Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day027.19 Last-Modified: 2000/07/25 MR IRVING: Well, the witness mentioned the use of paramilitary people to protect the meetings, and that was invited by . P-168 that. On 3.2.24, paragraph 3.2.24, you mention my keeping company with Rudel and Remer: David Irving was keeping company with Nazis like Otto Ernst Remer and Hans Ulrich Rudel. We are not interested in Rudel, he is not on the list, but you say that I have kept company with General Remer. Have you seen any documents in my private diaries or elsewhere showing me keeping company with Remer? A. I refer here to the data of the Schleswig-Holstein in '82, and that is it. Q. Yes. So you rely entirely in making that statement on a report of the OPC? A. In that respect, right. Q. Of the OPC, and his Lordship is not going to pay any attention to what the OPC says. Are you aware from the proceedings of this trial that I have produced a one-page diary entry showing me interviewing General Remer for the purpose of the Goebbels book and this was the only meeting I had with him? A. If you say so. Q. Have you seen any other entries in my diaries indicating meetings with General Otto Ernst Remer, apart from occasions when I have spoken and he has been one of many faces in the audience? You have not seen any other documents? A. It seems that this quotation of the OPC, of Schleswig-Holstein, is an overstatement. . P-169 Q. An overstatement, yes. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can I help you, Mr Irving, by saying that this seems to me precisely the sort of way in which it is helpful to cross-examine. MR IRVING: Yes. MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is really intended by way of guidance. MR IRVING: So, effectively, notwithstanding what we have seen on the video tapes of General Remer being present at meetings which I have spoken at, you would not say that I have had close contacts with him? A. I would not say. Q. Yes. 3.2.25 when I address the DVU rally, one of Dr Frey's rallies on freedom for Rudolf Hess, you object to my use of the word "martyrdom" or "martyr" for Rudolf Hess? I think we can leave that. It is not really important. A. Yes, I can allude to this, I can explain it, if it is of interest. Q. Paragraph 3.3.2, at page 32, you say the OPC report of 1993, you are quoting that. What year does that refer to, 1992? A. The second ---- Q. Is this one of Dr Frey's newspapers that is being referred to there? A. Yes. Q. And it published anti-Semitic articles according to the . P-170 OPC report of 1993? A. A lot. Q. Yes. Had I left Germany by that time? A. No. Q. When was I deported from Germany? A. End of '93. Q. End of 93. A. You recall that? Q. It cites two examples of anti-Semitic articles. One is a criticism of the Edgar Miles-Bronfman, well, I do not think this is sufficiently important. A. I mean I can read it. Q. 3.3.11, please? A. Maybe I can just say, you know: "The German Weekly, the DNZ's sister papers in the Frey press imperium, presented one Hungarian-born son of a Jewish lawyer as the 'finance guru of the world', a master of financial speculation, who through his dealings undermines the German mark, the DWZ made the point that they economic recovery central Germany was jeopardised by Jewish restitution claims." So these kinds of things. Q. You consider that to be anti-Semitic? A. Yes, and I can prove this by going into the sentences, if you want. Q. Paragraph 3.3.11, please, page 35. This is describing the events we saw on the video, April 21st 1990. . P-171 A. 3.3.11. Thank you. Q. 3.3.11. A. Yes. Q. This is the event that led to my being put in the police van. You describe it as an "illegal demonstration". Why do you call it an illegal demonstration? A. It was ---- Q. Have you any proof that it was illegal, that there were any arrests made for it? Was anybody fined for conducting illegal demonstration? What I am asking you is why do you call the demonstration that I was seen in illegal? You have no proof, right? A. No. Q. No. 3.3.12 ---- A. I mean I can allude to that bit further. It was the intervention of the police, you could see. So there were some calls in the administration to say, "this goes too far", because of the whole thing, of the whole conference. It went out. It was not asked for by the police, institutions. So in that sense it was illegal. Excuse me that I had to wait a minute to realize what it was about. Q. Let me just ask you one more question and this concerns the position of the police president in German life. Unlike England, the police president in Germany is a political appointment, is he not? . P-172 A. It depends. Q. In each city? A. No, it depends. The police president is, as I alluded to before, is a Staatsbeamter. Q. A Civil Servant? A. Civil servant, and the civil servants, as I said, have to stick to the laws and nothing else, whereas the politicians can do their own cause, be it a mayor of a city or so. So there is a different ruling and a different structure. Of course it happens that, this is in democracies like ours is the case, I do not know how it is in other countries, but, you know, they appoint a person of a given party or near to a given party and so forth. But once the position is established they have to shy away of these political affiliations and have to stick to the laws. Q. He is appointed by the ---- A. So it does not make a point if you say it is a politicized system, and so they are not, you know, whatever allowed to do this or that. Q. But the city administration of Munich is socialist, is it not, it is left-wing? A. It depended. I mean ---- Q. At this material time. A. So as far as I recall, yes, but there was a time when there was a big debate, whatever. . P-173 Q. My Lord, I think this might be a useful time to stop. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I wondered whether you did not want to get to the end of paragraph 3, because that that all seems to me to stick together, and then there is a rather new chapter beginning at 4 or maybe you have not got any questions on the remainder of paragraph 3. MR IRVING: Section 3. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Sorry, section 3 is a better word. MR IRVING: Yes, I have one page of questions. Page 3.3.12 or paragraph 3.3.12, you refer to a leaflet put out by Ewald Althans containing the phrase: "300 participants joined David Irving in spontaneous demonstration to the Feldherrenhalle after our event", which is a reference to that demonstration we saw on the video, is it not? A. Right, no, it is -- yes, right. Q. Do you have any evidence that I was actually on the demonstration that went to Feldherrenhalle, apart from that leaflet issued by Althans? MR JUSTICE GRAY: Are you saying that you did not, Mr Irving? MR IRVING: I am saying I did not, yes, my Lord. In that case I will put to the witness the letter from Mrs Worch which is page 9. Can I ask you to look at page 9 in the documents, it is either page 9 or 10. A. Yes, 9. Q. Is this a letter from Ursula Worch and her husband Christian Worch written to my lawyer February 17th 1991? . P-174 A. Yes. Q. If I summarize it very quickly, the actual letter is two pages later on page 11 probably in German. If you look at the German version, if I summarize it quickly, she is saying that after the end of the function in the Lowenbraukeller there was a spontaneous public demonstration: "We joined in that. We lost sight of Mr Irving who remained in the hall", right, "before we could make a firm appointment. About an hour later, shortly before the police broke up this demonstration, we met Mr Irving in the street where he had been looking for us", right? So the scene we saw on the video, would that be consistent with the crowd being ushered back to the hall by the police who then, for some reason, started making arrests? A. I mean the whole thing is inconsistent. On the one hand you have these letters of this couple, Worch, and of course it has the function for, you know, for the lawyer and so forth, and on the other hand you have the video and you have the Althans presentation you just quoted. So there is a lot of probability that this video is more correct than the letter. Q. Professor Funke, do you remember me asking you to look at the video and tell the court which way this little band of forlorn stragglers was moving, being ushered across the Viennastrasse and you could not tell? . P-175 A. All the evidence I have by Michael Schmidt, and especially Michael Schmidt who was there at the time and in his book and four days long, you know, whole videos of that, this is a short version we saw, I would say that in my overall cautious judgment I cannot say yes to your implication. Q. Since we are talking about this demonstration, I had œ2,000 worth of books on the book table at that function. Would I have left them unattended with 800 people in the hall in order to join a demonstration? A. You joined this going, and all the sources I had says, including Althans, that this was going to the Feldherrenhalle. Q. Did you read my diary covering that particular episode? A. Yes, I read. Q. Did you read the police statements that were taken describing what had happened in the file which was made available by discovery? A. You know, I think I did it also in the report, I read this and I came to the conclusion that there are more reasons for the case I state that you joined for a given period of time this march. Q. You think I would have just left œ2,000 worth of books unattended on a book table in a beer hall with 800 people? A. I do not know. There are other possibilities to take care and maybe you did and you joined. I do not know. . P-176 Q. Do you remember the police statements that were made at the time? A. I read the things that are of interest all around this case. Q. But my question was, do you remember the police statements that were made covering this particular event, the demonstration and the reason that I was taken in and so on? A. I think I recall, but help me. Q. Yes. Well, if you have not read them there is not much point in my putting it to you. A. I think I had. Q. Are you aware that Michael Schmidt who took the videos and on whom you rely is a paid police informer? A. No. Q. Well, are you aware that this emerges from the police dossier which is in my files which were provided by way of discovery? A. Michael Schmidt was not a police informer. Q. Where did the police obtain the video from on the basis of which they prosecuted me? A. But I have no evidence that he sided police functions, no evidence whatsoever.
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
Home · Site Map · What's New? · Search Nizkor