Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day003.17
Last-Modified: 2000/07/29

   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Do not let us let it descend into...

   A.   Mr Rampton -- my Lord, I am not sure if I can say this,

.          P-149

        but Mr Rampton rather left the innuendo in the air -- I am
        not sure if you are returning to this -- but I had this
        diary passage in front of me and ignored it when I wrote
        the book.
   MR RAMPTON:  Indeed.
   A.   Are you going to state that?
   Q.   I was going to ask you.  You can be personal about it if
        you like, I do not mind, but I am going to ask you whether
        you knew about this at the time you wrote these books.
   A.   Thank you very much indeed.  The answer is no.
   Q.   Why?
   A.   I did not have it.
   Q.   You did not have it?
   A.   No.  This was part of the diaries that were in Moscow.  A
        Goebbels', typical Goebbels' diary entry would run to 70
        or 50 or 100 pages.  One Goebbels' diary entry in
        September 1943 is 143 pages of typescript for one day.
In
        Moscow, we were extremely limited for our time, the
days
        we were allowed to view these pages.  I did, by
chance,
        look at these pages around the German declaration of
war
        on the United States as it was a matter of interest.
My
        commission from The Sunday Times was to obtain the
        material relating to Germany's declaration of war on
the
        United States, obviously for commercial reasons.  I
read
        those passages, those pages, copied them down.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Mr Irving, I just want to make sure I am

.          P-150



        understanding what the question is directed to.  Are
you
        saying that you did not have the passage quoted ----
   A.   By Longerich.
   Q.   --- in Longerich ----
   A.   That is correct.
   Q.   --- at page 61, 62, when you wrote Goebbels?
   A.   Indeed, my Lord, yes.   I did not have it.  It has
only
        recently been published by the Institute of History in
        Munich.  They obtained the diaries in 1992, shortly
after
        I obtained take them, and it has taken them six or
seven
        years to make them available to the general public.
        I still have not received the volumes that I ordered
from
        the publishers.
   MR RAMPTON:  I am not sure what you did have.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Can I just pursue this?  I am still a
little
        bit puzzled.  You do make reference though in Goebbels
to
        the speech that Hitler made to the Gauleiter?
   A.   Purely because we know that there was a speech from
Martin
        Bormann's diary.
   MR RAMPTON:  You quote from it?
   A.   And because Goebbels being a typical diarist, he kept
on
        rambling back and forth as he dictated the diary to
his
        Private Secretary, and he kept on coming back to the
        previous day's speech, but not the passage there.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  So what are you saying -- just bear with
me
         -- I am trying to follow.

.          P-151



   MR RAMPTON:  I am sorry, my Lord.  I will shut up!
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  If I can just speak for a minute?  Are
you
        saying that what you say about Hitler's speech to the
        Gauleiters in your book, Goebbels, comes from
Bormann's
        diary?
   A.   No, my Lord.  It comes from a previous passages of the
        Goebbels' diary.  Had I read all 100 pages, I would
have
        stumbled across this paragraph too; but I can make it
very
        easy for your Lordship and for the Defendants by
drawing
        their attention to the fact that in my discovery were
the
        entire Goebbels' diaries that I obtained from Moscow.
        They could have come to court producing the pages
which
        they had found in my discovery, proving that I had had
        them at the time I wrote both Goebbels and Hitler, and
        saying, "Here, he had them here, and yet he ignored
them
        when he wrote that", and the answer is they have not
done
        so because those pages are not in my documents because
        I did not get them.
   Q.   I am still puzzled.  What exactly did you base what
you
        write in Goebbels about the Gauleiters speech upon?
   A.   I read the Goebbels' diary for December 13th 1941,
just a
        few pages.  On each page there would be about 200
pages in
        a big typeface.  I read all the pages relating to the
        German declaration of war on the United States which
had
        just been made that day; and then Goebbels mentions
the
        fact that the previous day Hitler had delivered a
speech

.          P-152



        to the Gauleiters, and he mentions it in the terms
that
        I have quoted in full -- believe me, I quoted
everything
        that I had in my hands when I came back from Moscow
        because it was interesting material.  Had I read on
        another 30 or 40 pages in the diary for that day, I
        would probably have come across the full length
        description, the report of the Gauleiters' speech on
which
        Longerich is relying.  But I have not seen it from the
        Moscow day in 1992 to about the middle of last year
when
        it was finally made available and quoted by Christian
        Gerlach in his book and elsewhere.  I am still not
very
        impressed by it, but I do wish to make the point in
case
        it was going to be inferred that I had had the
material
        and not made use of it.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I think I understand.
   A.   It would have been in my discovery and it was not.
   MR RAMPTON:  How long are these daily entries in Goebbels'
        diary?  I have not understood it.
   A.   They vary in length depending on what is happening.
   Q.   How long is this entry for 13th December?  It reports
the
        previous day's events.  How long is the entry for the
        speech of Hitler?
   A.   I have no idea.  I have not seen it.
   Q.   Well, you quoted from it.
   A.   The previous entry?
   Q.   No, you quoted from it on page 383 of Goebbels.  This
is

.          P-153



        what I find baffling.
   A.   Yes, but, you see, he kept on coming back to it,
something
        like that he would keep on coming back to as things
        occurred to him.  He is sitting in the room with his
        Private Secretary, Dr Richard Otte, his chief
        stenographer, dictating the following morning the
events
        of the previous day and he would keep coming back to
        something.  The diaries were not really intended for
        publication in that form; they would have been edited.
        I came across an earlier reference to it in the
diaries
        which I then have used here; but to this day I have
not
        seen any full length description of the Gauleiters'
        speech.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  How do you know it is 30 or 40 pages
further
        on?
   A.   Well, presumably it was because, anyway, it was not on
the
        glass plate that I had, my Lord.  The glass plate
would
        have had 45 pages on it.  The glass plate was either
five
        times five or six times eight, depending on when it
was
        made, pages per glass plate, and they were in complete
        disarray.  So I would have had the plate which
contained
        the bits I used, but not the bits which contained the
        speech on it.  I had no commission from The Sunday
Times
        to look into this kind of thing.
   MR RAMPTON:  My Lord, may I take some instructions because
        I have just been given a rather important document?

.          P-154



   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Do you want to have five minutes?
   MR RAMPTON:  Yes, I think I need five minutes actually
because
        it is not a document I am not aware of.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I think, bearing in mind the
transcribers'
        task, but shall we say quarter past?
                       (Short Adjournment)
   MR RAMPTON:  I am grateful to your Lordship.  Can I say
this?
        I will say it to Mr Irving, if I may?  Mr Irving, I
say
        two things now and I undertake to come back to it on
        Monday, not more this afternoon because I am not clued
up
        enough yet, but I will be.  First, I do not accept
that
        the failure to use a subjunctive is necessarily a bar
to
        the written material being a report of what somebody
else
        says in German.  You do not have to comment on this.
        I tell you this so that you will know what is coming.
        Second, that the Goebbels' diary entry which you
quoted in
        the book is not as long as you said that it was.  All
        right?
   A.   I am sorry.  I do not understand the second part of
that,
        the Goebbels' diary entry which I quoted?  The
original
        entry you mean?
   Q.   Yes.
   A.   The original entry from which I quoted.
   Q.   I do not know because I have not looked at your
        discovery.  That is one of the things I want to do, is
how
        long is the entry from which you quoted.  I also want
to

.          P-155



        find out for certain what proportion of that bears to
the
        whole of the entry?
   A.   Can I suggest, therefore, that when we resume on
Monday
        I bring the entire December 1941 Goebbels' Diary that
        I brought back from Moscow with me and can see what I
had
        and what I did not because it was in the discovery and
you
        must have seen.
   Q.   I have not seen it, but I am sure we must have it.
   A.   Well, if you did not see it, it is not my fault.  It
was
        in your discovery and it was available.
   Q.   I am not criticising you, Mr Irving.  I am quite happy
to
        take blame for negligence, idleness, whatever you
like.
                  Mr Irving, I want, therefore, to pass away
from
        that, if I may, and, if his Lordship will allow me, to
        come back to it on Monday when I have done my homework
and
        ask you about something else, which, as you said, it
is
        probable that Hans Frank as one of the Reichleiters?
   A.   He was ----
   Q.   He was General ----
   A.   --- he was a Reichleiter and he would have been of the
        rank to attend that meeting.
   Q.   Surely he would; he was General Governor, was he not?
   A.   Yes.  In fact, he went to Berlin for the meeting, so
there
        is no reason to dispute he was there.
   Q.   The odious (and it is not really meant to be a pun)
        Globocnik was one of his subordinates?

.          P-156



   A.   Of Hans Frank?  At this time he was the Police Chief
in
        Lublin, I believe.
   Q.   Yes.
   A.   Yes -- no, this is not true.  The SS was -- they
conducted
        an independent existence in the Government General.
   Q.   Right, OK.  It does not matter.  It is not important.
   A.   Do you wish me to expand on that?
   Q.   No, not now.
   A.   No?  There was no hierarchy bringing the two together.
        The name is Globocnik -- G-L-O-B-O-C-N-I-K.
   MR RAMPTON:  Odilo Globocnik.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I think the surname will suffice.
   MR RAMPTON:  Otherwise known as "Globos".  May Mr Irving
please
        be provided please with Professor Browning's report?
   A.   Have we finished with Dr Goebbels?
   Q.   I have finished with that for the moment.  As I say, I
am
        coming back to that later on.  I am trying to keep
some
        semblance of chronological order.  I am still in
December
        1941.  Have you got Dr Browning there?
   A.   Page 30 and 31?
   Q.   30 and 31, correct.  Dr Browning also quotes the
speech of
        Hitler, but in abbreviated form, in other words, he
does
        not quote as much of the Goebbels' diary entry as does
        Dr Longerich.
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Do you see that?

.          P-157



   A.   Yes.
   Q.   He goes down as far as saying (which you agree is a
        correct translation, well, I do not know if you do),
that
        was no figure of speech, top of 31, "The World War is
        here.  The Vernichtung", whether it is destruction,
        extermination, annihilation or whatever, "of the Jews
must
        be the inevitable consequence".
   A.   Well, that is again a contentious and tendentious
        translation.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Well, we have been through that I think
        sufficiently.
   MR RAMPTON:  We have been through that.  That is why I used
the
        word "vernichtung"?
   A.   Well, but it is the word "Jews" also that we have to
look
        at there, is it not?  Destruction of the Jews.  But
this
        is ----
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  That is quite plain because he refers to
"des
        Judens", so there really cannot be any argument about
        that, can there?
   A.   No. "[German].. Judentums", no.
   Q.   There is not reference to "Judentums".
   A.   It is the fifth line, so he has allowed himself a lot
of
        poetic licence in his translation.  My Lord, I have to
be
        careful about what I accept here I cannot be heard to
        accept something that is not ...
   Q.   You are quite right.  I think I was wrong.  You are
quite

.          P-158



        right?
   MR RAMPTON:  You were in that respect, my Lord, but not, in
        fact, in the earlier part of which forms the
        context. "Zeeda ... [German] ... Vuren" and "ihre"
there
        is "their" which is the Jews' is it not?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  But in connection with "Vernichtung", it
is
        "Judentum".
   MR RAMPTON:  Both have "vernichtung" attached to them.

Home ·  Funding ·  Site Map ·  What's New? · 
Make Nizkor your home page

Custom Holocaust Site Search

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2008

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.