The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit//transcripts/day020.12


Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day020.12
Last-Modified: 2000/07/24

   MR IRVING:  That is the context, my Lord, and I think that that
        substantially softens what might be taken to be the sting
        of that passage left, as it is, in that rather bald and

.          P-103

        exposed position in the paragraph as quoted in the expert
        report.  I am being asked by a Jewish Professor for my
        take on the present situation and I am telling him in this
        semi-academic atmosphere the worries that I would have if
        I were Jewish.
   A.   Well, to my mind, it does not actually soften it at all.
        There is no indication here that it is a Jewish Professor,
        incidentally.  What he says is, he quotes you, saying
        that, if you were a Jew, you would want to see am answer
        to the vital question why are the Jews so hated within
        only a few years of their arrival in each host country.  I
        think I have done you a favour by leaving that out.
   Q.   On page 170, this is a sentence beginning with the
        word "fundamentally".  Here you have allowed yourself to
        say, "Fundamentally, however, as Irving conceded", there
        is that word again "conceded", "he was in basic agreement
        with Goebbels in his belief that 'they had it coming to
        them'".  Who do you mean by "they"?
   A.   The Jews.
   Q.   The Jews.  So you are saying once again that I am
        applauding the Holocaust effectively?
   A.   I do not think I use the word "applaud".  There again, let
        me just read the surrounding context which you are so keen
        on reading out in your own statements, so I hope I am
        allowed to do the same with mine.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes.

.          P-104

   A.   In 1996 you recount the view of the publisher who
        eventually refused to publish the American edition of your
        book on Goebbels and you said: Maybe ... the chairman of
        St Martin's Press was right when he said:  'This book
        suggests they (the Jews) had it coming to them'.  But if
        he is right, let me say in advance in my self-defence,
it
        is not David Irving who says that, it is David Irving
        reporting Dr Goebbels who says that.  Maybe I did not
make
        it plain enough, or maybe I did not put enough
distance
        between myself and Dr Goebbels or maybe I did not put
in
        all the counter-arguments I should have done to be
        politically correct".  "Fundamentally, however, as
Irving
        conceded", I go on, "he was in basic agreement with
        Goebbels in his belief that 'they had it coming to
them'."
        "For, Irving told an audience in Tampa, Florida, on
6th
        October 1995:", and then I have a very lengthy quote
which
        I think has already been referred to in the trial, so
I
        will not read it out.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes, it has.  The short answer is that
the
        Jews did have it coming to them, but there is a longer
        answer.  I think that is a fair summary.
   MR IRVING:  My Lord, what he has left out from this
quotation
        of course -- we have not actually looked at it in
detail.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  We have looked at the Tampa, Florida one
in
        detail.
   MR IRVING:  The reference is to this violent demonstration
that

.          P-105



        began in one of my speeches in Freeport in Louisiana?
        Have we had that?  The fact that the local community
came
        along and violently disrupted a lecture that I was
        speaking at, and that that is what has been left out
of
        the middle of this speech, in the middle of this
        anecdote?  I am sure that we have not had that, my
Lord.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am sorry, I have lost you temporarily.
You
        are talking about Louisiana but this is Florida.
   A.   There is an ellipse in the indented quotation.
   MR IRVING:  There are four ellipses on that page, each of
which
        was serious material and should not have been left out
        because it explains the remarks that follow.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Shall we deal with that as a matter of
        submission?  We have been through this speech in
        considerable detail already.  I have it reasonably
well in
        mind and I do not think it is going to be sensible to
        spend ten minutes filling in the ellipses.
   A.   I have looked at this speech again, my Lord, and the
only
        passage that I considered should be reinstated is
listed
        in my letter of 10th January 2000 with amendments to
the
        report.  So there is a short passage there.  But
otherwise
        I come back to the fact that this is a very long
quotation
        already, and I think it gives a correct impression of
your
        views.
   MR IRVING:  In that case, let us spend the remaining few
        minutes before the adjournment examining precisely
what

.          P-106



        you consider my views to be, unless his Lordship
        disagrees.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  No.
   MR IRVING:  "Irving conceded that he was in basic agreement
        with Goebbels in his belief that the Jews had it
coming to
        them".  That is, of course, a repugnant statement and
you
        are prepared now to defend that, are you, Professor?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   So you are saying that Irving said that the Jews
deserved
        the Holocaust?
   A.   That is right.  That is to say, of course, on your
        interpretation of the Holocaust.
   Q.   They deserved the gas chambers, the barbed wire, the
        millions of deaths, that they had it coming to them,
and
        that this my own personal view?  This is your view as
an
        expert witness in this case?
   A.   Well, I would not say the gas chambers, since you
denied
        that in 1996 when you made this statement, but for the
        rest.
   Q.   Ignoring the cheap laughs.
   A.   I am sorry, I have to make that point.
   Q.   This is a repugnant allegation for you to make and you
        should not be playing to the gallery with cheap
laughs.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I do not think Professor Evans is playing
to
        the gallery.  I really do not.
   MR IRVING:  If he says I do not mean the gas chambers
because

.          P-107



        of course----
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  He is making the serious point that, when
        you, as he argues, say that the Jews had it coming to
        them, you cannot have been meaning that they had the
gas
        chambers coming to them, because at that stage you
were
        saying that there were not any gas chambers.  That is
the
        point.  It is a serious point.
   MR IRVING:  My Lord, this is characteristic of this
witness's
        methods, that, when he come up against an awkward
        question, he attempts to push this particular express
        train on to a siding, and I am not going down the gas
        chamber siding, I am not going down that particular
road.
        I am going to nail this witness down on his submission
to
        this court that I applaud the Holocaust, which is what
        that sentence boils down to.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  No.  That is not quite what he is saying.
        What he is saying is that you had whatever you meant
by
        the Holocaust, that the Jews had whatever you meant by
the
        Holocaust coming to them.  That is what he is saying
you
        said.
   MR IRVING:  With respect my Lord, is that not precisely
what
        I just said?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Carry on with your questions and we will
see
        where you get.
   MR IRVING:  "Irving said that he agreed with Goebbels that
they
        had it coming to them".

.          P-108



   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Do you not see the distinction between an author
writing
        in a book saying Goebbels said that the Jews had it
coming
        to them and he believed they had it coming to them,
and
        the author himself believing the Jews had it coming to
        them?
   A.   I just quoted a lengthy passage where you try and
wriggle
        out of the suggestion made by the chairman of St
Martin's
        Press that the book suggests that the Jews had it
coming
        to them.  The man who was going to publish your book
and
        had read it took that message from the book and you
say
        that maybe you did not make it plain enough, did not
put
        enough distance between yourself and Goebbels.  I then
go
        on to quote your speech in Tampa, Florida on 6th
October
        1995, where you say precisely the same thing.
   MR RAMPTON:  Perhaps one could turn over the page for
        completeness because this theme is completed in
paragraph
        56, and I do resist a lack of context.
   A.   In 1991 you said "they (and you mean the Jews) dragged
us
        into two world wars and now, for equally mysterious
        reasons, they are trying to drag us into the Balkans".
   MR IRVING:  Can we narrow down----
   A.   There is another lengthy quote there, why does it
always
        happen to the Jews, you ask.
   Q.   Can we therefore narrow down what your allegation
against
        the author of this book is?  Are you alleging that he

.          P-109



        applauded what happened to the Jews?
   A.   What I am saying here is ----
   Q.   It should be easy to answer.  Does he applaud it or
does
        he not, in your view?
   A.   Let us read the text of my report, Mr Irving.
   Q.   Can you just answer a simple question?
   A.   "Fundamentally, however, as Irving conceded, he was in
        basic agreement with Goebbels in his belief that 'they
had
        it coming to them'".
   Q.   Will you now answer my question?
   A.   That is what I am saying.
   Q.   Will you answer my question?
   A.   The word "applause" and "applauded" does not occur
there.
   Q.   Just so that everybody in this courtroom can be plain
what
        you are suggesting, are you suggesting that I, David
        Irving, applauded what happened to the Jews or not?
   A.   I am saying that you are saying that they deserved
what
        they got.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  That answer has been given now three or
four
        times, Mr Irving.
   MR IRVING:  There is a certain amount of wriggling going on
        here.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  If you say you never said anything of the
        kind, put that to the witness.
   MR IRVING:  If what?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  If you say you never said that the Jews
had

.          P-110



        it coming to them, or they deserved what happened to
them,
        put that to the witness.
   MR IRVING:  I am trying to get the witness to state
        specifically whether he sees a distinction between
        Dr Goebbels saying in his diaries, as quoted by me in
my
        book, that the Jews had it coming to them on the one
hand,
        and David Irving applauded what happened, the
Holocaust,
        on the other.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  That is a false antithesis because
applauding
        does not come into it.  No-one is suggesting you
applauded
        it.
   MR IRVING:  Thank you very much.  If the witness would say
the
        same ----
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Will you listen, please.  What is being
        suggested is that you have on occasions said that the
Jews
        brought it on themselves.  Now, if you say that is not
        true, put it to the witness, and he will probably go
to
        paragraph 56 of his report in his answer.
   MR IRVING:  Can we take this in two stages?  Witness, you
have
        heard his Lordship say nobody says that David Irving
        applauded the Holocaust.  Does that include you?
   A.   I have already pointed out several times I do not say
in
        these paragraphs that you applaud the Holocaust
however
        you conceive of it.
   Q.   What you do say is that I state in my Goebbels
biography
        that Goebbels believed that the Jews had it coming to

.          P-111



        them.  That is the first question.  Goebbels believed
they
        had it coming to them?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   And that in the following page to which Mr Rampton has
        drawn attention I go on then to examine that piece by
        piece and say to what degree was Goebbels right.  Is
that
        effectively right?
   A.   No.

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.