The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day006.20

Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day006.20
Last-Modified: 2000/08/02

   Q.   As a first step to that desirable end beyond the pale,
        were the deportations from the Outreich and the
   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
        Servant such as Lammas to say: Hitler wants that which

.          P-177

        already been put into effect on his own orders of
        September 1941 to be postponed until the end of the
   A.   Can you look at the full text of the document?  The
        text of document says: "The Fuhrer has repeatedly said
        that he wants the solution of the Jewish problem
        until the war is over and for this reason he does not
        all this continued talking about it.  He does not want
        this to-ing and fro-ing within the ministry, but this
        at the height of the military crisis".
   Q.   That goes back right into the circle which his
        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
        intention as at the 3rd or 12th March 1942, then it is
        nonsense, because that entlosung has already been put
        operation.  It started in October 1941.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  And it is still in operation, would 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,
        is a limited reference to the mischlinge question
        discussed by Heydrich and his colleagues, then it
        perfect sense, it does not say that but this is the
        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
        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
        saying he wanted everything finished this year, for
        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,
        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
   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
        to him, with Schlegelberger making the note.
   Q.   Let us try and get a little common sense into this,
   A.   Do not attach too much importance to whether it is
        or entlosung that is the word that is being used.
   Q.   I am not, but it is one of the little things that,
        significant to an historian, is not decisive.  I am
        saying that.  Let us use common sense and objectivity.
        During this period and for seven months up to this
        according to you, Hitler's version of the losung or
        entlosung has been in top gear.

.          P-179

   A.   It has been gathering momentum, first one City then
   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
        talking about any general losung plainly?
   A.   We are talking about the overall completion of every I
        dotted and every T crossed.
   Q.   Exactly, including including the solution of the
        mischlinge problem.  Do you follow?
   A.   Can we stand back from these trivia and look at the
        overall effect of the document?  This is a high level
        diamond document of unquestioned integrity, stating
        Hitler wants the solution of the Jewish problem
        until after the war is over and that is what the
        states.  We do not have to read between lines any more
        unless you want to try and devalue the document.
   Q.   No.  I am not trying to devalue the document.  I am
        to help you, if I may put it so patronisingly, to see
        light because you just will not, will you?  Here you
        a document which refers to Hitler having said he wants
        solution of the Jewish question postponed until after
        war. If you extract it from all its historical, rip it
        the wall, take it out of its historical context, then
        yes, of course, it is a sort of diamond or golden
        that you like to brandish.  But, if you put it in its

.          P-180

        historical context, your interpretation makes no sense
        whatsoever, does it?
   A.   Equally less does your interpretation make any sense,
        I may say so.
   Q.   Now, consider another possibility.
   A.   You are putting the narrowest possible definition on
        extraordinary broad phrase, the solution of the Jewish
        problem.  We have been hearing for days how the Final
        Solution of the Jewish problem was the Holocaust.
Here is
        a document saying he wants it all postponed until
        the war is over and suddenly you say this document is
        no value at all, and all your historians have never
        mentioned it until now they are forced to because I
        put it in this court.
   Q.   Did you write to Professor Jekel?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Who I think actually found this document?
   A.   When I pointed him where to find it.
   Q.   He wrote an article in a German newspaper first off
        this, did he not?
   A.   If you remember, I found the staff evidence analysis
        which pointed out the document had once existed.
   Q.   The fact is, whenever you have said, as you so
        have, that all the other historians have ignored this,
        Abraham Jekel is, I suppose, is a historian?
   A.   When does he claim to have found it?

.          P-181

   Q.   I do not know.  I thought you just conceded that he
   A.   If it is a question of who was first.
   Q.   But he certainly has not ignored it, has he?
   A.   Yes, he cannot ignore it now.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  We are fencing a little bit.
   MR RAMPTON:  I am not interested in defending Professor
        any more than I am Professor Evans.  I am sure they
        both fight for themselves.  On 28th February 1978 you
        wrote to Professor Jekel in German from London, saying
        that you thought that this document could date
        between October 1941 and March 1942, did you not?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   That is actually a recognition of yet another
        of this curious document, is it not?
   A.   In the meantime, of course, I have checked on the
        interrogations of everybody who was present at that
        session in 1942, so we know much more narrowly when
        document originates from.
   Q.   So you say, but one reasonable interpretation of this
   A.   You say so I say, that is why I am standing here in
        witness box.
   Q.   I know. I am only saying that because I have not read
        those things myself.  I do not actually have to say
that I
        need to rely on what you say in the witness box.
   A.   Mr Rampton, I would not say something in the witness

.          P-182

        under oath if I was not speaking the truth.
   Q.   I have to say, I am afraid, Mr Irving, on a number of
        occasions in this court you have said things from the
        witness box which I do not accept as being the truth
        which I will characterise it at the end of the case as
        being knowingly untrue.
   A.   There is of course a solution for that kind of problem
        known as the Aitken solution and, if you want to go
        road, you can, but I think you will find it very
   MR RAMPTON:  I do not know what that is.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Can I ask two questions, first of all,
        Mr Irving?  Would you or would you not accept that the
        theory that Mr Rampton is propounding, namely that
        Schlegelberger note is really confined to the problem
        the mischlinge, is a feasible one?
   A.   It does hold water but it is an alternative theory, my
   Q.   It is alternative?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   And a viable theory?
   A.   Except for the fact that the document does not say
        Jewish problem, it says the solution of the Jewish
   Q.   Apart from that fact, would I also be right that in
        Hitler's War you have espoused 100 per cent the theory

.          P-183

        that it is in fact a highly significant statement
        it is referring to postponing the Jewish question
        altogether until after the end of the war?
   A.   My Lord, with respect, I would draw attention to the
        that in that very paragraph you are alluding to, I
        to the fact that it came immediately after the
        about the half Jews and the mixed Jews.
   Q.   That is true.  You think that is enough to tell the
        that this may not really be a very significant
   A.   Well, it tells the intelligent reader the kind of
        in which this document was found.  It has taken
        Evans, I think, eight pages to analyse the value of
        document.  I did not have eight pages.  I have one
        paragraph or less.
   MR RAMPTON:  Mr Irving, I must say I happen to believe his
        Lordship is right, that is very, what I shall say,
        reference to the mischlinge question in Hitler's War.
   A.   His Lordship did not say weasley reference.  I do not
        think he used those words.
   Q.   I interpret what I hear or see, Mr Irving.  I suggest
        you that the reference to the mischlinge question in
        Hitler's War is not apt to lead the reader to suppose
        you are saying, which you are plainly not, that the
        so-called Schlegelberger note has anything to do with
        mischlinge question.  Not directly.
   A.   I will not read it out, my Lord, but it is the third

.          P-184

        paragraph on page 464.
   MR RAMPTON:  Yes, I know.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I have it well in mind.  I have in mind
        you say in the last sentence of that paragraph.
   A.   I rely simply on that paragraph and my own comment on
   MR RAMPTON:  I think I have it here.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Mr Rampton, if it helps -- it probably
        not -- I think I have got the picture on the
        Schlegelberger note because I have read Professor
        and I have heard Mr Irving.  You may say there are
lots of
        other points to take, but I thought I would say that
   MR RAMPTON:  But there is one other main point, or two
        main points.  Whatever one may think of what was
        in Hitler's War in 1991, if one were inclined to be
        generous to Mr Irving and say, well, he has mentioned
        two in juxtaposition, therefore, one might think,
        it is not explicit, what he has had to say about it
        then and before is very much more categorical about,
        his mind, the importance, or at any rate in his
        the importance, of this document.  My Lord, I give an
        example from 1984:
                  "Finally, I think the most cardinal piece of
        proof in this entire story of what Hitler knew about
        was going on, is a document that mysteriously vanished
        from the Nuremberg files in 1945.  It is clear", and

.          P-185

        there is a lot of stuff about the files.  It says ----
   A.   Can I enquire what this is that you are reading from?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes, can I ask that too?
   MR RAMPTON:  I am sorry.  I was trying to save time.  It is
        file D3(i), tab 20, page 101.  Has your Lordship got
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am going to wait to hear you read it
   A.   What was the page number again?
   MR RAMPTON:  It is page 101.
   A.   I have it.

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

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and to combat hatred. Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.

As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.