordered

.          P-41



        that the Jews", general, "were", italics, "not to be
        liquidated.  On April 1st he had the report edited
'for
        submission to the Fuhrer' and a few days later, lest
he
        had not made himself plain, instructed that in version
for
        the Fuhrer he 'did not want there to be any mention of
        special treatment of Jews' whatever".
                  According to the new text the Jews would
have
        been 'channelled through' the camps to Russia
        not 'subjected to special treatment' at the camps.  As
he
        wrote on April 9th, the report would serve
magnificently
        for 'camouflage purposes' in later years.  Camouflage
from
        whom, Mr Irving?
   A.   It does not say but, of course, this passage has
remained
        the same in all versions of my book.  I think it is an
        eminently satisfactory description of the kind of
things
        that were going on at the highest level.  People were
        withholding things from people.
   Q.   I am not going to reengage on the argument about the
        so-called Fuhrer order of 30th November 1941.  We have
        been down that road.
   A.   That passage was removed from the subsequent editions.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  We know all about that.  What is the
        relevance to table talk?
   MR RAMPTON:  We have had all that.  The relevance of this
is
        the words unterbehandlung.  You see, I suggest to you,
        Mr Irving, that the reason why that was taken out had

.          P-42



        nothing whatever to do with the Fuhrer learning of
        something which he did not ought to know, because the
fact
        is, if the word unterbehandlung had been in there, he
        would have known exactly what was being talked about,
        would he not?
   A.   I do not think so.  The word unterbehandlung was a
very
        common German word, frequently used by even Himmler in
        totally different ----
   Q.   Then why did Himmler have it edited?
   A.   He wanted the report cut down from 16 pages to 9 pages
        which is one thing that is quite plain, but he also
wanted
        the explicitness, and I have made this quite plain in
        this, that ugly things are happening in the East, and
he
        does not want Hitler being told, he does not want his
nose
        being rubbed in it.  Let us put it like that.
   Q.   I do not know what the German says but, "subjected to
        special treatment" is a good deal shorter than
"channelled
        through to camps in Russia".
   A.   If you subject people to special treatment at camps,
then
        this has a very sinister connotation indeed.
"Channelled
        through those camps to the east" has a less sinister
        connotation.  My primitive reading of this document,
and
        maybe you will educate the court differently, is that
this
        is being withheld from Hitler.  Himmler is saying to
the
        statistician, "Write a different version for
submission to
        Fuhrer".  These words do not occur.

.          P-43



   Q.   No, Mr Irving.
   A.   You keep interrupting me.
   Q.   No, Mr Irving, I do not accept that.  What Himmler has
        done is precisely what he said he did.  He has
camouflaged
        it so that, when Hitler reads it, he is not going to
go
        through the roof and say, you cannot have a document
        talking about zonderbehandlung.  We all know what that
        means.
   A.   Unless you are going to lead evidence which actually
bears
        that out, I do not think there is any sustainability
        whatsoever.
   Q.   I am offering you another perfectly natural ----
   A.   I think it is a perverse interpretation.  If Himmler
is
        saying this is an excellent document for camouflage
        purposes, and says "I want a short version for
submission
        to the Fuhrer which does not mention these sinister
        words", I think that my interpretation is the most
obvious
        interpretation, and in fact I think it bears out
        everything I have said all along, that there is monkey
        work going on along here, and either it is the Richard
        Nixon complex, as I call it, where Hitler may
admittedly
        have said, "Do what you want, Mr Himmler, but do not
let
        me be told", which I am perfectly prepared to accept
may
        have happened.
   Q.   I suggest to you that precisely the same sort of
exercise
        took place at the table talks.  In other words,
camouflage

.          P-44



        language, slightly more delicate language was used
than
        would have been used between, say Hitler and Himmler
when
        discussing these matters.
   A.   Mr Rampton, I have had the advantage -- you are
familiar
        with the table talks, you are also familiar with the
        German version which has more recently been published.
        The table talk was written by Martin Bormann's
adjutant,
        Heinreich Heim.  Heinrich Heim was a person that
        I interviewed at great depth personally while he was
still
        alive.  He was a very educated, cultivated man, an art
        collector, oddly enough, in private life.  I
questioned
        him in great deal as to how much about the final
solution
        was discussed.  You are not listening to what I say so
        there is no point in my continuing.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am.
   A.   Perhaps Mr Rampton is just pretending he is not
        listening.  I questioned Mr Heim and the other
Adjutants
        in great detail as to how much was discussed in these
kind
        of circles, and there was no discussion whatsoever of
any
        kind of mass extermination of the Jews at Hitler's
table
        or in private or else where at Hitler's headquarters,
        which is what I find very disturbing because I
satisfied
        myself, possibly not the court but I satisfied myself,
        that I had won these people's confidence.
   Q.   Can you turn to page 426 of the Professor Evans report
        please?

.          P-45



   A.   We are moving on to a new topic now, are we?
   Q.   No.  We are still on table talk.  Henry -- was he
called
        Henry -- was one of those two people who wrote down
what
        Hitler said at these table talks, was he not?
   A.   Not strictly accurate.
   Q.   You tell me, then.
   A.   The primary scribe was Mr Heim, the gentleman I have
just
        mentioned.  When he was relieved by Henry Picker,
Henry
        Picker found in the desk a large number of Heim's
original
        transcripts, and he published them under his own name
in
        the third person.  So he was not always the person who
was
        himself present in the case of Mr Picker.
   Q.   But Mr Picker would have been there on a number of
these
        occasions, would he?
   A.   Yes, particularly from 1942 onwards.

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