The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day021.04


Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day021.04
Last-Modified: 2000/07/24

   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  If you had been your researcher and you had
        seen the kurz Bezeichnung, which, if any, of those would
        you have gone to if you were looking for Bruckner's
        account of these events?
   A.   It does not say the testimony of Wilhelm Bruckner, which
        is the tile the Mr Irving gives.  There is nothing in

.          P-28

        there indicating that there is anything about the 1938
        Reichskristallnacht.
   Q.   So you say the answer is really none of them suggests that
        it would have any bearing?
   A.   No.  In the limited time available, it might be
        interesting to see his views on religion, or his essay on
        Adolf Hitler, but there is nothing there to indicate that
        he has a testimony about 1938.  But there is an indication
        in there of his testimony about other specific events, the
        Hanfstaengel the Rowan Putsch 1934.  Given the fact that
        those specific references are in there, one would expect
        there to be a specific reference in there to his testimony
        about 1938.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  One more question and then I will keep
        quiet.  Who compiles the kurz Bezeichnung?
   A.   It is usually archivists, my Lord.
   Q.   It would not have been Mr Irving?
   MR IRVING:  No, my Lord.  In fact, this particular cover sheet
        was compiled by me.  I gave 500 collection of documents to
        this institute and for each one there was this sheet in
        the front of each file.  The Bruckner file is about
        quarter of an inch thick.  It would have taken possibly
        five minutes to flip through and find the appropriate
        passage.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  We may need to hear from the person who
        actually searched the archive.  Yes.

.          P-29



   MR IRVING:  The point I am making, my Lord, is that I am
        accused of not having had proper sources for the
events of
        that night.  The sources were there, they were
referenced
        in my Goebbels biography in a manner in which any
        competent researcher would have found the file in a
matter
        of minutes.
   A.   I cannot agree with that, Mr Irving.
   Q.   Can you tell the court now -- I am moving on to
another
        personality -- who Julius Schaub was?
   A.   Yes.  He was sort of Hitler's ----
   Q.   Factotum?
   A.   Yes, side kick.  It is difficult to find a precise way
of
        describing him.  He was a very close aid of Hitler's
for
        very many years.
   Q.   An amanuensis, one of the old guard, with him in the
1923
        Putsch?
   A.   Yes.  He joined the party very early on in 1921 or 22,
        personal adjutant from the mid 20s on, and again he
was
        given a senior office in the SS and possessed various
        decorations and so on.
   Q.   Look at page 257 of your report, please, where we are
        dealing with the Schaub as a source, the source which
        Irving gives for Schaub's claims is: Schaub's
unpublished
        memoirs in the author's collection in the Institute of
        History in Munich, file ED.100/202.  ED.100 is the
Irving
        collection, is that right?

.          P-30



   A.   I think that is true, yes.
   Q.   Oblique stroke 202.  They have now changed the
reference,
        you say, to 203.  Can I draw your attention to page 26
of
        the little bundle I gave you?
   A.   Indeed, yes.
   Q.   This I think will put your Lordship's mined at rest.
This
        is the reason I am going through these documents.  Is
that
        a translation of a passage from these Julius Schaub
        papers?
   A.   I find myself in some difficulty here.  I do not know,
is
        the answer.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  You made this translation, Mr Irving, did
        you?
   MR IRVING:  I made it last night, my Lord, yes.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  You have access then to Julius Schaub's
        papers?  I thought they were in the archive in Munich.
   MR IRVING:  I am pretty certain that this comes from --
yes, it
        comes from the discovery.  There was one page in the
        discovery from these papers I think.  Off of the top
of my
        head I have to say that, but this is a genuine
        translation.
   A.   You have not supplied the original.
   Q.   It is in H 5?
   MR RAMPTON:  I do not know what particular document Mr
Irving
        is talking about or which it is that he has
translated.
        There is a piece about Goebbels apparently headed
Schaub

.          P-31



        Nachlass, whatever that means, at page 4 of tab 5 of
the
        file L2, the Reichskristallnacht.
   MR IRVING:  Yes, my Lord, that is where it comes from.
   MR RAMPTON:  Which is the reference given by Professor
Evans at
        page 257.
   MR IRVING:  It was quite late when I did this translation
last
        night.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am sure.  I am not forgetting that side
of
        things.
   A.   Yes, I have it.
   MR RAMPTON:  Page 4 of tab 5 my Lord.  It is leaded IfZ ED
        100/203.
   A.   Yes.
   MR IRVING:  If I had provided just the German to your
Lordship,
        you would have rightly reprimanded me.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  The witness asked to see the German,
which is
        fair enough.  I am very happy with the translation.
   MR IRVING:  If the witness wishes to challenge the
translation,
        then of course he may.  "Without doubt Goebbels had
the
        biggest influence on AH"?
   A.   Can you direct me to where exactly it is?
   MR RAMPTON:  Page 5, last paragraph.
   MR IRVING:  I have translated only the passage dealing with
the
        events of that night.  "Without doubt Goebbels had the
        biggest influence on AH, far more so than Bormann, he
        invented the concept Fuhrer for AH and he hammered the

.          P-32



        Fuhrer principle into the people.  Goebbels always
        discussed his propaganda with Hitler, even during the
        war".  The part I am relying on is a sentence or two
        later: "It is a certainty that Goebbels ordained the
        Reichskristallnacht Sunday".
   A.   You skipped a bit.  All right, yes.
   Q.   "It is a certainty that Goebbels ordained the
        Reichskristallnacht Sunday with the SA command".  Of
        course it was not a Sunday, was it?  It was another
day of
        the week.  Then comes no doubt Schaub's own
        particular hobby horse.  He says, "The SS was innocent
of
        this, apart from a few lesser officers.  When AH
learned
        on that Sunday of the anti-Semitic outrages, he was
        furious with Goebbels.  He made a frightful scene with
        Goebbels and told him that this kind of propaganda was
        just damaging".
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Now, this is a source that you would disqualify for
some
        reason, or downgrade?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Would you disqualify it because of its content,
because it
        does not agree with your own views, or because of
        something about Schaub, or something about the
document?
   A.   It is a number of different things.  I think he is
just
        making this up, basically.
   Q.   You think he is just making it up?

.          P-33



   A.   Indeed, yes.  There is an enormous amount of other
        evidence, contemporary evidence, and not much later
        evidence such as this, that most of what he says here
is
        not true, and that I go into in great length in my
report.
   Q.   First of all, you do accept that this document is
genuine,
        that this is a collection of papers given to me by the
son
        of Schaub Mr Roland Schaub, containing an odd
collection
        of manuscripts and notes, articles, carbon copies and
the
        like?
   A.   Indeed. I describe it on footnote 54 of my page 257.
   Q.   You have actually had a look at the heap of papers,
have
        you?
   A.   Yes.  It is cited in the report on page 257.
   Q.   Yes, but the point I am looking at is of course that
here
        we have a man who was on Adolf Hitler's private staff,
his
        chief adjutant, and factotum, who says he was an
        eyewitness, or he reports to us that, when Hitler
learned
        of the outrages, he was furious with Goebbels, he made
a
        frightful scene.  Should I have disregarded that
evidence
        completely?
   A.   No.  You weigh it up against other evidence and
against
        Schaub's possible motives in writing this, and the
fact
        that, as you say repeatedly, eyewitness testimony
after
        the war is less reliable than contemporary testimony.
        This is another example of your double standards,
        Mr Irving.

.          P-34



   Q.   Double standards?
   A.   Yes.  You are determined to give credence to this
report
        but you dismiss all reports of victims of the
Holocaust as
        being fabrications due to mass hysteria, as we heard
        yesterday.
   Q.   Which of us has the double standard?  The person who
        pretends that this report and the contents that it
        contains should be in some way played down for no
reason
        other than you do not like it?  You cannot give a real
        reason why.  You cannot say Schaub was a congenital
liar?
   A.   You have already said that he was wrong to say that it
was
        on a Sunday, Mr Irving.
   Q.   He got the wrong day of the week but this is a mistake
any
        of us can make.  No doubt it stuck in his mind.
   A.   Not if he is an utterly reliable eyewitness who has
total
        recall of what went on.  That alone I think should
alert
        one to the fact that his memory is not particularly
good.
        Then you yourself went on to discredit, or cast doubt
over
        his statement that the SS was completely without any
        guilt.  No doubt that is connected with the fact that
        Schaub himself was a senior officer in the SS.  This
is an
        extremely self serving document.  One has to regard it
        with the deepest suspicion and compare it with other
        documents, preferably contemporary ones dealing with
the
        same events.
   Q.   Do we have any contemporary records of what went on in

.          P-35



        Adolf Hitler's private residence, any contemporary
records
        whatsoever of went on in his private residence?
   A.   Not directly, no.
   Q.   So we are really then on our uppers, are we not?
   A.   We are comparing a lost of post war reminiscences and
we
        have to be very careful in treading through this
        particular minefield of documents.
   Q.   So ideally we want to have more than just one source
that
        says the same thing?
   A.   Whole range of sources, indeed.
   Q.   How many would you accept? Two sources?
   A.   I am not going to put a number on it, Mr Irving.
   Q.   But, if we have another source that says the same
thing,
        then we are getting convergences of evidence beginning
to
        kick in, are we?
   A.   Well, it is a problem with the evidence of Hitler's
        entourage, that they of course had a major incentive
after
        the war for trying to exculpate them for involvement
in a
        number of crimes such as the Reichskristallnacht.
They
        also seem to have been a fairly close knit group who
had
        the opportunity to discuss their line, as it were,
amongst
        themselves, so I think one has to be very cautious.
   Q.   Any common sense historian would adopt that line, that
is
        correct.  But, if we ignore for a moment the main
trend of
        these statements, and I am going to introduce another
one
        to you in a moment, and we look for the little bits of

.          P-36



        verisimilitude which tend to support the main trend,
for
        example he was livid with rage and he shouted at
Goebbels,
        those kinds of things which appear to figure in
several of
        the statements or certainly more than one, then the
        convergence of evidence then becomes more convincing.
        Would you agree?
   A.   No, not necessarily.  This might have been a story
they
        cooked up.
   Q.   Can we now turn to a third witness?
   A.   The sentence you are relying on here claiming such a
        tremendous piece of evidence is-- I will quote it: "As
AH
        on this Sunday" -- we know it was not a Sunday.
   Q.   Do you attach much important to the fact he got the
day of
        the week wrong?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not.
   A.   Yes.  It is pretty easy to remember.  "As AH heard on
that
        Sunday about the anti-Semitic excesses, he was angry
with
        Goebbels".  It does not seem to me to be very
        circumstantial.
   MR IRVING:  He was furious with Goebbels.  You are changing
the
        words.
   A.   It is angry, very angry, furious, yes.
   Q.   He made a frightful scene, did he not?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Told him that this kind of propaganda was just
damaging.
   A.   Yes.  Mr Irving, I do not know how much detail I ought
to

.          P-37



        go into here, but there is an enormous amount of
evidence
        which is laid out in my report and which was gone over
in
        your cross-examination ----
   MR IRVING: But not of the events in your----
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Do not keep talking over the witness.
   A.   -- about Hitler's responsibilities for these events.
   MR IRVING:  We are not talking about that at this point.
   A.   You know that, and accepted that what Goebbels said in his
        speech to the party assembly at between about 10 o'clock
        at night on 9th November that (I quote) on Goebbels'
        briefing the Fuhrer has decided that such demonstrations
        should not be quelled.  That is contemporary evidence,
        Mr Irving.
   Q.   I really have to halt you here because this is a totally
        different matter.

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.