Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day028.18 Last-Modified: 2000/07/25 Q. -- it is that, that sort of sentiment, is it, which German law does not permit, the expression of that kind of sentiment in public which German law forbids? A. Yes, this is right. It was done again, and again it was a . P-166 bit sharpened in the 1980s. It was a bit changed in the middle of 1990s because of the experience of late 1990s and the early 1990s, and the people in Germany, the authorities in Germany, are very aware of what these kinds of sayings meant to people who still or have lived at that periods of time as survivors. One of them is the famous Heinz Kaminsky of the Jewish community in Berlin, who asked, because of this kind of sorrow, because of this kind of cynicism that they, the Jews in Germany after 1945 experienced, to sharpen a bit these laws, as a kind of acknowledgment that it happened. Q. Sorry, carry on. A. As a kind of acknowledgment, recognition. Q. Yes. A. To these people that had happened, that the German people, the German public, is aware that this is done by German authorities between 1933 and 1945, and what you can call is a kind of second anti-Semitism is exactly to attack this experience of those who survived. This is again a very aggressive behaviour to those. Q. Is that one that I think you told us when you first started giving evidence, that one is one of the strands or elements in right-wing neo-Nazi policy, ideology, statement in Germany? A. This is at the core. For example, at even DVU presentation of Otto Butz, Hoax of the Century, that with . P-167 this presentation it goes very aggressive behaviour in this newspapers against all representatives, all sorts, all kinds of representatives of the Jewish community in these days. So we have a combination of this kind of denial of the memory, not only the denial of the Holocaust itself, but the memory of those survived, with the alleged financial and political mysterious strategies of the Jewish community after 1945. So you have a combination of the old racist anti-Semitism of the years before 1945, used now as a kind of second anti-Semitism, to attack the people who survived in Germany and who are, as Jewish community or Jewish individuals still, you know, nowadays in the public. Q. Yes, well, now Mr Irving in this connection, and what I have to ask next flows directly from your last answer, Mr Irving put it to you that he did not break the law when he was in Germany. He went out of his way to keep on the right side of the law, I am paraphrasing; do you remember that? A. Yes. Q. Would you look at at page 106 of your report, please? A. Yes. Q. You write in the third line: "In Canada in October 1991 Irving told his audience that the Bavarian Ministry of Justice whom Irving described in the same speech as the 'extended arm" of 'you know who'", and then Funke puts . P-168 in brackets, "i.e. the Jewish people". Do you have any reason to revise that parenthesis Professor Funke, the Jewish people? A. No, I have not. Q. No. Then comes: "Wanted to talk to me about certain things I have done and said in Germany. Well, what I do and say in Germany unfortunately does violate the law in Germany. I am well aware of that, and I go round from meeting place to meeting place in Germany now quite voluntarily sticking my neck out, because Germany is one of the most difficult places in the world to speak now". Professor Funke, speak about what, is my question? About what is it difficult to speak in Germany now? A. Yes, especially about his revised version of the Holocaust Nazi period. Q. One small point in passing. Mr Irving was putting it to you that the Munich city authorities had done something or other, and he used the form of words: "The Munich city authorities of the German Reich"? A. Yes, I heard that. Q. I know you did and you showed some surprise. You said "of what?", and he said, "of the German Reich". Now why did you show surprise? A. Because the German Reich is a clear defined term in post-Nazi Germany, to the Nazi Reich, not to any sort . P-169 of ---- MR JUSTICE GRAY: There has never been a fourth Reich? A. Up to now not. MR IRVING: The actual quotation was that the Munich city authorities have succeeded in getting my banned from the entire German Reich. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. I think you are slightly missing -- well, I doubt whether they put it that way -- I think you are missing the point. I did notice that Professor Funke was surprised. MR IRVING: It was meant to be sarcastic of course. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Was it right? MR RAMPTON: Oh was it? Very well. I will leave it in that condition, if I may. MR IRVING: I thought an expert in sarcasm would recognise that. MR JUSTICE GRAY: We will move on. MR RAMPTON: I have to say I thought it a slip of the tongue. It leads to my next question, which is this. It is a series of questions, Professor Funke. You have told us that these neo-Nazi groups, right-wing extremists, there was a convergence in the late 80s, early 90s? A. Yes. Q. Of which the Wahrheit macht Frei event at Munich in 1990 was a notable sort of a marker. Have I got that right? A. Right. . P-170 Q. You told us that anti-Semitism is one of the notable features of this convergence? A. Right. Q. Of which obviously a feature is Holocaust denial. You have explained that too. Mr Irving said, and you agreed with him, that when he goes to Germany he does not talk only about Holocaust denial, yes? A. Right. Q. Can I ask you whether any of the following things form any, from your knowledge of this topic, this field, any of the following things form any part of right-wing extreme or neo-Nazi policy or ideology. First, to try to absolve -- do you know that word, excuse -- excuse the Nazis of blame for the outbreak of the Second World War, is that part of it or not? A. Yes, of course. Q. It is? A. That is the question of so-called allein Schuld. Q. Which is? THE INTERPRETER: Exclusive guilt. A. Yes. MR RAMPTON: Do they have a tendency at all to try to blame Winston Churchill for the outbreak of war? MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Rampton, can I interrupt because I am not quite sure what you are asking. You are asking about topics which do not come within the umbrella of Holocaust . P-171 denial. MR RAMPTON: It has an end result. A. Yes. Yes, of course they questioned the role of Churchill to degree that they attack the role of, you know, reacting to the aggression that was done by the Hitler regime in 39. Q. Do they tend in any way to focus rather on so-called allied atrocities or war crimes such as the bombing of Dresden? A. There is often the case that there is a kind of counterbalance. Q. Yes, they try to make a balance? A. To minimise the own atrocities. THE INTERPRETER: They are setting one off against the other. A. Yes. MR RAMPTON: What I in this court have called a false equivalence? A. Yes, it is criticised, this kind of revisionists historians are criticised exactly with this kind of assessment. Q. Do they have any tendency to glorify what they see as Nazi war heroes? A. This is very much the case, if I go through the 70s already and the 80s you have always this kind of appraisal of war heroes, of Judet, of Ruddell, of Dall, of Rommel, those who are identified with the Nazi cause and those who . P-172 are not identified but. THE INTERPRETER: "Praise" rather than "appraisal". MR RAMPTON: Do they include General Remer in this galaxy of stars? A. He is one of the most accepted heroes in that camp, because, as you may recall, of his courage to crush down the coup, the attempt of the resistance fighters within the Army of 20th July, 44, around Stuffenberg, Gurdella and others. Q. Do they ever speak of the prospects of establishing a greater Germany? A. Of course we did not tackle that too much. This is of course the centre of their belief system, that they have to renew a greater Germany. We more addressed the attention to the so-called second revolution of the Kuhnen connection, but the broader perspective is of course to build a new or greater Germany that extends the borders of Germany now that are internationally accepted. Q. Do they propose what the ethnic or racial composition of this greater Germany will be? A. They include normally so-called ethnic Germans, Germans by ethnic dissent, or they even say by Aryan race dissent, if it is possible to say by Aryan race dissent. Q. In which geographical direction do they tend to see this expansion, Westwards, Eastwards, South, North? A. Especially to the East, to the Northeast, to the East and . P-173 to a degree to the Southeast. Q. To include what, for example, the parts of the Reich that were formed after the invasion of Poland? A. Yes, this is the main cause. This has always have been the cause in the right-wing circles and beyond in the right-wing extremist circles to attack the borderline in the ---- Q. The Odanisa(?) Line we call it. A. How do you call it? Q. The Odanisa line. A. Yes. Q. Finally this. Do they ever make a claim or a proposal that the Germans should be compensated, for example, by the Poles, for the land which the Poles have occupied since the end of the war? MR IRVING: I cannot really see the point of all this. MR RAMPTON: You will in a moment. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think it is fair. MR RAMPTON: You will in a moment. A. Yes, they say this is almost not so densely populated areas, so they can move or they try to rebuild German ethnic circles, and one of these people we are talking about were very active to do so in the Kalingrad area, for example, but also in the Baltic states, and especially in Silesia and in West Prussia, in former Silesia I have to say, in the West part of Poland. . P-174 MR RAMPTON: Thank you very much. Now I think I would like you to look at a document, will you please. My Lord, this is in RWE at tab 7, page 81. It is part of the Frey section. What I am going to do, if I may, is hand up a clip containing the German and an English translation of the relevant part, the first part of the German. MR IRVING: My Lord, I am not sure this is proper material for re-examination. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not know what it is yet. MR RAMPTON: This is an Irving document. MR IRVING: That does not make it necessarily proper material for re-examination. MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is true. Let us hear what it is and then we can make up ---- MR RAMPTON: It arises directly out of Mr Irving's suggestion that he does not talk only about Holocaust denial when he is Germany. MR JUSTICE GRAY: If it does that seems to me to be legitimate. MR IRVING: I have no objection. MR RAMPTON: Of course your Lordship will remember that our case is not simply that Mr Irving is a racist and an anti-Semite, but that he is a right-wing extremist with sympathies, deep sympathies for the Nazi regime. This is directly relevant to that. Have you seen this before, Professor Funke? Look at the German document. A. Oh, yes I saw. . P-175 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Is it the top page a translation of what comes later? MR RAMPTON: Yes, the top page takes us down to -- I must use my own copy otherwise I get lost. A. There is a red line somewhere. Q. The red line is mine. Can I have mine back. Does the English, Dr Funke, take us down to the words on the first page of the German: (German spoken - document not provided)? A. Yes. Q. Right. I will read the entire ---- A. Your red line. Q. My read line, yes. That is right. First of all, please, it is sent by in Irving from Keywest in Florida to Dr Frey and to his lawyer, Dr Von Spranger, yes? A. Yes. Q. One sees that it is dated 30th January 1991. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Frey is the publisher, is that right? MR RAMPTON: It is what? MR JUSTICE GRAY: Is Frey publisher? MR RAMPTON: No, Frey is the head of the DVU.
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012
Home · Site Map · What's New? · Search Nizkor