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