The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day020.18

Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day020.18
Last-Modified: 2000/07/24

   Q.   Answer my question.  Is it likely that if he is a Jewish
        writer he is probably not going to be disposed to me in a
        very friendly way initially until he gets to know me, is
        that correct?
   A.   No, it seems to be -- I do not accept that, no.

.          P-159

   Q.   "Moreover, in the course of his conversation with
        Mr Rosenbaum, Irving admitted", you say, "of some
        Holocaust deniers 'that there are certain organizations
        that propagate these theories which are cracked
        anti-Semites'".  Does that show that I am a great admirer
        of these organizations?
   A.   Well, I do not know.  You do not say, or Rosenbaum does
        not say, what organizations you are referring to, so it is
        impossible to guess.
   Q.   Well, you would not expect a Holocaust denier like David
        Irving roundly to dismiss other organizations of Holocaust
        deniers as "cracked anti-Semites"?
   A.   Do you do not mention what those organizations are.  It
        would be more plausible, more plausible if you did.
   Q.   Well, what organizations do you think I was talking about
   A.   I really ----
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Why do you not put to the witness which
        organizations you...
   MR IRVING:  My Lord, that was going to be the follow up
        question when he answered, "No, I do not know which ones"
        and I was going to say could it possibly be -- would I
        have been talking about the Institute of Historical
   A.   You do not mention them.
   Q.   Yes.  Would I have been talking ----

.          P-160

   A.   It is impossible to tell who you are talking about.
   Q.   Are you surprised to hear somebody ----
   A.   As I say here, you say this without actually saying who
        you meant by this or what kind of damage or harm you
        referring to ----
   Q.   Does it surprise you to hear that ----
   A.   --- the damage done to you.
   Q.   --- I regard a number of these Holocaust deniers as
        "cracked anti-Semites"?
   A.   I have not read anything that you have written that
        specifically to any specific individual or
organization as
        being "cracked anti-Semites", only these very, very
        general statements which really have very little value
        because they have no precision, no reference.
   Q.   They have no precision, but this is as represented by
        neutral observer who has spoken to a lot of authors,
        do you accept that -- are you surprised to read in a
        that I have described Holocaust deniers as "cracked
   A.   I have -- some Holocaust deniers.  What you say,
        are certain organizations that propagate these
        which are cracked anti-Semites" but it is impossible
        say who you are referring to.
   Q.   Now, Rosenbaum's book was reviewed, thank goodness, by
        Norman Stone who pointed out that Rosenbaum is yet
        of these ignorant, negligent reviewers whom have met

.          P-161

        before, is that is correct; that he had not done his
        homework and he did not know enough to write such a
        properly?  Is that the next paragraph's burden, 3.6.2?
   A.   Let me just have a look.  He says that stone was
        of Rosenbaum.  He said he could not follow subjects,
        had misunderstood one of books he was writing about.
        is certainly the case, yes.  It is a critical review.
   Q.   Yes.  So why did you mention the Rosenbaum book
        you do accept that there are serious authors out there
        accept that I am not a Holocaust denier and that I do
        differentiated views and that I regard Holocaust
        as "crack pots" and you could not get passed this?
   A.   Nobody says that you regard Holocaust deniers as crack
        pots.  What you say is that there are certain
        organizations, unnamed, that propagate these theories
        which are cracked anti-Semites.  You do not say that
        Holocaust deniers are crack pots.
   Q.   Does it matter what the name of the organization is if
        just refer to Holocaust ----
   A.   Yes, of course it does because this is so vague it is
        completely meaningless.  It is just -- I mean, one
        read this as just some kind of alibi.  It has no
        at all.  It is a meaningless statement unless you
        say who you are talking about.
   Q.   I could hardly be more specific.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Put to him the organizations that you

.          P-162

        as consisting of cracked anti-Semites.  Is the IHR one
   MR IRVING:  I did, my Lord, and he waffled.  We did not get
        clear answer.
   A.   Well, let me say ----
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  So your case is -- I want to be clear
        this -- you do regard the IHR as an organization
        consisting of cracked anti-Semites, is that your case?
   MR IRVING:  I think that the correct thing to say there is
        it consists of some elements which are cracked
        anti-Semites.  I do not think I would wish to brand an
        entire organization.  As far as I know, some of the
        officers of that organization, I would regard them as
        cracked anti-Semites.  That is the point I wanted to
        plain in my discussion with Mr Rosenbaum, but I
        would respectfully submit ----
   MR RAMPTON:  I would like to know who those people are.  It
        some bearing on what is to come.
   MR IRVING:  Your time will come in cross-examination,
        Mr Rampton, to ask that question, and it would be
        if you did not interrupt.  I would say that ----
   MR RAMPTON:  Perhaps it would have more value, my Lord, if
        came directly now, otherwise we may find a list
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Well, if I may say so, Mr Rampton, since
        Mr Irving has taken the point that he does not want to

.          P-163

        at this stage in the course of his cross-examination
        Professor Evans, I think he is entitled to say that.
   MR RAMPTON:  All right.
   MR IRVING:  And I would respectfully submit ----
   A.   However, Mr Irving, if you were, of course -- if you
        think that the certain organizations that propagate
        theories and certain organizations, not individuals,
        are cracked anti-Semites and if the Institute of
        Historical Review is an organization which is cracked
        anti-Semites, then it is extraordinary that you should
        have spoken so regularly at their meetings in the
        of the 1990s.
   Q.   Do you consider this view, as you just stated,
        to Mr Rosenbaum, as a kind of alibi that I just use to
        people like him?
   A.   Well, in its vagueness, it sounds rather like that to
        but I am speculating there.  I am simply quoting your
        statements here.
   Q.   Is this the only occasion when I have expressed such a
        view, to your knowledge, having had complete access to
        my papers?
   A.   I think there is one other occasion, but I cannot
        exactly where it is.
   Q.   Can I suggest you look at page 90 of my bundle,
   A.   Ah, yes.
   Q.   A letter to "Dear Connie" -- does your Lordship have

.          P-164

   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Sorry, when you say your bundle, do you
   MR IRVING:  Bundle F, yes.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  90, that is a letter.
   MR IRVING:  "Dear Connie""?
   A.   Yes, I have this, yes.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  "Dear Miss Kadashka"  I have got at page
   MR IRVING:  No, it has to be "Dear Connie".
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Mine is 89, but it does not matter.
   MR IRVING:  Is this letter dated June 24th 1988?
   A.   It is, yes.
   Q.   Is this about two months after I read the Leuchter
        in other words, two months after the Zundel conference
        the Zundel trial?
   A.   The trial.
   Q.   Yes.
   A.   You will have to remind.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I think that is right.  Take it from me.
   A.   Is that right?  OK.
   MR IRVING:  Can I read to you the final paragraph or the
        thereof?  First of all, looking at the address at the
        bottom, am I writing to my publishers, William Morrow
        Company in New York ----
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   --- who published the Goring biography.  "I have been
        invited to speak as a guest speaker at a right wing

.          P-165

        function in Los Angeles next February.  They have
        a substantial fee and all my expenses and until now I
        adopted a policy of never refusing an invitation if
        organizers meet my terms, namely free speech and fat
        On this occasion I intend to give the audience a piece
        my mind about some of their more lunatic views".  Does
        say that?
   A.   It does indeed, yes.
   Q.   So, in other words, I do not just express views about
        crack pot anti-Semites and crack pot ideas or whatever
        an alibi, but on the evidence of this letter (which
        I found in the early hours of this morning by chance)
        quite a few occasions I have expressed robust views
        people I associate with?
   A.   This, Mr Irving, is not evidence of what you actually
        at this meeting, if you indeed went to it.  It is
simply a
        letter to a publisher, obviously.  You do not say what
        their lunatic views are and there is no evidence here
        you have gave them a piece of mind.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Who was the right-wing organization
holding a
        meeting in?
   MR IRVING:  That was the IHR, my Lord.  That was precisely
        body, the Institute of Historical Review, who at that
        were under different management, if I can put it like
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  So the lunatic views attached to the old

.          P-166

        management, not to the present regime, is that it?
   MR IRVING:  I shall be submitting to your Lordship at the
        proper occasion that as the years passed, I tried to
        persuade them to adopt a more serious profile, to
        respected historians as well as more unorthodox
        revisionist historians and try to straighten their act
        out, if I can put it like that.  There is
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  So you did have an association that
        you to bring that sort of pressure to bear, did you?
   MR IRVING:  Oh, yes.  They looked to me.  They were
        wooing me and I wrote them letters saying, "In my
        you should do this and you should do that", and I am
        they got similar advice from other people.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Thank you very much.
   MR IRVING:  Thank you.  So do you accept that on the basis
        those two letters I had a robust attitude towards the
        Institute which indicated I was in no manner
travelling in
        their tow or in their wake?
   A.   Sorry, what is the other letter?
   Q.   Well, on the basis of the Ron Rosenbaum ----
   A.   Ah, yes, the interview.
   Q.   --- matter and this letter.
   A.   I have to say that on the basis of having read your
        speeches or articles in the Institute and its Journal
        you did come to them in the 80s for the first time

.          P-167

        you went to speak at the Institute with what seems to
        like a certain apprehension of the fact that your
        would differ somewhat from theirs, but this
disappears, in
        my view, entirely in the 1990s when you were a regular
        attender at their conferences and a regular speaker.
   Q.   At their conferences I regularly rubbed their noses in
        what actually happened in the Holocaust and that I
        out the Bruns' interrogation report in all its gory
        of the shootings on the Eastern Front, and that I was
        up to criticism by some of their members for doing
   A.   You read out parts of the Bruns' report, excluding the
        reference to Hitler's order which we went through
        ago in this trial.  You have a very selective version
        it.  I think you did say at the beginning of this
        you had not actually read it out before.
                  I do not deny that there were some arguments
        discussion (as there always is in discussions) after
        speeches, but in the 1990s I think you were purveying
        same views as they had on the whole.  There were some
        minor differences between yourself, in particular,
        Professor Faurisson, but your speeches to the
Institute of
        Historical Review did not meet with jeers and cat
        as I recall.
   Q.   They did not meet with jeers and cat calls.  Do you
        believe that a body like the Institute of Revisionist
        Historians, or whatever they call themselves, performs

.          P-168

        useful function at all?
   A.   No.

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.