Irving v. Lipstadt

Transcripts

Holocaust Denial on Trial, Trial Transcripts, Day 32: Electronic Edition

Pages 191 - 195 of 222

<< 1-5221-222 >>
    Your Lordship has been told of my remarks that
 1colourful language, my tasteless language, was a
 2rhetorical way of bringing that extraordinary revelation
 3home to audiences.
 4     The audiences, I am told, are extreme audiences,
 5of extreme people, although the photographs suggest rather
 6differently. They appear rather boring middle-age kind of
 7people.
 8     My files confirm that I occasionally addressed
 9audiences of the Association for Free Journalism in
10Germany, the National Democratic Party in Germany and the
11German Peoples Union. My Lord, those four documents which
12I have disclosed to the Defendants, they are English
13translations of the policy leaflets, the manifestos of
14these bodies, and in my submission they do not show them
15to be extreme in any way. These were, furthermore, bodies
16that were accepted at that time under Germany's very
17strict laws as being legal and constitutional. But the
18court is more concerned, I believe, with have individual
19personages than with bodies, than with the actual
20organizations. I have not the slightest doubt that this
21court will find that I had no meaningful contact with the
22ugly rag-bag neo-Nazi extremists mentioned by Professor
23Funke, people with whom, to make the point quite clearly,
24the Defendants, their experts and their legal team seem
25more familiar than I. Most of the names were completely
26unknown to me and the Defence have sought, in vein, for

.   P-191



 1them in my diaries and papers, to which I emphasise yet
 2again I gave them complete and unlimited privileged
 3access. This has not stopped them from bringing these
 4names forward and mentioning these alleged links in the
 5open court in an attempt to smear me still further with an
 6eye particularly on the German media. I urge that this,
 7their conduct of the case, be held against them.
 8     Characteristically of the weakness of their
 9case, Professor Funke listed one entry in a diary where
10I noted "road journey with a Thomas" whose second name
11I never learned; Funke entered the name "Dienel?" So for
12as I know, I have never met a Dienel, but it illustrates
13the kind of evidence that the Defence were hoping to rely
14upon.
15     As for Michael Kuhnen, the documentary evidence
16before both Professor Funke when he wrote his report and
17before this court, is that I explicitly said I would not
18attend any function at which he was even present. I never
19did and I never met him.
20     By way of evidence the court has been shown a
21number of videos. Shorn of their commercial packaging,
22they do not amount to very much, in my submission. In
23view of the weight attached to it by learned counsel and
24by his witness Professor Funke, my Lord, I have
25re-examined the raw video of Halle function of November
269th 1991 at which I briefly spoke, and I have timed and

.   P-192



 1listed the scenes that it shows. My Lord, you will see in
 2the footnote on that page that I have given the
 3appropriate breakdown referring to the time on the video.
 4     Your Lordship may wish at sometime to have the
 5video back to check that these times are correct, or the
 6Defendants' solicitors may wish to submit any corrections
 7they feel are needed.
 8 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     No. I will assume your time is correct
 9unless I am told otherwise.
10 MR IRVING:     Yes, unless otherwise informed. The raw details
11are, when the when camera's meter shows 170021 I am first
12seen arriving at an unnamed hotel restaurant in Halle,
13accompanied by Mrs Worch and by David Leigh of he Sunday
14Observer. At 17:14:40 I am again glimpsed, 14 minutes
15later, still at the hotel speaking to a reporter. The
16cameraman and David Leigh then go off to film the rival
17processions during which I am at no time seen on film. In
18fact I remained lunching at the hotel. At 18:11:00 a
19truck is seen being rigged as an open-air platform, and at
2018:14:26 I am seen with two reporters watching from the
21edge of the square. In my submission, my Lord, I do not
22have a particularly happy look on my face at all at what
23I am seeing.
24     At 18:16 I walk over to the platform, hands in
25pockets and mount it. The man whom Professor Funke tells
26us is Dienel, and I have no way of checking it one way or

.   P-193



 1the other, is seen to get off to the left and there is no
 2contact whatever between him and me. Mr Worch briefly
 3introduces me to the audience. I begin speaking at
 418:16:39 and the filmed portion of my speech ends less
 5than three and a half minutes later.
 6     When the off-screen chanting of slogans begins
 7at 18:18:59 I am clearly seen to interrupt my speech,
 8shake my head at them and gesticulate with my left hand to
 9them to stop, and I am clearly heard to say, "You must
10not", because they are shouting the "Siegheil" slogans,
11Mein Fuhrer, and things like, "you must not always be
12thinking of the past". I am heard clearly to say: "You
13must always be thinking of the past. You must not keep
14coming out with the slogans of the past. We are thinking
15of the future [voice emphasised] of Germany. We are
16thinking of the future of the German people. As an
17Englishman I have to say ...", and so on. So I am quite
18clearly expressing extreme anger at these people who have
19come along with their Nazi slogans.
20     Six seconds after ending my brief speech I am
21seen to leave the platform without further contact with
22anybody. My diary notes that I at once left by car and
23drove back to the Rhur in Western Germany.
24     Heavily edited, for example to remove my rebuke
25to these slogan-shouting people, whom I took and take to
26have been agents provocateurs, this sequence was shown on

.   P-194



 1November 28th and 29th to British TV audiences in a "This
 2Week" programme entitled "Hitler's Children, the New
 3Nazis", directed by the German Michael Schmidt, Professor
 4Funke's star witness, and with none other than Gerald
 5Gable of Searchlight listed as the consultant, and in
 6Despatches on the other channel. This indicates whose
 7hands were behind the editing. Again, heavily edited the
 8film has been shown around the world against me. This was
 9the thrice edited film to which I drew your Lordship's
10attention in suggesting there was evidence of dubious
11admissibility.
12     May I again remind your Lordship of my basic
13principle on lecturing. Unlike the Defendants who have
14proudly stated that they refuse to debate with opponents,
15I have expressed a readiness to attend, to address all and
16any who are willing to listen. Your Lordship will
17remember my letter of June 24th 1988 to my editor William
18Morrow, Connie Roosevelt, to whom I wrote:
19     "I have been invited to speak as a guest
20speaker at a right-wing function in Los Angeles next
21February. They have offered a substantial fee and all my
22expenses, and until now I have adopted a policy of never
23refusing an invitation if the speakers meet my terms,
24namely a free speech and a fat fee. On this occasion
25I intend to give the audience a piece of mind about some
26of their lunatic views."

.   P-195


              
<< 1-5221-222 >>