Irving v. Lipstadt

Defense Documents

David Irving, Holocaust Denial, and his Connections to Right Wing Extremists and Neo-National Socialism (Neo-Nazism) in Germany: Electronic Edition, by Hajo Funke

Table of Contents
<< 6.2 Irving's arrest as le...

6.3 The speaking bans [Redeverbot] of 9 September 1992, 9 December 1992, and Irving's ultimate exclusion from Germany.

6.3.1Irving had been the subject of an exclusion order since 9 March 1991, handed down by the Ministry of the Interior. The exclusion order had been issued in view of Irving's reputation as a right-wing extremist writer and historian, and was repeatedly renewed, for instance in February 1994.568 Although the order repeatedly gave Irving cause for thought when entering Germany, it proved ineffectual once he was in Germany.569 As the German authorities had to admit: 'The Federal Minister of the Interior had already instructed the frontier control authorities in March 1990 to send back Irving when attempting to enter the Federal Republic. In practice, however, this can only be done in an imperfect manner, since the frontiers between EC countries are wide open.'570
6.3.2On 11 September 1992 Irving was to have spoken to a branch of the Bavarian NPD in Munich on 'What is in the Goebbels's Diaries'571 In light of previous experience' ['bisherigen Erfahrungen'] the authorities responsible for foreigners [Ausländerbehörde] handed Irving a speaking ban.572 What was to have graver effects for Irving was that on the same day Irving was written a letter announcing that his exemption from meeting the requirement for a residence permit for short periods of residency had been withdrawn ['die Befreiung vom Erfodernis der Aufenthaltsgenehmigung für Kurzaufenthalte zu entziehen.'].573 In other words Irving was no longer covered by the normal exemption for fellow members of the EU from having to possess a residence permit for short stays in Germany. In December the Munich authorities widened Irving's speaking ban to include mentioning a number of specific themes at any future meeting in the Federal Republic.574
6.3.3On 9 November 1993, the anniversary of the so-called 'Reichskristallnacht,' Irving arrived in Munich to start a tour arranged by Stephan Wiesel.575 Irving was expelled from Germany after it became known that he intended to take part in meetings on the 55th anniversary of Crystal Night. That same afternoon Irving was handed an indefinite residence ban [unbefristetes Aufenthaltsverbot] as an unwanted foreigner by officers of the Bavarian security police [Sicherheitspolizei] whilst Irving sat in the Café   Mövenpick.576
6.3.4Irving was requested to leave Germany by 10 November 1993 and applied the ban nationwide.577 By choosing to leave Germany that same day Irving was spared the ignominy of being deported.
6.3.5The 33-page explanation of Irving's expulsion is worth quoting at some length, especially in view of Professor Deborah Lipstadt's claim that 'Irving is one of the most dangerous spokespersons for Holocaust denial.'578
6.3.6After having pointed out that Irving's thesis followed the example set in the works of Fred Leuchter, Ernst Zündel, and Robert Faurisson,579 the authorities cited what had been established in previous trials involving Irving as defendant or plaintiff.
The court saw it as proven that it was only superficial intention of yours to paint a picture of history which deviated from the established research. In fact your intention was to deny the systematic mass murder of the Jewish population. This thesis undoubtedly insults the victims of National Socialism. In addition you met with wide approval, especially in right-wing extremist, neo-Nazi, and revisionist circles, or circles close to them. For a number of years increasingly right-wing extremist and xenophobic attitudes have been ascertainable in precisely these circles.
This opinion of the court is based on the one hand on the widespread effect of you opinion. The court considered it as proven that particularly neo-Nazi and revisionist groups endorse your theses and made use of your thoughts. On the other hand the judgement considered your lack of understanding. Even after the reporting of an offence [Strafanzeige] had been raised you persistently publicly represented your theses.580   [...] In the meantime [since summer 1990] you have become very famous. Your mere presence is enough to inflame moods. [...] That you yourself are not amongst the active members of right-wing extremist groups is insignificant. Decisive is that these groups use your thoughts, are strengthened by your theses, and enhance them.
Your personal responsibility is that you use events of right-wing extremist circles as a supposed historian for your publications and thereby are at least aware of the consequences of your actions.
Your conduct represents an endangerment of the inner security of the Federal Republic of Germany in the widest sense and in addition inflicts considerable damage on the external reputation of the German state.
Your interpretation and expression of the thesis given under point I.1 is suited to endanger the peaceful co-existence of Germans and foreigners. They are considered the truth by a small but radical part of the population and ultimately motivate violence and racial hatred.581 [...]
Although the largest part of the German population distances itself from such attacks [the judgement cited the murders and violent attacks on foreigners in Rostock, Hoyerswerda, Hünxe, Mölln, and Solingen] the most recent developments show the existence of grass-roots right-wing extremist motivated culprits who are willing to use violence. Precisely this circle of people is receptive to revisionist thoughts and feel themselves confirmed in their political opinions whereby they express their opinions with violence.582
6.3.7These developments entailed an endangerment of the public safety and order, the danger of a further escalation of violence, and posed a threat to Germany's economy and reputation. It was in turn considered that Irving contributed to these threats.583
The interest of revisionist, right-wing extremist and Nazi groups in your participation in future events remains undiminished. [...] Added to this is that, in view of your previous reputation in right-wing extremist circles, already your mere attendance at political events suitable to harm the interests of the general public, as stated above.584


568. Schleswig-Holsteinisches Oberverwaltungsgericht, 'Urteil in der Verwaltungsrechtssache David Irving...gegen Kreis Segeberg, Der Landrat...wegen Verbot politischer Betätigung (§ 37 AuslG)', 5 October 1993, p. 2.
569. 'The Federal German ministry of the interior issued an exclusion order against Mr Irving on March 9 last year, in an attempt to prevent him from entering Germany. "Unfortunately," the government stated in a recent. official report, "he has repeatedly succeeded in entering the country, as he was not not [Sic] recognised at the frontier."' Irving, press release, 1 May 1992.
570. Dr Frisch, Office for the Protection of the Constitution, to Neville Nagler, the Board of Deputies of British Jews, 9 August 1991 as posted on Irving's website. In Irving's words, 'Of course, it is difficult for the Germans too, because they are very pernickerty about details and wording; and the ban is on entering Germany, not on being in Germany.' 'Speech by David Irving at Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, on the evening of October 28, 1992,' no page number. See also diary entry, 30 November 1991. '...phoned [Christian] Worch, Hamburg, can I stay there December 10 or 12 for Lübeck case. Yes. He says Verfassungschutzbericht states I have Einreiseverbot since March last year, but have repeatedly entered Germany unerkannt!!!'
571. Flyer, 'Die bayerischen Nationaldemokraten laden ein...' n.d. Irving to Renate Werlberger, 12 July 1992; Renate Werlberger to Irving, 22 July 1992; Irving to Renate Werlberger, 24 July 1992.
572. Irving to Renate Werlberger, 12 July 1992; Renate Werlberger to Irving, 22 July 1992; Irving to Renate Werlberger, 24 July 1992.
573. 'Vollzug des Ausländergesetzes (AuslG) Ausweisung aus der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, n.d.', p. 10.
574. Irving was forbidden to mention (word-for-word or in general) six themes in presentations, discussions, press conferences etc., especially in the context of statements about trials in Munich: 1) that there were no gas chambers in Auschwitz 2) that the Allies were equally guilty for the Second World War as the Axis 3) that American Jewry, Churchill, and the French wanted war with Germany and acted on this wish 4) that there was no planned extermination of the Jews during the Third Reich 5) there was no systematic extermination of the Jews in concentration camps in eastern Europe, especially that the history of the extermination of the Jews in Auschwitz was a lie 6) the figure of 6 million Jews is a lie designed to blackmail Germany politically and financially. The six points were formulated in the form of quotations, albeit without sources. Landeshauptstadt München, Kreisverwaltungsreferat HA II/3 - Ausländerangelegenheiten, 'Vollzug der Ausländergesetzes; Beschränkung der politischen Betätigung des britischen Staatsangehörigen IRVING, David', addressed to Dr. Klaus Goebel, 7 December 1992, pp. 1-2.
575. Diary entry, 1 October 1993; diary entry, 5 November 1993. According to Irving he was to have spoken at Munich university. See Press release of 11 November 1993, as quoted in diary entry, 11 November 1993.
576. See Landeswaltschaft München, 'Verwaltungsstreitsache David Irving', 21 February 1996; Irving to Hajo Herrmann, 19 July 1994.
577. Based on § 42, Abs. 1-4 of the AuslG. See Landeshauptstadt München, Kreisverwaltungsreferat, 'Ausreise aus dem Bundesgebiet', 9 November 1993.
578. Deborah Lipstadt, Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory (London, 1994), p. 181.
579. Landeshauptstadt München, 'Vollzug des Ausländergesetzes (AuslG) Ausweisung aus der Bundesrepublik Deutschland', 9 November 1993, p. 3.
580. Das Gericht sah es als erwiesen an, daß es Ihnen nur vordergründig darum ginge, ein von der gesicherten Forschung abweichendes Geschichtsbild zu zeichnen; in Wahrheit ginge es Ihnen um die Leugnung des systematischen Massenmordes an der jüdischen Bevölkerung. Diese Thesen beleidigten unzweifelhaft die Opfer des Nationalsozialismus. Sie fänden zudem vor allem in rechtsextremistischen, neonazistischen und revisionistischen oder ihnen nahestehenden Kreisen große Zustimmung. Gerade in diesen Kreisen sei seit einigen Jahen eine zunehmende rechtsextremistische und fremdenfeindliche Einstellung festzustellen./ Die Urteilsbegründung stützt sich zum einen auf die Breitenwirkung Ihrer Äußerungen. Das Gericht hielt es für erwiesen, daß sich insbesondere neonazistische und revisionistische Gruppen Ihren Thesen anschließen und sich Ihr Gedankengut zunutze machen. Zum anderen berücksichtigt das Urteil Ihre Uneinsichtigkeit. Sie hätten Ihre Thesen auch nachdem Strafanzeige gegen Sie erhoben worden ware, beharrlich öffentlich vertreten...' Landeshauptstadt München, 'Vollzug des Ausländergesetzes (AuslG) Ausweisung aus der Bundesrepublik Deutschland', 9 November 1993, p. 13.
581. 'Inzwischen haben Sie eine größere Bekanntheit erlangt. Ihre bloße Anwesenheit reicht aus, die Stimmung aufzuheizen. [...] Daß Sie sich selbst nicht zu den aktiven Mitgliedern rechtsextremer Gruppierungen zählen, ist unerheblich. Auschlaggebend ist, daß sich diese Ihr Gedankengut zunutze machen, durch Ihre Thesen bestärkt werden und eine zusätzliche Aufwertung erfahren./ Ihrer persönlichen Verantwortlichkeit unterliegt, daß Sie als vorgeblicher Historiker die Veranstaltungen rechtsextremer Kreise für Ihre Publikationen nutzen und dabei die Konsequenzen Ihres Handelns zumindest billigend in Kauf nehmen./ Ihr Verhalten stellt eine Gefährdung der inneren Sicherheit der Bundesrepulik Deutschland im weitesten Sinne dar und fügt damit zugleich dem Ansehen des deutschen Staates nach Außen erheblichen Schaden zu./ Ihre Darstellung und Äußerung der unter Ziffer I.1. wiedergegebenen Thesen ist geeignet, das friedliche Zusammenleben von Deutschen und Ausländern zu gefährden; sie werden von einem kleinen, aber radikalen Teil der Bevölkerung als Wahrheit angesehen und motivieren letztlich zu Gewalt und Rassenhaß.' Ibid., pp. 17-19.
582. 'Obwohl sich der größte Teil der deutschen Bevölkerung von derartigen Aktionen distanziert, zeigen die jüngsten Entwicklungen, daß eine gewaltbereite Basis rechtsextremistische motivierter Täter vorhanden ist. Gerade dieser Personenkreis ist empfänglich für revisionistisches Gedankengut, fühlt sich dadurch in seiner politischen Einstellung bestätigt, wobei er seiner Meinung auf gewalttätige Weise Ausdruck verleiht.' Ibid., pp. 19-20.
583. Ibid., pp. 20-21.
584. 'Das Interesse revisionistischer, rechtsextremistischer und neonazistischer Gruppierungen an Ihrer Teilnahme an künftigen Veranstaltungen hält unvermindert an. [...] Zudem ist angesichts Ihres einschlägigen Rufs in rechtsextremistischen Kreisen bereits Ihre bloße Teilnahme an politischen Veranstaltungen geeignet, die Belange der Allgemeinheit im oben dargestellten Sinne zu beeinträchtigen.' Ibid., p. 22.
Popups by overLIB
<< 6.2 Irving's arrest as le...