Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day024.09
Last-Modified: 2000/07/24
Q. And from that, you conclude that the evacuation of the
Jews to Auschwitz is a homicidal meaning, is it?
A. I think this is quite clear from the document that the
people were sent to Auschwitz and ordered to kill them
there. So the term evacuation then, particularly
after 1941, could just mean the deportation to a point but
it also could mean the deportation to this point plus the
killings of the people there. So, I think these two
interpretations are possible after 1941.
Q. Yes. I will come to this later on, either today or
tomorrow, are you familiar with the Ahnert document, the
deportation from France?
A. No.
Q. We will come to that when the time comes.
A. Yes.
Q. But you are not saying that all the people deported to
Auschwitz were killed. You accept that some were used for
slave labour?
A. I think we went through the history of the Auschwitz. It
was a combination of a slave labour camp and extermination camp.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: But I do not think, Mr Irving, that you are
suggesting that, when guidelines are issued on the
evacuation of Jews to the East (Auschwitz concentration
camp), you are not suggesting, are you, that evacuation
has a wholly non-homicidal connotation there?
. P-75
MR IRVING: It can be either, my Lord. Here is one typical
example where the context does not really help us. I am
trying to establish that, from what we know, we do not
know whether they were killed on arrival or whether they
were put to work as slave labour as very large numbers or
what. So that document does not really help us.
A. May I comment on that.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, of course.
A. I think that we know, not from the document, but, of
course, we have enough information about Auschwitz to
establish that, because these are guidelines; the general
picture of what happens to Jews who were deported to
Auschwitz after February 1943. So I think we could
establish the context if we want to do so, but the
selections and about sending people to gas chambers
I think we have this information, and from this, I would
then take this information and say that actually this
makes it, I think, almost clear that the term evacuation
here could include the killing of the people.
MR IRVING: In fact, it means exactly what it says that has
been evacuated to Auschwitz.
A. I think we could, in a way, extend our knowledge and go
into this day of Auschwitz, and it is not that this is a
dark area ----
Q. This is not the time or place for that.
A. So, we could do research and I think that, in the end, we
. P-76
could come to the conclusion that this, in general, meant
the extermination of the people in the camp at Auschwitz.
Q. If I refer to the previous sentence beginning: "A report
of 26th December", in which the head of the police force
Saliter reported in detail about his experiences
accompanying and supervising the transport of 1,007 Jews
from the Rheinland to Latvia, is an entire report on the
of evacuation of Jews to Riga, is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. In December 1941, what happened to these Jews who were
deported to the Riga at that time?
A. At this time, the Jews were actually sent to ghettoes or to camps.
Q. To the Jungfernhof camp?
A. To the Jungfernhof camp or to the ----
Q. So they were not massacred on arrival, then?
A. Most of them were not massacred on arrival.
Q. What conclusion do you draw from the use of the word
evacuation there, then?
A. Here, it says that the Jews -- I am trying to be cautious
-- it says here that the Jews are going to be deported to
Riga, and the document does not say that the Jews are
exterminated on the spot. There is actually one reference
in the Saliter report, where Saliter says that the
collaborators, if I may call them so, in Latvia were quite
astonished to see the Jews here because they said that you
. P-77
can Ausrotten them yourself in Germany. But I think they
were probably a little bit ahead at this time and in this
context, I could not say that the word evacuation would
necessarily include the killing of the people who were
sent to this place.
Q. Dr Longerich, we have actually seen a number of documents
over the last weeks from this December 1941 period,
indicating that these trainloads from the Reich to Germany
carried provisions and equipment for their first weeks in
there camp on arrival there. So the evacuation here,
would you accept, does actually mean evacuation then and
not necessarily anything more sinister?
A. This is what we call the second wave of deportations.
This was about 21 trains to Riga and about, I think, seven
or eight trains to Minsk which happened between November
1941 and February 1942, except the six trains where the
people were shot on the spot in Kovno and in Riga, except
these six trains where the majority of these people
actually were not shot on the spot but they survived a
couple of months, most of them, and they were provided
with all kinds of things, with tools and so on, from the
Jewish communities because they, some of them, maybe even
the majority, I do not know, some of them may actually
have thought that they were some sort of pioneers who were
sent to the East. So I think this idea to provide them
with tools and so on also includes a moment of an element
. P-78
of deception, giving them the idea that they actually can
start a new life somewhere in the East.
Q. Do you have any proof for that. This is an important
point, I think. Do you have any proof that this was an
element of deception in inviting them it take
their appliances with them?
A. I think that the fact that 6,000 people were shot on the
spot gives you an idea there was a kind of, you know, a
kind of juxtaposition between the provision of these
trains and actually what happened to those people. If
I can explain this.
Q. I do not want really get into the police decodes business
here, my Lord, because I think we will stick to the
meaning of the words.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: The cross-examination is notionally to do
with the translation of words.
MR IRVING: It is, entirely.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: The trouble is you are chasing some of the
uses. I understand why, Mr Irving; it is not a criticism
of you, but the result is that it is a little bit
scattered this cross-examination, and it is not a criticism.
MR IRVING: I have two ways of doing it. Either I can follow
my own plan or I can follow his own very useful glossary
which he has provided for us, and as we all have the
glossary, I think it is more useful if I follow his
. P-79
paragraphing rather than introduce yet further confusion.
But I am taking large leaps and bounds through it.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. You have been confronted with the
glossary and I suppose you have to really to deal with it.
MR IRVING: Well I hope that is not implied criticism of my
dealing with it.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is not a criticism at all of you, Mr
Irving, no.
MR IRVING: But if the Defence does seek to rely on these
meaning of these words, then I have to try to shoot them down.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I know. Well, take your own course.
MR IRVING: Paragraph 3.3, the evacuation to the Lodz ghetto ----
A. Yes.
Q. Which was referred to in the Gestapo report of June 9th.
A. Yes.
Q. In fact, the stages of the evacuation make it quite plain
that were not actually being evacuated to their death, so
they were initially evacuated somewhere else.
A. Yes, but it is ----
Q. They were transported to the special command.
A. Yes, but it is clear from, if you look at the following
document, it is clear that they were deported to the
extermination camp Chelmno. The Sonderkommando is the
Sonderkammandolange which actually was responsible for the
. P-80
Chelmno extermination camp and the gas used there.
Q. Abschieben, which is No. 4, carries only the meaning of
deport really, does it not, or does it ----?
A. This is the original meaning, I think.
Q. Yes. Goebbels, for example, in his 27th March 1942 entry,
talks about the Abgeschobene Juden, of whom 60 per cent
would probably be liquidated.
A. Yes.
Q. Which implies that the Abschiebung, the deportation, was
not the killing, that was just what they used what came first.
A. You might be right in this case, but it is clearly said in
his document what happened, so I think one of the key
documents as far as Holocaust is concerned.
Q. We are now on No. 5, which is Vernichtung.
A. Yes.
Q. In other words, abschieben is not a very important word in
this particular argument, would you agree?
A. I think that, in a kind of hierarchy, I would not put it
on the top.
Q. Yes. Vernichtung is, however, quite important, is it not?
A. Yes.
Q. You have quoted in 5.1, the Langenscheidt version of the
word, as destroy, annihilate or exterminate, presumably in
that order.
. P-81
A. Yes.
Q. It is really destroying a thing, is it not, or if you can
regard a group of people as a thing, then it is destroying
a group of people?
A. If you look at the group of people as a thing then, if you
make this ----
Q. For example, Judentum is a body of Jews, a community of
Jews, is it not?
A. Again, I think that we have enough examples to discuss it
with reference to a document. We do not have to speculate
about the possible ways the terminology was used.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: I quite agree.
MR IRVING: You refer to Klausewitz?
A. Yes.
Q. As defeating the enemy, you destroy the enemy?
A. Yes. He is referring to, I think, an enemy army. So he
is not referring just to people; he is referring, well, to
an organization, and he is making it quite clear that the
term "vernichtung" could mean, well, it could mean, as he
said, annihilation of the enemy forces either by death or
by injury or any other ways, either completely or merely
to such an extent that the enemy no longer has the will to
continue the fight. So I am trying to illustrate here
that if the term "vernichtung" refers to an organization,
it can have the meaning, you know, following Klausewitz,
to kill all of them, to kill part of them, but basically
. P-82
to make sure that the organization, as such, is not able
to exist any more as an organization.
Q. You could bankrupt somebody and he would be destroyed,
could you not?
A. Yes, you can make all other kinds of connotations.
Q. Take the army prisoner ----
MR JUSTICE GRAY: It all depends on the context.
A. Yes, you can make all kinds of combinations, but I think
the most interesting, I mean if I may suggest that the
most interesting case is of course when it refers to the
vernichtung of people, not of an organization, of Judentum
but of Jews, then I think it becomes clear what the term
actually meant.
MR IRVING: You have referred to Adolf Hitler's speech of
January 30th 1939 ----
A. Yes.
Q. --- in this context where he uses the word "vernichtung"?
A. Yes, 5.6, footnote.
Q. We do not have the exact quotation.
A. Unfortunately not.
Q. But the sense is, he said: If international finance Jewry
once more succeeds in launching a new world war, then it
will end not with the destruction of the European people,
but with the destruction of, is it Judentum?
A. Well, I have the quote in the first report.
MS ROGERS: 38.
. P-83
A. 38. Shall I read this again?
MR IRVING: I think it is an important passage.
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.