Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day024.21 Last-Modified: 2000/07/24 Q. So Himmler was a weak man? A. In a way Himmler had -- in a way Himmler had some weaknesses. You are quite familiar, you wrote biographies about the leading Nazis, and you I think are quite aware of the fact where are his weakness. Q. Himmler's brother Gebhardt told me that Heinreich was such a coward that he would never have done this without Hitler's orders. So he backs you. But the fact remains that we are faced with these baffling documents, are we not? A. Yes. The question is now whether these documents are really sufficient enough to prove the case that the Holocaust was carried out by Himmler behind Hitler's back, you know, without his knowledge, without his approval. Generally speaking, my impression is that it is impossible to prove this case. Q. You mention the transportation, that this could not have been done without Hitler's orders? A. All this, not only transportation but the whole magnitude of this operation. Q. But Himmler referred specifically to the fact that this movement of the Jews from the West to East is going to proceed stage by stage, is the Fuhrer's orders, September 1942 I think is the document? . P-185 A. Yes. Q. So that was covered by Hitler's orders, the actual transportation movement. That was clearly covered by Hitler's orders? A. Yes, but all the over -- I can accept that, but it is not only the transportation. It is the involvement of 10,000 people in police units, in SS units. MR JUSTICE GRAY: The whole. You do not need to spell it out? A. The whole operation. MR JUSTICE GRAY: One can imagine how logistically complicated it was. A. The Holocaust became known in 1942 to the Western world, and of course it was used in the Allied propaganda, for instance, they dropped leaflets on Germany, and so on. So the whole idea that this process could be kept as a secret when, you know, 22 officials in the Foreign Ministry alone read one of the activity reports of 1941 which quite clearly states that thousands of people are shot, and 22 diplomats were officially allowed to read this. Then to argue that this was done behind Hitler's back, it seems to me it defies reason. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. I have your very clear and full answer on that. Mr Irving, I do not know whether you are going to move on now? MR IRVING: I have now reached effectively my planning for the first report. I will conclude the cross-examination on . P-186 the second report tomorrow, and then I shall be finished with Dr Longerich tomorrow, if I may. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, you are really saying you would rather break off now? MR IRVING: Quite simply because we did zip through the glossary. I think it does fall naturally in two stages. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am not sure about that, but if you say you would like to break off now then I am perfectly happy with that. Can we just see where we are going from here. Mr Rampton, are we expecting to have any other witness on Thursday? I suppose that depends on Mr Irving. MR RAMPTON: No. I can start re-cross-examination Mr Irving on Thursday, if we go short with Dr Longerich. If not I will do that on Monday. I am expecting Professor Funke to be here on Tuesday. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Have you got a whole day's further cross-examination, do you think? MR RAMPTON: Probably. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am not surprised. MR RAMPTON: Probably, because I have not done the political association. Considering the volume of material there is, I am going to keep it short, but it is still bound to take a bit of time. MR IRVING: My Lord, ought I to question this witness about the Schlegelberger document which he has not referred it in his report? . P-187 MR JUSTICE GRAY: He has not, you are quite right, and I personally think there is absolutely no need, because if there is one topic that has been investigated exhaustively it is certainly that one. MR IRVING: I do not want to be criticised for not having done so. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I will not criticise you and I do not think Mr Rampton will either. MR IRVING: Your Lordship is aware I attach great importance to it. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I realize you do. MR RAMPTON: I would point out, therefore, that it is likely that I will place reliance on what Dr Longerich has already said about that, which is that, in effect, he thinks it is a document of no historical significance. MR IRVING: Yes. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. The trouble is you cannot nibble at these issues. I hope Mr Irving will not take that as an invitation to open the whole issue. MR RAMPTON: No, but it is only fair that I should say that. I would use as corroboration for reliance on that what Professor Evans has said about it. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Professor Evans? MR RAMPTON: Yes. MR IRVING: If Professor Evans wishes to have a chance to amplify the reason why he considers it to be insignificant . P-188 or less significant than do I, then this would be the opportunity. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think the answer to that is that he will not want to. MR RAMPTON: He is in Cambridge. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think you meant Dr Longerich, did you not? MR IRVING: That was the correct inference, yes. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am sure he will not want to, but Mr Rampton is entitled to rely on his commentary about it. Since I know so clearly what the issues are each way on it, I really see very little benefit to be derived from going through all the points all over again. MR IRVING: I have no desire to. MR JUSTICE GRAY: If you want to I am not stopping you. MR IRVING: But I thought it would only be fair in view of the fact that he did express that negative opinion on it, if he wished to have the opportunity to amplify on that that he should, but if he does not so ---- MR JUSTICE GRAY: Just so it is clear, I am not for a moment stopping you from cross-examining fully on your reasons for saying why the Schlegelberger memorandum is a very important document, but I will not hold it against you that you did not cross-examine if you do not. I want to be absolutely clear what my position on that is. MR IRVING: If your Lordship will not then I shall not. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Good. I think that is a sensible outcome, . P-189 because otherwise it is just a waste of time. MR RAMPTON: Can I give your Lordship two more references to close the day. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. MR RAMPTON: Day 2, page 262, lines 11 to 17, I will read it out for Mr Irving's benefit so he knows exactly. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Of what? MR RAMPTON: Of my cross-examination in the transcript. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Day 2? MR RAMPTON: Yes, page 262. Again I am afraid for some reason best known, perhaps it is that I merely lay the ground and all the bright questions seem to be asked by your Lordship. Maybe your Lordship has a better facility for getting straight answers, I do not know. Anyway, page 262, line 11, Mr Justice Gray asks Mr Irving: "Do you accept that means," this is about report No. 51, "since it is addressed to the Fuhrer that it was shown to him?" Answer: "On a high probability, yes, my Lord. I would have accepted that as being evidence that it had probably been shown to Hitler, but I would also draw attention to one, two or three details, if I may, since we are looking at the document." Then bottom of page 264, which is on the same physical sheet of paper, line 23, again your Lordship is asking the question: . P-190 "To be asked what you think this would have conveyed to Hitler, which is I think what Mr Rampton was asking?" Answer: "Firstly, I accept the document was in all probability shown to Hitler. Secondly, I think in all probability he paid no attention to it, the reason being the date, the height of the Stalingrad crisis". If there is going to be a retreat from that position, it is going to have to have, in submission, quite a good reason. MR IRVING: Well, my response is that I think documents are often shown to learned counsel which learned counsel sometimes pay no attention to. I think Mr Carmen is an example of that. MR RAMPTON: I am not Mr Carmen for one thing, and I shall not say what I feel about that. MR IRVING: Also your Lordship will remember ---- MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let Mr Rampton tell us more about it. MR RAMPTON: For another thing, that is only to say that it seems that that concession, and I advisedly use that word, seems to remain in place. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Indeed it is fortified, because Mr Irving is there saying that, all right, it may have been shown to Hitler, but he paid no attention to it, well, that is almost the same as saying it was not shown to him. But he goes done in day 4 and 5 in the passages that you have . P-191 referred to I think to accept that Hitler knew and approved. MR RAMPTON: Yes, knew about the systematic mass shootings in the East. MR IRVING: Your Lordship remember that I produced evidence to you a day or two later showing that on precisely that day or the day before one document of exactly the same nature was shown to Hitler on two successive days, submitted to him and obviously not read by him. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. I suspect the position will emerge that you have slightly shifted your ground backwards and forwards in the course of your answers to Mr Rampton. MR IRVING: It is highly possible that one learns as one goes along, and one would be incorrigible if one did not. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I will not comment about that, but you have now put your case actually in considerable detail to Dr Longerich and we have now had his answers. MR IRVING: Yes. MR JUSTICE GRAY: So tell me what your final stance is, because I would like to know, but the evidence is all in now. MR RAMPTON: I would like to know too. MR JUSTICE GRAY: So 10.30 tomorrow morning. (The witness withdrew) (The court adjourned until the following day) . P-192
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.