The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day017.23

Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day017.23
Last-Modified: 2000/07/20

   Q.   Can we please turn back to your L1 tab 7 documents and
        turn to page 74 where I think you were accused -- this is
        Hans Frank on 16th December accused by Mr Irving of
        deliberately suppressing significant parts of the German.
        It is the paragraph that begins "Die Juden"?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   I only want you to look at the sentence, the next
        sentence, which begins:  "[German - document not
        provided]".  What would you say if you were going to say
         "gas" there?
   A.   "Vergasung".

.          P-205

   Q.   "Vergasung".  So he cannot shoot them, he cannot poison
        them, then he says "verden aber", that means "but", does
        it not?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   [German], what does that mean?
   A.   Well, "Verden aber" would be in the sense "but
   Q.   "Nonetheless"?
   A.   And  "eingriffa" would be, you know, "steps would be
   Q.   Yes, [German] "We can do something"?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   And then it says:  "Die [German - document not
        That means what?
   A.   That is "one way or another", "in some way".
   Q.   [German] and then the word "vernichtung erfolch".
        does that mean?
   A.  "That would lead to a successful", literally in the way
        Germans combine words it means "a destruction success"
        an English translation usually would be, we would
        those and say "a successful destruction".
   Q.   So "We will find a way to bring about a successful
   A.   Correct.
   Q.   "One way or another"?
   A.   Yes, yes.

.          P-206

   Q.   Then I think you will be pleased, Professor, that that
        that, but I would like, if you can give me the answer
        what is this?  Finally, I would like a little bit of
        history from you.  You were asked about the Wannsee
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Was the date in January, 20th January, I think it was,
         '42, its original date?
   A.   No, it was originally scheduled for December 8 or 9.
   Q.   And when was it cancelled, do you know, or postponed?
   A.   Just right before that, basically at the time of the
        Russian counter offensive around Moscow on 5th and
        Harbour on the 7th.  I forget the exact date.  The
        of -- when the marginal note that Rademacher makes on
        invitation, you know, that he hears it has been
        I do not remember the exact date, but it comes just
   Q.   So does one know the reason why it was cancelled?
   A.   They do not stipulate -- they do not specify, but I
        a probable inference is that at that point a crisis is
        going on and the people who are invited have too many
        other things to do.
   MR IRVING:  It says "because of intervening events", I
        does it not?
   A.   It would suggest that the 5th and 7th were very
        events that suddenly did not allow -- that Heydrich's

.          P-207

        schedule had to be changed.
   MR RAMPTON:  Right.  Thank you very much, Professor.  My
        those are all the questions I have in re-examination.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Mr Irving, if you think there is anything
        raised by the re-examination would you like to further
        question the Professor about, feel free.
   MR IRVING:  My Lord, going in reverse order, the "We cannot
        shoot them, we cannot poison them", what would the
        objections to shooting and poisoning have been that
        not also have applied to gassing, if any?
   A.   The shooting of 3 million or 2 million in this case
        possibly would have, simply it would have been much
        public.  I do not know why Frank would have said they
        impossible.  He is not the one that has been charged
        trying to figure out how to do it.  This is an
        extraordinary thing that is to about to take place,
        the mind boggles that Frank could not conceive
        of how this would be done strikes me as ----
   Q.   He was not talking from a script, was he?
   A.   No.
   Q.   Finally, on this document which has been put to which
        I have not seen mentioned before, which is the Event
        Report No. 80.
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   You will notice it has the top State Secret

.          P-208

        on it?
   A.   This has Geheim, yes.
   Q.   Would I be right in saying that all SS documents are
        pernickety about the classification of security on
        an that the Foreign Office and other bodies were less
        pernickety about the security grade placed on them?
   A.   I do not think I could say that.  I notice here that
        is 48 copies.  They may have wanted to stamp it so
        who were getting, given the number in circulation,
        they would be very careful with it.  That is
        but I do not know that SS had a tendency to use the
        Secret stamp more than the Foreign Office.
   Q.   Is this document typed in the special Fuhrer
   A.   No, it is not.
   Q.   Have you ever seen any Event Reports typed in this
        Fuhrer typewriter for submission to Hitler?
   A.   Nothing, except the No. 51 we have talked about.
   Q.   Is that called an Event Report?
   A.   No.
   Q.   Or is it called Meldung Fuhrer?
   A.   That is a report to the Fuhrer.
   Q.   Is there any indication on this document that it was
        to the Fuhrer or submitted to the Fuhrer, like
   A.   No.
   Q.   Thank you.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Why would just the one document have been

.          P-209

        typed out in the large type for the Fuhrer and marked
   A.   Why were these not typed out?
   Q.   Sorry, that was a rather badly phrased question.  Does
        fact that there is only one such document extant
        that there only ever was one document?
   A.   Given the destruction of documents, particularly, say,
        Eichmann's office and in the SS, it leaves open the
        question that there was a file of such things, and
        were destroyed.  We do not know.
   MR IRVING:  My Lord, I answer that.  There is in fact an
        extensive file of such reports to the Fuhrer, but they
        cover everything like the midget torpedo attack on
        Turpids.  It is the whole gamut.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am sure there are. I was talking only
        reports from the Einsatzgruppen.
   MR IRVING:  That is only one I have seen also.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I appreciate it is the only one anyone
        about.  I was wondering whether that suggested that
        only ever was one, but the Professor says not.  No
   MR IRVING:  No further questions.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Professor Browning, thank you very much.
        are free to go.
                  < (The witness stood down).
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  We are going to resume at 10.30 on ----

.          P-210

   MR RAMPTON:  I think Professor Evans will be here on
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Are you wanting to interpolate some
        of your own before him?
   MR IRVING:  We have Dr John Fox.
   MR RAMPTON:  Whatever you like.
   MR IRVING:  I am only going to ask Mr Rampton whether he
        going to cross-examine me further and, if so, when?
   MR RAMPTON:  I will not only say when but I hope what,
        it is the last things I have to ask about.  I was
        to do it on Friday, so as to get it out of the way,
        I am in other people's hands.
   MR IRVING:  Can you say about how long you will be
   MR RAMPTON:  I do not think it will take all that long.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  What are the topics?
   MR RAMPTON:  The topics are, well, there is the question of
        Mr Irving's knowledge of that Muller signal to the
        Einsatzgruppen.  I do not accept his answer that he
        not seen it before, and there is a reason for that
        I shall not say what it is now, apart from the fact
        it appears to have been in the public domain for
nearly 20
   MR IRVING:  I have been in the public domain for 62 years.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  We are not going to have the
        cross-examination now.
   MR RAMPTON:  That I think we have dealt with.  So that has

.          P-211

        gone.  There is Zamus report of 16th December 1942
        appeared and then disappeared because your Lordship
        Mr Irving needed more time.
   MR IRVING:  Also you should reveal where it came from.
   MR RAMPTON:  That is happening and I hope that will be in
        by Friday.  There is Anne Frank that I forgot about
out of
        Evans and also van Pelt, and I think I ought to ask a
        couple of questions, it is quite short.  Then there
        again which I hope I can keep quite short, the
question of
        Mr Irving's associates, if I may call them that.
   MR RAMPTON:  That will certainly be completed in a day or
        perhaps less.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  My slight feeling, and it is up to Mr
        in the end, well, I suppose it is up to me in the end,
        I wonder whether it is right to interrupt his
        cross-examination ----
   MR RAMPTON:  I agree.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  --- of really your major witness,.
   MR IRVING:  May I suggest that I bring Dr Fox on Thursday?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  If you are going to do that bring him
   MR RAMPTON:  Can I say not, because I think I told your
        Lordship Professor Evans is in real difficulty on
   MR RAMPTON:  Which is why I am proposing -- if your

.          P-212

        wants to leave Friday blank I quite understand the
        why, nothing personally, but from Mr Irving' point of
        view, then he has three clear days to gather himself
        for a renewed assault on Professor Evans on Monday.
        Alternatively Dr. Fox might come on Friday, but it
seems a
        bit of a ----
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  That I would not have so much difficulty
        with, because Fox, frankly, I do not quite know what
he is
        going to say, but he has not a major problem for Mr
        in terms of preparation.
   MR RAMPTON:  Absolutely certainly not, and none for me
        I am not going to cross-examine him.
   MR IRVING:  You do not what he is going to say yet.
   MR RAMPTON:  Of course I do.  I have read his witness
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  So I have but I have forgotten what is in
   MR RAMPTON:  Something about free speech I think.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Shall we just plan the timetable?  On
        Thursday we will have Evans all day.  On Friday we
        Fox for as long as he takes.  Then we will resume with
        Evans on Monday.  We will have the cross-examination
        yourself at a later date to be fixed.
   MR RAMPTON:  That means only one more day and a tiny bit in
        court this week I think.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Which I think at this stage of the case
        not such a bad thing.

.          P-213

   MR IRVING:  Preparation of Evans is complicated by the fact
        that I now have to shoe-horn the material which I have
        prepared for Levin and Eatwell into the Evans
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  We are giving you a day tomorrow and then
        are going to have most of Friday.
   MR IRVING:  Very well.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Are you happy with that because tell me
        you are not?
   MR IRVING:  So Fox on Thursday?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Fox on Friday morning.
   MR RAMPTON:  If he can manage it.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Tell me if it turns out to create any
        problems for you.
   MR RAMPTON:  We do not mind, my Lord.  If Mr Irving would
        rather have Dr Fox here on Thursday we do not mind.
   MR IRVING:  No.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I think it is quite a good idea to have
        on Friday.  So we are not sitting tomorrow but we are
        sitting on Thursday.
        (The court adjourned until Thursday, 19th February 2000)

.          P-214

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.