Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day008.19
Last-Modified: 2000/07/20

   MR RAMPTON:  So would I, particularly since, as one can see
        from the original document -- I am not asking your
        Lordship to look at it -- the conference about the
        Mischling and the Mischeyer is actually headed  "Ent
        Losung der Judenfrage" whereas one notices that Lammers'
        statement, or the note of Lammers' statement, refers only

.          P-170


        to the "Losung".
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Well, there would be many Juden frager,
would
        there not?
   MR RAMPTON:  Yes, precisely, of which I have no doubt the
        mischlinge one was a knotty one, because I think the
        evidence is that Hitler himself did not think that it
was
        a good idea to split marriages and send what might be
        called half and halfs off on the trains.  That is
right,
        is it not?
   A.   If you were to pursue this line of argument, the
document
        would say that the solution of this Jewish problem
would
        need to be postponed.
   Q.   Exactly, Mr Irving.
   A.   He is talking about the solution of the Jewish problem
        postponed.
   Q.   That is another problem with the document.  You would
have
        expected it to say diese Juden frager?
   A.   Of this Jewish problem, but it does not, of course.
   Q.   I quite agree.
   A.   So that does not help you very much.
   Q.   I am not looking for help, Mr Irving.  You see, you
have
        completely the wrong end of the stick.
   A.   I am trying to help you because I am enjoying this.
   Q.   You are not helping me at all because you are always
        punting to the same end of the pond.  I am not.  I am
in
        the middle and I am looking at all the lily pads
around me

.          P-171



        and wondering what the answer is.  I do not think it
is
        clear that this is a general statement by Hitler in
the
        context of the file in which it was found, which would
be
        a floating statement of no significance at all, that
        Hitler has said yesterday, "Stop all this talk about
        mischlinge because I have said that the whole Jewish
        question is to go off to the end of the war".  I do
not
        think that is the only possible explanation.  I think
        anybody who leaps on that band wagon and ignores all
the
        others is not being a respectable and competent
historian.
   A.   You are not, with respect, being a respectable and
        competent counsel if you ignore the document that
        immediately precede this note, which is Schlegelberger
        writing to Lammas, saying that ugly things seem to be
        looming ahead, I really think I ought to talk about
this
        with you before we go any further.  Lammas then writes
        back to him saying, no, the Fuhrer does not want to be
        bothered with this kind of thing.  He wants all the
Jewish
        problem postponed until the end of the war.
   Q.   You say, write back.  Where is Schlegelberger's
signature
        on that thing?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Could I see it, because are you assuming
        I know.  What is this note about ugly things going on
        because that would be very relevant, it seems to me?
   A.   It is immediately preceding this in the file.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  In the web site?

.          P-172



   A.   Well, it is certainly in the actual file, which is the
        file here.  While they are looking for it, I will just
get
        it to the front.  It would be on the web site
definitely.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  It may not have been reproduced.
   MR RAMPTON:  I am certainly not aware of it.
   A.   It is probably page 1564 of the web site just off the
top
        of my head.  Yes, here it is.  If I can just read it
        straight out while you are looking for it, my Lord, it
is
        March 12th 1942.  This is six days after the
conference.
   MR RAMPTON:  Mr Irving, I have the original German here,
        I think.  Can you just identify it and then give it to
his
        Lordship to look at?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I think we have found it in the web site.
   MR RAMPTON:  I have not got the web site file.  I just want
to
        make sure that we are talking about the same document?
   A.   It is from the same Justice Ministry file.  It is
        paginated in that series 01/109, in the original
wartime
        series, it is just two documents ahead of the
        Schlegelberger note, dated March 12th 1942:
                  "Dear Reichs Minister Dr Lammas, I have just
        been briefed by my personal assistant on the outcome
of
        the conference of March 6th concerning the treatment
of
        Jews and mixed race Jews.  I am still awaiting the
        official protocol.  After the briefing by my personal
        assistant there appear to be decisions in preparation
        which for the larger part I consider to be quite out
of

.          P-173



        the question, quite impossible, as the outcome of the
        conferences at which an adviser or a personal
assistant of
        your house has also taken part will form the basis for
the
        Fuhrer's decision.  I would urgently request that I
can
        have in good time a conversation with you in person, a
        personal conversation with you, about the matter.  As
soon
        as the protocol of the session is in front of me, I
will
        allow myself to telephone you and to ask you whether
and
        when we can have that talk."
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Mr Irving, that seems to me to run quite
        counter to the proposition for which you contend
because
        that is dealing entirely with the problem of Juden and
        mischlinge?
   A.   Jews and mixed race.  "The Jews and" I think is
        significant there.  But, be that as it may, my Lord,
even
        if you are right, and I am sure your Lordship is
right,
        I hesitate to say that your Lordship is wrong in that
        matter, but, even if you are right, what I am saying
is,
        and I have reason for saying this, that the outcome
was
        the note from Lammas to Schlegelberger, which
effectively
        says that the Fuhrer does not want to be bothered
about
        this, he wants this whole thing, he wants the solution
to
        the Jewish problem postponed until the war is over.
If
        I just continue that, we also know from interrogations
of
        people who were at the conferences that Lammas came
back
        to them and said he had mentioned it to the Fuhrer
with

.          P-174



        precisely that outcome.  The Fuhrer said he did not
want
        to be bothered with this kind of stuff, postpone it
all
        until the war is over.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  All of that points, so far as I see it at
the
        moment, to this having been the narrow question of, if
one
        can call it, mischlinge?
   A.   Juden und mischlinge.
   Q.   I follow that that phraseology is used, but that does
not
        seem to me to be tremendously significant, given the
whole
        context of the reference to the conference on 6th
March.
   A.   I appreciate this is one possible interpretation if
you
        ignore the fact that the Schlegelberger memorandum
says
        die losung der juden frager (?), the solution of the
        Jewish problems, not this Jewish problem.
   Q.   I have the point about der rather than dies.
   MR RAMPTON:  That points in one direction, Mr Irving.  The
        other considerations point in the opposite direction,
        including, if I may -- I do not know, I am completely
        ignorant but I am told that this is a good point by
those
        like you that have inspected the file.  The file
number on
        the top right-hand side of what you call the
        Schlegelberger memo, I prefer for safety sake to call
it
        the Freisler document, is 153.
   A.   Yes, with the handwritten number 153 on it?
   Q.   No.  There is stamp on the one I have.
   A.   Yes, but the one I am looking at is stamped on the
left.

.          P-175



   Q.   I know you are looking at your web site copy.
   A.   No.  I am looking at the one on the left. This is the
        original document with the stamp on the left.
   Q.   So you say, but the other document with 12th March
1942
        has the stamp number 155 on it.
   A.   Well I do not have ----
   Q.   You will find it in H1 (vii) at page 371.
   A.   Previously, of course, you could not find it.  Now you
can
        find it.  Yes.
   Q.   There is no evidence, is there, that these file page
        numbers are contradictory?  One is 109 followed by
111.
   A.   This is why we cannot be absolutely certain as to
exactly
        which sequence within the month they are shuffled.
   Q.   You cannot assert with any confidence that the
anonymous
        undated Freisler document was generated or prompted by
the
        dated and signed note of the 12th March 1942, can you?
   A.   Within the space of a month you can be pretty certain.
        You can say it was after March 6th.
   Q.   If this relates to the question of the mischlinge at
all?
   A.   Well, it was within this file and we know where it is
        placed in the file, and there are no documents outside
        that time frame, so on a high degree of probability
that
        is the time, and we know when, reasonable from other
        documents, you know when the conversation took place
        between Schlegelberger and Lammas.
   Q.   Now, Mr Irving, consider a problem of real substance.

.          P-176



   A.   The problem of real substance is that I am the only
        historian to mention these documents.  Everybody else
        pretends they do not exist, although they have ----
   Q.   Mr Irving, you have grasped it with your usual boyish
        enthusiasm because you think it acquits Adolf Hitler
of
        any hand in the mass murder of Jews.
   A.   Which is precisely why the other historians have not
even
        mentioned it.
   Q.   Mr Irving, that was not what I was going to ask you
        about.  The problem you do not seem to have faced up
to is
        this.  I am going to ask you a question first.  What
in
        your version of history was in Hitler's mind the
entlosung
        (?), and we notice this document does not use that
word,
        to be put into effect after the war in Hitler's mind
in
        March 1942?
   A.   Well, at this time, of course, as you know, I will say
he
        was talking about deportation overseas, or deportation
        beyond the pale.
   Q.   As a first step to that desirable end beyond the pale,
        were the deportations from the Outreich and the
        Protectorate?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Those had already begun in September or October 1941?
   A.   That is correct.
   Q.   What on earth then would it mean for a high ranking
Civil
        Servant such as Lammas to say: Hitler wants that which
has

.          P-177



        already been put into effect on his own orders of
        September 1941 to be postponed until the end of the
war?
   A.   Can you look at the full text of the document?  The
full
        text of document says: "The Fuhrer has repeatedly said
        that he wants the solution of the Jewish problem
postponed
        until the war is over and for this reason he does not
want
        all this continued talking about it.  He does not want
all
        this to-ing and fro-ing within the ministry, but this
is
        at the height of the military crisis".
   Q.   That goes back right into the circle which his
Lordship
        has drawn for you, does it not?  If it is a general
        statement by Hitler about the losung of the Jewish
        question which is to be treated as evidence of
Hitler's
        intention as at the 3rd or 12th March 1942, then it is
a
        nonsense, because that entlosung has already been put
into
        operation.  It started in October 1941.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  And it is still in operation, would that
that
        not be right.
   MR RAMPTON:   Yes, and it is still going on.
   A.   Yes, it is.
   Q.   It makes absolute nonsense.  If, on the other hand,
this
        is a limited reference to the mischlinge question
being
        discussed by Heydrich and his colleagues, then it
makes
        perfect sense, it does not say that but this is the
proper
        interpretation, this part of the losung has to be
        deferred.  Hitler is not interested in it.

.          P-178



   A.   That is not exactly what it says.  It does not say
this
        solution of this Jewish problem, and does not this
        document also therefore destroy your Riegner document
        which you quoted to the court with Adolf Hitler
allegedly
        saying he wanted everything finished this year, for
which
        purpose they are using the prussic acid, I am sure you
        remember the content of the Riegner document, which is
        only a week or two after this one. If you were right,
this
        would destroy that.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  No, I would not go down that road.
   MR RAMPTON:  I am not going to.  I am not picking up that
        gauntlet.
   A.   Can I also remind you, of course, that this is not
        Hitler's word?  This is second hand already.  This is
        Schlegelberger being told by Lammas what Hitler had
said
        to him, with Schlegelberger making the note.
   Q.   Let us try and get a little common sense into this,
shall
        we?
   A.   Do not attach too much importance to whether it is
losung
        or entlosung that is the word that is being used.
   Q.   I am not, but it is one of the little things that,
though
        significant to an historian, is not decisive.  I am
not
        saying that.  Let us use common sense and objectivity.
        During this period and for seven months up to this
period,
        according to you, Hitler's version of the losung or
the
        entlosung has been in top gear.

.          P-179



   A.   It has been gathering momentum, first one City then
        another.
   Q.   It would not make any sense for Lammas to report that
        Hitler wants what is now taking place on his command
to be
        postponed until the end of war, would it?  So we are
not
        talking about any general losung plainly?
   A.   We are talking about the overall completion of every I
        dotted and every T crossed.

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