Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day014.06
Last-Modified: 2000/07/20

   Q.   We cannot fit that many witnesses into your witness box up
        there, Mr Irving, I am afraid.  Can you turn to the next
        page, 92, please?  It has a 92 in the right hand corner,
        so that you can identify it.  It is a letter from you,
        London, 4th June  1992 -- it is a facsimile -- to Karl
        Philip.  Just tell me, does it say more or less the same
        as what your letter to Mark Weber said?
   A.   Yes.  I do not know what file I am supposed to be looking
        at.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I think the answer is yes, having read
        through it.
   MR RAMPTON:  It looks like it.  My German is rotten but it
        looks much the same.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Who is Philip?
   MR RAMPTON:  That is my next question.  Who is Karl Philip?
   A.   He is a German friend of mine.
   Q.   Why would he want to have this information?
   A.   I would have to think back.  In 1992 he was publishing a

.          P-46

        newsletter.
   Q.   He is another revisionist, is he not?
   A.   Oh yes.  He is a wicked revisionist.
   Q.   No, he is another revisionist?
   A.   But I said yes, he is a revisionist.
   Q.   You said he was a wicked revisionist.  Would you like to
        expand on why he is wicked?
   A.   Apparently all revisionists are wicked.  This is a piece
        of sarcasm on my part which obviously totally escaped you.
   Q.   Mr Irving, revisionists are wicked if they tell deliberate
        falsehoods about the past.
   A.   Let us hear if you can catch me out in telling deliberate
        falsehoods on oath, which is of course a serious matter.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  On we go, I think.
   MR RAMPTON:  I quite agree.  The last three pages in this
        little clip should be some pages from your book
        Nuremberg.  Do you recognize them?  Starting with the page
        number 245.
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   There is a paragraph at the bottom of page 245 which
        begins, "in fact Eichmann".
   A.   Yes.  I just have the notes here.  I have 245, yes, page 6.
   Q.   "In fact Eichmann had no authority to issue orders to
        Hoess, as they were in different branches..." I will not
        bother to read that.  You are talking about the material

.          P-47

        presented by the Allies at Nuremberg, I suppose, are you?
        "There is no trace on the Allied aerial photographs
        either of such burning operations or of the pits
        themselves.  Perhaps for security reasons, the Allies made
        no attempt to introduce these highly detailed aerial
        photographs of Auschwitz in this or the later war crimes
        trial".
                  Those are probably including some of the
        photographs we looked at earlier in this trial, are they
        not, Mr Irving?
   A.   Yes.  The aerial photographs helped in particular with
        secrecy by the Americans and the British after the war.
   Q.   Now, the footnote there is 34, and you will find that
        footnote on the next following page in this little clip of
        documents.  At the bottom of the page, I am afraid the
        page has lost its number.
   A.   Pages 4 and 5.
   Q.   Yes.  It is page 353 of the book.  You write: "Nor did
        they (that is Allies) introduce other compelling evidence
        about Auschwitz, for example, the testimony of SS
        Sturmbannfuhrer Kurt Almeyer".  In fact I think he is
        called Hans Almeyer, is he not?
   A.   That I do not know.
   Q.   -- "who had for several weeks acted as deputy Kommandant
        of Auschwitz.  Almeyer was initially as incoherent as
        Hoess under interrogation by the British in Norway and

.          P-48

        England.  The memoirs and manuscripts which he pencilled
        in the Kensington Interrogation centre commanded by
        Lieutenant Colonel Scotland also displayed an increasing
        precision with each week that passed.  The final
        manuscript (or fair copy) signed by Almeyer was pencilled
        in British Army style with all proper names in block
        letters.  Almeyer was extradited by the British to
        Poland and hanged."
                  If you write the words "compelling evidence",
        are you being sarcastic?
   A.   It is compelling.  It is very important.  I have always
        been puzzled why that evidence was not introduced at
        Nuremberg, unless perhaps the experts at Nuremberg said
        this will harm us more than it helps us because of the figures.
   Q.   How many people were tried at Nuremberg for the sorts of
        crimes alleged to have been committed at Auschwitz and Birkenhau?
   A.   At the principal trial there were 22 Defendants and in the
        subsequent actions, there were 12 subsequent actions with
        the United States, people of the United States against
        individual groups.
   Q.   How many of the 22 pleaded guilty?
   A.   None of them.
   Q.   Were they all convicted?
   A.   Two were acquitted.

.          P-49

   Q.   Was the evidence of, for example, Heinrich Tauber used at
        Nuremberg?
   A.   I do not think so.  I do not know, is the answer to that.
   Q.   Right.  I just want to come back to one thing on this.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Before you leave that, I am a bit puzzled,
        Mr Irving.  Can you help me?  I had got the impression
        that you really thought that Almeyer's account was not
        worthless but really not worth a great deal because of the inaccuracy.
   A.   It is questionable material, but obviously, if you read
        the whole file, this was a man who was in a position to
        know.  He is an important character, and I am surprised
        that they did not introduce either his statements or call
        him as a witness.
   Q.   If it is questionable, why do you describe it in your
        Nuremberg book as compelling?
   A.   It is compelling evidence which needs to be examined.  It
        is compelling evidence that should have been before the
        court if they were looking at these atrocities.  It is one
        of the oddities of the Nuremberg War Crimes trial that
        Auschwitz was hardly mentioned.  The prosecution of crimes
        against humanity was left to the French and the Russian
        prosecutors, and the actual events in Auschwitz were very
        skimpily touched upon.  The purpose of this footnote, my
        Lord, is to bring the attention of the Almeyer file to the
        historical community, to say there is this material, here

.          P-50

        is the file number, it is important stuff, go for it.
   MR RAMPTON:  When was book published?  1996?
   A.   It was written in 1994, yes.
   Q.   When was the first time you went public on Almeyer?  You
        discovered it in the beginning of June 92.
   A.   I drew attention of the fellow historians to it and other
        writers from 1992 onwards immediately.  I found one letter
        in October 1992 to a Mr Paul Gifford, to whom I sent the
        entire file on the Holocaust, including the Almeyer
        material.
   Q.   Who is he?
   A.   He is a British writer.  If you are interested in this
        letter, it was in the discovery.  I sent it to him on
        October 7th, saying this file must be returned within four
        weeks please.  I sent him a reminder on 29th 1992, that is
        the same year as I found it, saying please now return the
        file.  So it went on.  I sent it to Gerald Fleming.  I
        believe I drew Sir Martin Guildford's attention to it, but
        on that I cannot be certain without looking at my papers.
   Q.   I cannot challenge that.  I am in no position to do that.
   A.   I certainly drew the attention of, I would say, half a
        dozen or a dozen other writers around the world over these
        years to the Almeyer file.
   Q.   Finally this, Mr Irving, I am reading now ----.
   A.   Quite simply because I was not an expert on it and they
        were better placed than I was to evaluate it.

.          P-51

   Q.   I am reading now from the report of Professor Funker,
        which you may or may not yet have read, who will be giving
        evidence, I hope, in about a fortnight's time, about
        political movements and figures in modern Germany.  You
        know who I mean, do you not? Hyo Funker?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   I think he is a Professor in Berlin.  He tells us this
        about Karl Philip and I want you to comment on it.
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   You will obviously get the chance to cross-examine him if
        he is going to be a witness, I mean Professor Funker.
        Karl Philip NPD:  What is NPD?
   A.   It is national something or other.
   Q.   Party Deutschland?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Is that a legal political party in Germany?
   A.   What are you suggesting, that he was a member or an
        official of it?  I do not know.
   Q.   Functionary?
   A.   I do not know.  That is news to me.
   Q.   You do not know that? In the 1970s and 1980s?
   A.   No.
   Q.   Did you know that in 1990 he received a fine of about
        3,600 deutschemark for incitement of the people and
        defamation?
   A.   I know the expression give a dog bad name and hang them,

.          P-52

        yes.
   Q.   Is it correct that he received a fine, to your
        knowledge -- if you do not know, say so -- of 3,600
        deutschemarks for incitement of the people and defamation?
   A.   This is not known to me, no.
   Q.   It is not known to you?
   A.   When was this?
   Q.   1990.
   A.   No.
   Q.   When did you first meet Mr Philip?
   A.   1989, October 23rd or thereabouts.
   Q.   How often do you correspond, speak to or meet Mr Philip,
        Herr Philip?
   A.   I suppose 1989, for about two years.  He was in
        correspondence with me for those two years.  He
        occasionally sends me emails now.
   Q.   Do you know a newspaper called Die Barenschaft?
   A.   The little magazine, yes.
   Q.   Is a neo-Nazi magazine?
   A.   I do not know.  I never opened it.  It was sent to me and
        it went straight into the trash can.
   Q.   Do you know Ahmed Rami of Radio Islam in Stockholm?
   A.   I have had no dealings with him whatsoever.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Are you leaving Almeyer?
   MR RAMPTON:  Yes, I am.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Mr Rampton, is the allegation pursued that

.          P-53

        Mr Irving sat on the Almeyer material until it was
        discovered by the defendants' solicitors?
   MR RAMPTON:  Since I am in no position to challenge that he
        wrote to these various people when he says that he did, it
        obviously is not.  He did not go into public print on
        until the Nuremberg book but he did mention it there.
   A.   The reason I did not go in public with it is because it
        was my scoop, and although I am known for my generosity in
        giving my files away to other writers, this particular one
        ----
   Q.   What would be the value of a scoop, Mr Irving, when, as
        soon as you have made the scoop, according to you, you
        have to throw it away because it has been devalued by
        being tortured out of the man who provided it?
   A.   No.  What would happened, you see, is just the same as the
        Institute of History in Munich published the Hoess
        memoirs.  I would have contemplated publishing the Almeyer
        memoirs with suitable surrounding material and documents
        from the archives, but from 1993 of course this became
        impossible when I was banned from the German archives on
        July 1st and banned from German soil on November 9th.
   Q.   It would be a bit like publishing the Hitler diaries and
        saying, look at this, it not terrific, it is a forgery?
        It would be absolutely worthless, would it not, according
        to you?
   A.   I can see no comparison whatsoever.

.          P-54

   Q.   Now I want to move to something else, if I may.  Again it
        is only a little point.  My Lord, what I am going to do,
        if I may, is spend a little time just clearing up some
        loose ends.  Loose ends do happen in the course of
        litigation.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Of course they do.  Can you explain to me, as
        you do so, where the loose ends fit in?
   MR RAMPTON:  I am now going to deal with three documents which
        Mr Irving Denied in evidence that he had ever seen.
   A.   Can I come back on the Almeyer thing by way of
        re-examination, so to speak?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes.
   A.   Your Lordship very rightly asked if they were upholding
        that allegation that I sat on it.  There is the specific
        allegation in the van Pelt report that I did not let it be
        known until I heard that Mishcon de Reya ----
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  That was what I was asking Mr Rampton about.
   A.   You did not specifically mention that footnote, my Lord.
        I think I have established that I put it in the public
        domain long before Mishcon de Reya started scrabbling
        around in the archives.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Mr Rampton is not pursuing that allegation.
   MR RAMPTON:  I am not pursuing it, subject to this, that
        I would quite like to see the letters which he said that
        he wrote to the various historians.
   A.   Certainly.  I will try to find them.  I have seven copies

.          P-55

        of it here, if you would like to have this.
   Q.   Being a suspicious bloke, I like to see the chapter and verse.
   A.   This is dated October 7th 1992 and there are seven copies
        of it which I did at 4 o'clock this morning.

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