Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day027.19
Last-Modified: 2000/07/25

   MR IRVING:  Well, the witness mentioned the use of paramilitary
        people to protect the meetings, and that was invited by
.          P-168



        that.  On 3.2.24, paragraph 3.2.24, you mention my keeping
        company with Rudel and Remer:  David Irving was keeping
        company with Nazis like Otto Ernst Remer and Hans Ulrich
        Rudel.  We are not interested in Rudel, he is not on the
        list, but you say that I have kept company with General
        Remer.  Have you seen any documents in my private diaries
        or elsewhere showing me keeping company with Remer?
   A.   I refer here to the data of the Schleswig-Holstein in '82,
        and that is it.
   Q.   Yes.  So you rely entirely in making that statement on a
        report of the OPC?
   A.   In that respect, right.
   Q.   Of the OPC, and his Lordship is not going to pay any
        attention to what the OPC says.  Are you aware from the
        proceedings of this trial that I have produced a one-page
        diary entry showing me interviewing General Remer for the
        purpose of the Goebbels book and this was the only meeting
        I had with him?
   A.   If you say so.
   Q.   Have you seen any other entries in my diaries indicating
        meetings with General Otto Ernst Remer, apart from
        occasions when I have spoken and he has been one of many
        faces in the audience?  You have not seen any other documents?
   A.   It seems that this quotation of the OPC, of
        Schleswig-Holstein, is an overstatement.

.          P-169



   Q.   An overstatement, yes.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Can I help you, Mr Irving, by saying that
        this seems to me precisely the sort of way in which it is
        helpful to cross-examine.
   MR IRVING:  Yes.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  That is really intended by way of guidance.
   MR IRVING:  So, effectively, notwithstanding what we have seen
        on the video tapes of General Remer being present at
        meetings which I have spoken at, you would not say that
        I have had close contacts with him?
   A.   I would not say.
   Q.   Yes.  3.2.25 when I address the DVU rally, one of Dr
        Frey's rallies on freedom for Rudolf Hess, you object to
        my use of the word "martyrdom" or "martyr" for Rudolf
        Hess?  I think we can leave that.  It is not really important.
   A.   Yes, I can allude to this, I can explain it, if it is of interest.
   Q.   Paragraph 3.3.2, at page 32, you say the OPC report of
        1993, you are quoting that.  What year does that refer to, 1992?
   A.   The second ----
   Q.   Is this one of Dr Frey's newspapers that is being referred to there?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   And it published anti-Semitic articles according to the

.          P-170



        OPC report of 1993?
   A.   A lot.
   Q.   Yes.  Had I left Germany by that time?
   A.   No.
   Q.   When was I deported from Germany?
   A.   End of '93.
   Q.   End of 93.
   A.   You recall that?
   Q.   It cites two examples of anti-Semitic articles.  One is a
        criticism of the Edgar Miles-Bronfman, well, I do not
        think this is sufficiently important.
   A.   I mean I can read it.
   Q.   3.3.11, please?
   A.   Maybe I can just say, you know:  "The German Weekly, the
        DNZ's sister papers in the Frey press imperium, presented
        one Hungarian-born son of a Jewish lawyer as the 'finance
        guru of the world', a master of financial speculation, who
        through his dealings undermines the German mark, the DWZ
        made the point that they economic recovery central Germany
        was jeopardised by Jewish restitution claims."  So these
        kinds of things.
   Q.   You consider that to be anti-Semitic?
   A.   Yes, and I can prove this by going into the sentences, if
        you want.
   Q.   Paragraph 3.3.11, please, page 35.  This is describing the
        events we saw on the video, April 21st 1990.

.          P-171



   A.   3.3.11.  Thank you.
   Q.   3.3.11.
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   This is the event that led to my being put in the police
        van.  You describe it as an "illegal demonstration".  Why
        do you call it an illegal demonstration?
   A.   It was ----
   Q.   Have you any proof that it was illegal, that there were
        any arrests made for it?  Was anybody fined for conducting
        illegal demonstration?  What I am asking you is why do you
        call the demonstration that I was seen in illegal?  You
        have no proof, right?
   A.   No.
   Q.   No.  3.3.12 ----
   A.   I mean I can allude to that bit further.  It was the
        intervention of the police, you could see.  So there were
        some calls in the administration to say, "this goes too
        far", because of the whole thing, of the whole
        conference.  It went out.  It was not asked for by the
        police, institutions.  So in that sense it was illegal.
        Excuse me that I had to wait a minute to realize what it
        was about.
   Q.   Let me just ask you one more question and this concerns
        the position of the police president in German life.
        Unlike England, the police president in Germany is a
        political appointment, is he not?

.          P-172



   A.   It depends.
   Q.   In each city?
   A.   No, it depends.  The police president is, as I alluded to
        before, is a Staatsbeamter.
   Q.   A Civil Servant?
   A.   Civil servant, and the civil servants, as I said, have to
        stick to the laws and nothing else, whereas the
        politicians can do their own cause, be it a mayor of a
        city or so.  So there is a different ruling and a
        different structure.  Of course it happens that, this is
        in democracies like ours is the case, I do not know how it
        is in other countries, but, you know, they appoint a
        person of a given party or near to a given party and so
        forth.  But once the position is established they have to
        shy away of these political affiliations and have to stick
        to the laws.
   Q.   He is appointed by the ----
   A.   So it does not make a point if you say it is a politicized
        system, and so they are not, you know, whatever allowed to
        do this or that.
   Q.   But the city administration of Munich is socialist, is it
        not, it is left-wing?
   A.   It depended.  I mean ----
   Q.   At this material time.
   A.   So as far as I recall, yes, but there was a time when
        there was a big debate, whatever.

.          P-173



   Q.   My Lord, I think this might be a useful time to stop.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I wondered whether you did not want to get to
        the end of paragraph 3, because that that all seems to me
        to stick together, and then there is a rather new chapter
        beginning at 4 or maybe you have not got any questions on
        the remainder of paragraph 3.
   MR IRVING:  Section 3.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Sorry, section 3 is a better word.
   MR IRVING:  Yes, I have one page of questions.  Page 3.3.12 or
        paragraph 3.3.12, you refer to a leaflet put out by Ewald
        Althans containing the phrase:  "300 participants joined
        David Irving in spontaneous demonstration to the
        Feldherrenhalle after our event", which is a reference to
        that demonstration we saw on the video, is it not?
   A.   Right, no, it is -- yes, right.
   Q.   Do you have any evidence that I was actually on the
        demonstration that went to Feldherrenhalle, apart from
        that leaflet issued by Althans?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Are you saying that you did not, Mr Irving?
   MR IRVING:  I am saying I did not, yes, my Lord.  In that case
        I will put to the witness the letter from Mrs Worch which
        is page 9.  Can I ask you to look at page 9 in the
        documents, it is either page 9 or 10.
   A.   Yes, 9.
   Q.   Is this a letter from Ursula Worch and her husband
        Christian Worch written to my lawyer February 17th 1991?

.          P-174



   A.   Yes.
   Q.   If I summarize it very quickly, the actual letter is two
        pages later on page 11 probably in German.  If you look at
        the German version, if I summarize it quickly, she is
        saying that after the end of the function in the
        Lowenbraukeller there was a spontaneous public
        demonstration:  "We joined in that.  We lost sight of Mr
        Irving who remained in the hall", right, "before we could
        make a firm appointment.  About an hour later, shortly
        before the police broke up this demonstration, we met
        Mr Irving in the street where he had been looking for us",
        right?  So the scene we saw on the video, would that be
        consistent with the crowd being ushered back to the hall
        by the police who then, for some reason, started making arrests?
   A.   I mean the whole thing is inconsistent.  On the one hand
        you have these letters of this couple, Worch, and of
        course it has the function for, you know, for the lawyer
        and so forth, and on the other hand you have the video and
        you have the Althans presentation you just quoted.  So
        there is a lot of probability that this video is more
        correct than the letter.
   Q.   Professor Funke, do you remember me asking you to look at
        the video and tell the court which way this little band of
        forlorn stragglers was moving, being ushered across the
        Viennastrasse and you could not tell?

.          P-175



   A.   All the evidence I have by Michael Schmidt, and especially
        Michael Schmidt who was there at the time and in his book
        and four days long, you know, whole videos of that, this
        is a short version we saw, I would say that in my overall
        cautious judgment I cannot say yes to your implication.
   Q.   Since we are talking about this demonstration, I had
        œ2,000 worth of books on the book table at that function.
        Would I have left them unattended with 800 people in the
        hall in order to join a demonstration?
   A.   You joined this going, and all the sources I had says,
        including Althans, that this was going to the
        Feldherrenhalle.
   Q.   Did you read my diary covering that particular episode?
   A.   Yes, I read.
   Q.   Did you read the police statements that were taken
        describing what had happened in the file which was made
        available by discovery?
   A.   You know, I think I did it also in the report, I read this
        and I came to the conclusion that there are more reasons
        for the case I state that you joined for a given period of
        time this march.
   Q.   You think I would have just left œ2,000 worth of books
        unattended on a book table in a beer hall with 800
        people?
   A.   I do not know.  There are other possibilities to take care
        and maybe you did and you joined.  I do not know.

.          P-176



   Q.   Do you remember the police statements that were made at
        the time?
   A.   I read the things that are of interest all around this
        case.
   Q.   But my question was, do you remember the police statements
        that were made covering this particular event, the
        demonstration and the reason that I was taken in and so on?
   A.   I think I recall, but help me.
   Q.   Yes.  Well, if you have not read them there is not much
        point in my putting it to you.
   A.   I think I had.
   Q.   Are you aware that Michael Schmidt who took the videos and
        on whom you rely is a paid police informer?
   A.   No.
   Q.   Well, are you aware that this emerges from the police
        dossier which is in my files which were provided by way of
        discovery?
   A.   Michael Schmidt was not a police informer.
   Q.   Where did the police obtain the video from on the basis of
        which they prosecuted me?
   A.   But I have no evidence that he sided police functions, no
        evidence whatsoever.

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