The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day008.22

Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day008.22
Last-Modified: 2000/07/20

   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Sending them all the way from France to
        Poland and then back again.
   MR IRVING:  And then back again.  I cannot speculate as to the
        reason why they should engage in this movement, except
        that Auschwitz does appear to have had a transit camp
        character about it.  It had facilities there for stealing,
        robbing; it had facilities there for fumigating and
        checking; it had also the big slave labour camp that was
        attached to the Molovitz factory.
                  There are two reasons, your Lordship has quite
        rightly spotted that fact, and that is I wanted to hint at
        the possibility this may have been the kind of movement --
        remember your Lordship drew attention to the fact that
        people were coming back from the East, from Lemburg to one
        of the camps on the border.  Of course, the special
        reception camp, that is, Bezonderes Auffanglager, you will
        see on the next page, my Lord, in line 4, "Bezonderes
        Auffanglager", a special reception camp, is clearly the
        Sonderlager to which reference is later made, in my

.          P-3

                  If I can move rapidly on to the next
        my Lord, it is headed "Pocket Dictionary".  It is
three or
        four pages.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am not sure I have that.
   MR IRVING:  In that case ----
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Hang ob. I probably have it somewhere.
   MR IRVING:  It will be in white, my Lord, with a green
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  No.  Oddly enough, that has not arrived.
   MR IRVING:  My Lord, I went to some trouble over the last
        months obtaining contemporary a German dictionary by
        I mean a wartime Third Reich German dictionary so we
        see what the meaning of words were at that time,
        than the modern Langenscheidt being used and relied
        by the Defence.  This is a 1935 dictionary, my Lord,
        is this one here.  I have just looked up at random
some of
        the words we are interested in.  The first page is
        "Entfernen" which means "to remove".  It has no
        subsidiary sinister meanings.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I do not think anyone is suggesting,
        in a euphemistic way, that it means anything other
than to
        remove or distance.
   MR IRVING:  My Lord, I believe the Defence is relying
        on the fact that I have mistranslated and distorted.
        my submission, if I use the correct wartime
translation of
        the word, then this destroys that particular Defence

.          P-4

   MR IRVING:  The next page is "Vernichten", a very sinister
        word, "annihilate and destroy".  The next page is
        "Abschaffen" which is quite significant in connection
        with the French movements, you will remember, my Lord,
        because Himmler wrote next to the figures "Abschaffen"
        his handwriting, and this means "to dismiss".
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I think the difficulty with "Abschaffen"
        that it would not normally be applied to people.  Is
        not a fair point?
   MR IRVING:  You are right, my Lord.  It could apply to a
        of people, perhaps, to dismiss them, and I shall be
        making, obviously, my closing speech submissions at
        length summarising this question of the translations
        is a thorny one, I appreciate, but in view of the fact
        Defence do rely on it so heavily for the distortion
        element of their justification; and, finally, my Lord,
        page 33 of the dictionary we have the famous
        and there the 1935 meaning of the word is quite
        "to root out", as you would imagine, the word
        "Ausrotten"; whereas I quite readily accept that
        in 1999/2000, the word "Ausrotten" quite clearly means
        "liquidate".  It has become that, the same as words
        change their meaning over the years.

.          P-5

   MR IRVING:  My Lord, finally, I come to the little bundle
        documents.  It is a rather arcane matter, but again
        I believe the Defence rely heavily on my choice of
        language.  Your Lordship will remember the rather
        remarks I made about certain Jewish fraudsters and
        racketeer in the United States, Ivan Boesky, Michael
        Milken, and so on.  I suggested they were hiding
        they were insulating themselves from public criticism
        the use of the Holocaust.  This is what is now
        scientifically or academically referred to as the
        instrumentalisation of the Holocaust.  This is one
        particular example which came to our attention.  Mr
        Murmelstein, who may well be mentioned later on in the
        case, started a claim against the Hertford Insurance
        Company.  His lawyers warned the insurance company
        as a survivor of Nazi concentration camps during World
        II, this matter is extremely important to Mr
        That is page 2, my Lord.  On page 6, the insurance
        company's own lawyers warned them, warned the
        company, to settle the $100,000 being claimed, saying,
         "The lawyer argues that a jury will be sympathetic to
        man who has survived a Nazi concentration camp", and
        on.  So this is the kind ----
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:   It is not quite the same point, is it?
        point that I think you were making in that talk that
        looked at on Thursday was that Jews who get up to some

.          P-6

        sort of financial or other misconduct then used the
        Holocaust as a kind of shield against their own
   MR IRVING:  My Lord, it may well be that I shall lead ----
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  This is a slightly use or
        of the Holocaust.
   MR IRVING:  It is an insulation which goes on.  Perhaps it
        automatic -- we all have the utmost sympathy with
        of the Holocaust, and that includes myself, and I want
        to say that here; but I want to get this one instance
        now because of the rather ugly note we closed on on
        Thursday evening, and it may well be I will lead
        evidence which will go more closely to the matter
        raised.  With that, I end my submission, my Lord.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I will put these into, just so we know
        they are going, J.  I think we have got to 8, but
there is
        a problem with these loose documents.
                  So that completes what you wanted to say
        that, Mr Irving.
   MR IRVING:  I have completed my submission, my Lord.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Mr Rampton, you do not want to say
        about this matter?
   MR RAMPTON:  No, I do not want to say anything about any of
        them at the moment.  I may have to come back to some
        them in due course, but certainly not today.  J8, my
        says Miss Rogers.

.          P-7

   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Could I mention something that I would
        to do, I think probably first thing tomorrow morning,
        that is convenient, and that is to have a look and see
        what the future timetable is looking like, as far as
        can judge it.  I would appreciate there are witnesses
        be accommodated.  We might need to discuss what topics
        need to be cross-examined to and possibly some do not
        to be.
   MR RAMPTON:  I agree.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  And timing generally.
   MR RAMPTON:  I mean, I quite agree with that.  One reason,
        I may respectfully say so, I would say it was a good
        to do it tomorrow is that today is a bit uncharted, I
        chartered, but I do not know where my charts will lead
        today.  But there is also the very good question your
        Lordship has raised on how much more of Evans do I
have to
        do?  Of course, essentially, that is a question for
        subject to being told not to.  There are only, I
        two big topics left in Evans, that is
         -- three, ReichKristallnacht early anti-Semitism of
        Hitler with the Nuremberg rules and Dresden.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I think there is another heading post
        Kirstallnacht, is there not?
   MR RAMPTON:  Yes, but that is all part of the same subject.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  All right.
   MR RAMPTON:  My Lord, can I mention something which I think

.          P-8

        I have mentioned before, which is this, that it would
        convenient to us if we could have our reading day on
        Thursday rather than Friday of this week for the
        that Professor van Pelt has to go to Stockholm on
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  For a day or for a weekend?
   MR RAMPTON:  Only for a day.  He is going in the morning
        coming back in the afternoon, but there is a
        that he has been asked to attend and thinks that he
        should.  So if we could possibly have ----
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I do not see any problem with that.  Does
        that cause you any difficulty, Mr Irving?
   MR IRVING:  My Lord, we were going to call Dr John Fox as
        expert witness on that day, but I can easily postpone
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  That is very accommodating.  Thank you.
        will do that first thing Thursday morning, if that is
        right with both of you?  So we can now press on with
   MR IRVING:  My Lord, I am calling Mr Peter Miller as a
        tomorrow, but he will be relatively brief, I think, on
        events in Moscow.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  That raises a question that I have
        before.  To what extent are we going to have to go
        quite voluminous evidence on the Goebbels' diaries?
        some extent I am in both of your hands.  I have made
        secret of the fact that whilst I understand, Mr

.          P-9

        your complaint about it, and I have seen the way the
        Defence is put, in the end is it a topic that we
        by spending a very great deal of time on?
   MR IRVING:  On the Goebbels' diaries.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  On the Goebbels' diaries and the breach
        the agreement or whatever it was.
   MR IRVING:  My Lord, I am accused of having breached
        in Moscow.  This is what I will certainly ask Peter
        to evidence on.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  This is really in a way addressed to
        Mr Rampton as he will understand.
   MR RAMPTON:  There are really only two points left in
        There is an admission that plates were removed without
        permission.  The question, was there any significant
        they might be damaged?  Second, how many plates?  Now,
        whether that is more than about half an hour's
        cross-examination -- nothing more than that, I doubt.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Well, well and good.  That is, I think,
        it really merits, frankly.
   MR RAMPTON:  That is how I see it.  There is the additional
        point, of course, that Moscow would be, if it fell
        anywhere in the case, a section 5 question.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  That is what you say.
   MR RAMPTON:  That is what I believe, and it may be against
        everything else I will take a view (and it will be my
        decision) that it pales into insignificance.

.          P-10

   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  That is really why I have said what I
        just said.  I do appreciate, Mr Irving, you do not
        that it is an insignificant point because you say you
        accused of breaking an agreement.
   MR IRVING:  Well...
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  It does not sound as if Mr Rampton is
        pursuing that at all.
   MR RAMPTON:  Yes, but without permission.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes, but without permission does not mean
        breaking an agreement necessarily.
   MR RAMPTON:  That is a question of terminology really.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am in both your hands about that, but I
        personally do not think we should spend a lot of time.
   MR RAMPTON:  That is my present view, but I am not
        myself now.  But I think your Lordship can reasonably
        expect that Moscow will not take up a lot of the
        time, as far as I am concerned.
   MR IRVING:  My Lord, if they were to put Moscow into
section 5
        as well, I think that bucket is beginning to overflow.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  That is a very vivid way of putting it.
   MR IRVING:  We can put the whole of his Hizbollah and
        into section 5.
   MR RAMPTON:  That is not section 5.  That is common sting
        is different.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Right, anyway, let us get on.  That
        of that.  Yes, do please come back, Mr Irving.

.          P-11

(MR DAVID IRVING, recalled. Cross-Examined by MR RAMPTON, QC, continued.)

   MR RAMPTON:  My Lord, there are three new bundles.  They
are not new in any surprise sense.  They are new in that we
        have composed them for ease of reference for this part of
        the case.  There are two Auschwitz core bundles; the first
        consisting of what one might call material arising out of
        the Leuchter Report, and it has the Leuchter Report at the
        beginning of it.  The second Auschwitz core bundles are
        the original drawings and documents.
   MR RAMPTON:  The third new file, again composed from other
        sources, are statements by Mr Irving about Leuchter and
        the Leuchter report.  That has been extracted from a range
        of the D files, D1 and 2 and 3.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Many of which we have been through?
   MR RAMPTON:  Yes, exactly, but not the specific reference and
        I am hoping to cut that short this morning, if I possibly
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am sorry to be tedious about it, but
can we perhaps give these bundles a slightly more convenient
        means of identification?
   MR RAMPTON:  We started off by calling them "K".
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Well, why not?
   MR RAMPTON:  All right.  K1, 2 and 3 then.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  It is just going to make life simpler later

.          P-12


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.