Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day027.20
Last-Modified: 2000/07/25

   Q.   Have you read in the police dossier the words, "Michael
        Schmidt has come forward and volunteered to us a video
        which he took at the Lowenbrau meeting?

.          P-177



   A.   This is a different, this a different, you know, what is
        it, observation.  That does not include that he is paid or
        whatever integrated in this secret or police system.
   Q.   You referred repeatedly in your report to that fact that
        in the written agreements between myself and Dr Frey it
        was stated in writing that I would not talk about the
        Holocaust in any of my talks?
   A.   Yes, Frey again and again reiterated that.  He may have
        had reasons.  I do not know.
   Q.   Yes.  Well, can you speculate on what the reason would be,
        possible reasons?
   A.   You were there too.  The one is not to be illegalized; the
        other is that you may depart from it.
   Q.   Would you agree that the more likely reason is in the
        German climate, that even though neither of us intended,
        neither Dr Frey nor I, should speak about that subject, it
        would be alleged against us by malicious parties and we
        wanted it therefore to be set out in writing that that was
        not an agreed topic, and that this is the reason why it
        was fixed every time in writing between us?
   A.   It seems ----
   Q.   So we could not be tricked.
   A.   It seems the case.
   Q.   Yes, and using your own political nouse, your ability,
        your acumen, would you agree that this is probably the
        more likely conclusion on the basis of the correspondence

.          P-178



        as you have read it?
   A.   It does not defer from what I wrote or did I get it wrong?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  No, I think you are all agreed.  It was a
        precaution that he took to protect himself, his party and
        indeed Mr Irving from being prosecuted.
   MR IRVING:  It was a precaution we both took, my Lord.  Can
        I add another question as rider?  Have you seen any
        reference or indication of the fact that at any of the DVU
        meetings I departed from that agreement and that I spoke
        Holocaust denial?
   A.   I mean there was the quarrel between Mr Frey and Mr Irving
        with respect to the other activities you took at that
        period of time, and that was also in relation to the, to
        quote, "Hitler and Jews" thing.  So this made him
        concerned that you will lose the ability, that Mr Irving,
        so to speak, lose the ability to stay freely and to speak
        freely in Germany and he lost.
   Q.   Yes, but will you now please answer my question because it
        is important.  Have you read any indication anywhere, in
        my diaries or on the speech notes or anything like that,
        that I spoke on Holocaust denial or the Holocaust or
        Auschwitz at any of the meetings that Dr Frey commissioned
        me to speak at?
   A.   So far as I recall not, no.
   Q.   And the same goes for anti-Semitism of course, that I did

.          P-179



        not go vapouring on against the Jews at any of these
        meetings?
   A.   So far as I see, not with respect to the DVU, but in other
        circumstances very different.
   Q.   We will take each one as we come to it.  In paragraph
        3.4.1, and I am nearly at the end, you say that I was a
        main speaker for the DVU?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Is not the correct way to say it in fact that I was
        speaker frequently hired by the DVU as an historian, that
        I never spoke for them?  I was not a spokesman for them?
   A.   You were a star speaker used by the political party for
        political aims.
   Q.   Why do you call me an agitator for the DVU in that same
        paragraph, an agitator?
   A.   Because of that.
   Q.   Would you like to justify the last sentence beginning,
        "The DVU is itself a party that propagates hatred against
        foreigners, an-Semitism, revisionism, incites violence"?
        Is this not again an example of your loose writing, you
        just throw these things in there?
   A.   Not with respect to the DVU.  As I stated it before, you
        did not do that.  Is it is very interesting to describe
        this.  The speaker, Irving, is cautious in sticking to the
        law as he can with respect to the DVU, but the DVU itself
        is taking him as a star speaker, and representing their

.          P-180



        cause or its cause as an anti-Semitic, right-wing
        extremist, and often denialist, as you can see in the
        newspapers and as are referred to by the articles thing.
        So it is a kind of mutual interaction with often very
        cautious tactic lines.
   Q.   But, Professor Funke, each of those activities or
        agitation factors that you list there, propagating hatred
        against foreigners, anti-Semitism, inciting violence, each
        of those would be an illegal activity if it was true.  So
        why was the DVU never prosecuted, as you say it was not?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  You asked that before.
   MR IRVING:  Yes, my Lord, but I wanted to underlined the point,
        if the DVU is accused in that sentence of conducting these
        activities, it seems highly improbable given that they
        were never prosecuted.
   A.   Again, Mr Irving took sides with this extremist party, and
        I can go into details of how intense anti-Semitic party
        members and the newspapers are.  There is no doubt about
        that.
   Q.   But not in the extreme form.
   A.   The other part of the answer is that that does not mean
        that this party is illegal, because of the special
        importance parties, as parties, were given by the
        constitutional law as a reaction to the period before, and
        that includes that the political party has a special - ---
   THE INTERPRETER:  A right to participate.

.          P-181



   A.   --- stated by the constitutional law directly.  So it is
        very difficult to push aside parties when they not only
        claim but by their structure are parties, although they
        may not be in the internal structure democratic ones.
        This is why at the beginning it was so extended to
        describe the specifics of the German political system and
        the right-wing extremist cause they have to fight.
   MR IRVING:  I think it would be easier to deal with
        personalities tomorrow, my Lord, because the organizations
        are clearly problem.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  So that I have some idea of the timing, how
        much cross-examination?
   MR IRVING:  I have one more day at this rate, less than a day.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  A day of cross-examination of Professor Funke?
   MR IRVING:  I think so, yes.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Your original estimate was half a day.
   MR IRVING:  I will abbreviate it then.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  No, do not do it because I say that.
   MR IRVING:  Your Lordship is excellent at brooming me along and
        making me scrap hours of work.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  It is a matter for you to take whatever
        course you think.
   MR IRVING:  If I know your Lordship is not going to pay
        attention to those matters ----
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:   I have give you a very, very clear

.          P-182



        indication I hope of what I would be paying attention to.
   MR IRVING:  Had I had that indication last night ----
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I agree, but I did not know what you were
        going to be asking about.  10.30 tomorrow.

(The witness withdrew; The court adjourned until the following day)





















.          P-183

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