Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day004.20
Last-Modified: 2000/08/01

   Q.   But when you wrote Hitler's War in 1991 you had the
        original German, you had it since 1977?

.          P-179


   A.   I did not write Hitler's War in 1991.  I reissued Hitler's
        War in 1991.
   Q.   It is the second edition.  It is much more than a reissue,
        Mr Irving.  You rewrote whole passages in that book?
   A.   No, I did not rewrite whole passages.  I inserted a lot of
        fresh material like the diaries of Hitler's doctor,
        Hermann Goring's diaries, papers like that.
   Q.   And the Holocaust disappeared hook line and sinker, did it
        not?  You had plenty of opportunity between 1977 when you
        got the original German and doing the rewrite of 1991
        Hitler's War to get this right?
   A.   It was not wrong in the first place.
   Q.   We will stop arguing about that, Mr Irving.  That sentence
        is plainly completely wrong.
   A.   Even if that sentence is plainly completely wrong, it
        leaves the other two sentences which are the burden of
        that paragraph, namely who says we cannot push them out of
        Germany and park them somewhere nasty, and then he
        continues to say, "Anyway, let's leave it until the war is
        over. We have other more important things to do."
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Can we come back to the "we cannot park them
        in the marshier parts of Russia", because, this is pure
        supposition on my part, the phrase about sending them into
        the marsh looks as if it might be some sort of saying?
   A.   That is what it looks like to me.  It is rather like
        sending somebody, somebody going for a Burton, something

.          P-180



        like that.  It is not impossible.
   Q.   Exactly.  Do you know whether that is so or not?
   A.   In schreiken I think it does not have the sense of killing
        somebody, but it has the sense of rather like sending them
        to Coventry might be even closer, who knows.  But I would
        have to take advice from a German who is familiar with the
        vernacular of that particular era.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I think Mr Rampton is maybe going to ask you,
        I am sure he is, where on earth you get "parking them in
        the marshier parts of Russia" from?
   A.   Weidenfeld has it, my Lord.
   Q.   I follow, but you have trotted along behind.
   A.   Weidenfeld's translation, if I may say so, is
extremely
        good and very literate.  You are faced constantly with
the
        dichotomy of having a literate translation or a wooden
        translation, and I would aver that this is not one of
the
        most important parts of that paragraph. The most
important
        part is (a) Hitler saying he is pushing them out
        geographically, and (b) he does not want to be
bothered
        until the war is over with, this problem, which goes
along
        with my perception of the involvement of Hitler.
   MR RAMPTON:  Mr Irving, I have to put it to you, you just
say
        any old thing to get yourself out of a corner.  Have
you
        got Goebbels' book, page 377?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   We have read what you wrote as being the translation
of

.          P-181



        the table talk in that paragraph.  You see it is
footnoted
        16?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Now please turn to page 643.
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   So far from your having used the rotten old Weidenfeld
        translation two or three generations down the line, in
        fact you did use the original.  Footnote 16 on page
643:
        "Heinreich Heinn, note on Hitler's dinner table talk,
        October 25th junet papers", those are ----
   A.   That is where it is now to be found, yes, the
original.
   Q.   And you stuck with the translation that you can see
now to
        be complete rubbish, and bears very little
relationship
        with the original which you actually used?
   A.   It is not complete rubbish, Mr Rampton.  It is very
close
        to the original.  The colouring is different.  The
        colouring assigned to it by the English translator
with
        whom I have no connection whatsoever.  I adopted the
        colouring adopted by George Weidenfeld and his
publisher.
   Q.   Why did you not acknowledge them in the footnote?
   A.   Because I in the meantime had the original which is
        available now to historians.
   Q.   You mean you gave a reference ----
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   --- for a book written in 1996?
   A.   Yes.

.          P-182



   Q.   --- to some papers from which you had not taken the
        translation?
   A.   I gave the superior reference.  It is a superior
        reference.  I perhaps should have said: "See also
        Weidenfeld, table talk, Ed Trevor-Roper" and so on.
   Q.   No, Mr Irving.  What you should have done, as you know
        perfectly well, is to have retranslated the thing
        correctly.  You knew it was wrong?
   A.   Let us argue it the other way round.  I really do not
want
        to labour this point, Mr Rampton.
   Q.   I do.
   A.   I am not sure how long the Court will allow you to
labour
        this point, Mr Rampton.
   Q.   That is a matter for the Court, Mr Irving.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am getting the hint though.
   A.   Mr Rampton, if I were to retranslate that sentence
        following Mr Evans' admirable translation to which you
        refer, would that in the slightest degree alter the
        arguments which I seek to make in that paragraph?
   MR RAMPTON:  Oh, yes, it would, because what Hitler is then
        saying is something very much stronger, much more
        sinister.  He is saying:  "It is a good thing that the
        fear that we are exterminating the Jews goes before
us"?
   A.   Yes, he says that.
   Q.   Never mind.  We will pass on to the next thing.
   A.   He does say that.

.          P-183



   Q.   Because here now we come to a huge ellipse in the
        translation which you have given.
   A.   So you accept that even that translation would not
alter
        the argument that I have made?
   Q.   Of course it would alter it.  It would put much
stronger
        words, threatening words into Hitler's mouth than you
have
        allowed.
   A.   Use of the word "fear" instead of "public rumour".
   Q.   Yes, fear, shock, terror.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Shall we move on to the next passage.
   MR RAMPTON:  And the absence of any plan.  I think your
        Lordship has my point?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I do.
   MR RAMPTON:  Good.  You jump or your translation jumps, the
        translation you used jumps from "des Judentung
        aulsgrotten", yes?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   To the words, [German spoken], does it not?  No, it
goes
        even further.  Sorry, that is not right.  It goes to
        [German spoken].  That is where your translation
starts
        again from "aulsgrotten", does it not?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Now look at what has been missed out.  You have missed
        out ----
   A.   Yes.  Shall I translate it for you?
   Q.   Yes, please.

.          P-184



   A.   The words which I missed out:  "I find myself forced,
        I have been forced to keep piling up a lot inside me.
        That does not mean to say that I forget about it
without
        taking cognisance of it, without taking cognisance of
it,
        without showing it immediately."  This is the sense of
it.
   Q.   The sense of it is he does not forget?
   A.   That is right.
   Q.   He does not necessarily take action at once, but it
goes
        into the account and it stays there.
   A.   It says, "I am keeping it on the books and one day the
        books are going to be taken out."
   Q.   Yes.  It goes into an account, one day the book is
taken
        out?
   A.   That is right, which rather implies that nothing is
        happening yet.
   Q.   Wait, now read the next sentence, please.
   A.   This is part I quote, right?
   Q.   Where?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Look at the tense.
   MR RAMPTON:  Mr Irving, tell me which is the point, which
is
        the sentence that you translate?  Show me in the
English?
   A.   I am sorry.  It continues:  "Vis-a-vis the Jews I also
had
        to remain inactive for a long time.  I also had to
remain
        inactive for a long time."
   Q.   "Had to"?
   A.   Yes.

.          P-185



   Q.   Where do I find that in your text?
   A.   It is not there.  The book is already nearly 1,000
pages
        long.
   Q.   But it is the critical -- it is the critical passage?
   A.   He is throwing them out.  He remained inactive and now
he
        is throwing them out.  He is sending them to the
marshy
        parts of Russia, the most radical measures.
   Q.   What it means is -- bear with me Mr Irving -- what it
        means is that the time has, he uses the plue perfect
we
        would call it in English, "I had to remain inactive
        against the Jews for a long time, but that does not
mean
        much because now the book of account has been taken
out
        and the time has come", is it means?
   A.   He does not actually say that of course.  He does not
say
        "The book has now been taken out".
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Sorry, it is probably my
misunderstanding.
        Mr Irving, I think you just said that you have not
        translated that sentence beginning "alt den Juden",
but
        you did, did you not?  Is that not where you write:
"He
        pointed out, however, that he had no intention of
starting
        anything at present"?
   A.   It is bundled up in that sentence.  It is precise'd in
        that sentence.
   Q.   You use the word "precis", but you have changed the
tense,
        "missed" stays in the past tense?
   A.   That is the next sentence we are taking up.

.          P-186



   Q.   No, it is the same sentence, unless I have
misunderstood.
   A.   "It has no sense to make additional difficulties for
        oneself", he then continues.
   Q.   Yes, but go back to the previous sentence.  Am I not
right
        in thinking that your rendition of that previous
sentence
        is where you write:  "He pointed out, however, that he
had
        no intention of starting anything at present"?
   A.   What he no doubt said, if he was speaking in direct
        speech, is, "For a long time now I have done nothing,
        I have been inactive towards the Jews."
   Q.   In the past?
   A.   In the past, yes.
   Q.   But that is not the same thing as saying that you have
no
        intention of starting anything at present or in the
        future?
   A.   At present.
   Q.   Is there not a real distinction between the two on
        reflection now?
   A.   No, because the sense of the next sentence, my Lord,
where
        he goes on to say, "I am not looking for difficulties.
        I am not going to try to make difficulties, there is
no
        point in it, there is no sense in doing it."
   Q.   Look at the tense again.  It is "hat".  That may be a
bad
        point.
   MR RAMPTON:  No, my Lord, I do not think it is.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  It may be a neutral point.

.          P-187



   MR RAMPTON:  Maybe, but I have a reason why I say it is not
a
        bad point.
   A.   Can I use Professor Evans' translation?
   Q.   Yes, please do.
   A.   Where he said: "I had to remain inactive for a long
time
        against the Jews too. There is no sense in
artificially
        making extra difficulties for oneself.  The more
cleverly
        one operates the better." In other words, "We are not
        doing anything for the moment, but the time will come
when
        I get my book out".
   MR RAMPTON:  No, Mr Irving.  You know that is nonsense.
   A.   I would not say it was nonsense, Mr Rampton.
   Q.   I am afraid I have to suggest it is nonsense and you
know
        it is nonsense.  He is talking actually about what he
is
        going to do with Bishop Galen who is grumbling about
the
        euthanasia programme.  That is the context?
   A.   Then he goes on to Galen, yes.
   Q.   No, and he uses the past tense to describe his
previous
        inactivity against the Jews to, you miss out the
        word "ough" also and then he says: "There is no since
in
        artificially making extra difficulties for oneself".
        There is no "at this time" as there is in your
English.
        He simply observes, no doubt with some pride, "The
more
        cleverly one operates the better", and what he is
saying
        is this:  "Look, leave Galen for the moment, don't
let's
        make extra difficulties for ourselves in relation to

.          P-188



        Galen.  I had to remain inactive against the Jews for
a
        long time too", and then the implied parentheses or
        sequence, "but the time has now come"?
   A.   Yes, but you are hanging all your proof on this
implied
        parentheses which just does not happen to be in the
        document, Mr Rampton.  It is not hanging document
again.
   Q.   It does not hang Hitler.  There are plenty of other
ways
        of doing -- I was going to say skinning a cat, but it
        hangs you as an accurate recorder of German history,
        because it is a deliberate misuse of a translation
which
        you knew to be wrong, so as to exculpate Hitler and
make
        it appear that on 25th October 1941 he was yet again
        postponing taking any action against the Jews.  You
know
        perfectly well, because the German says it, that that
is
        not what he said?
   A.   I totally disagree with you.

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