Irving v. Lipstadt


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

Pages 96 - 100 of 222

<< 1-5221-222 >>
    Even if I had read that far on that day's glass
 1I would have attached any significance to them other than
 2adding this list to the occasions -- adding this entry to
 3the list of occasions on which Hitler harked back, for
 4whatever reason, to his famous "prophecy" of 1939.
 5     I have read again the printed version of the
 6meeting of the generalgouvernenent, the Polish
 7authorities, the German occupation authorities in Poland,
 8Hans Frank, on December 16th 1941. It is significant to
 9see the amount of space taken, even in this abridged
10published version, by the typhus epidemic sweeping through
11the region, the climax of which was expected to come in
12April 1942. Hans Frank states that he has begun
13negotiation with the purpose of deporting the Jews to the
14East, and he mentions the big Heydrich conference which is
15set down for January 1942 on this topic in Berlin. Then
16comes the sentence which pulls the rug out from beneath
17the Defendant's feet, in my submission: Hans Frank
18says: "For us the Jews are exceptionally damaging mouths
19to feed. We've got an estimated 2.5 million here in the
20Generalgouvernement, perhaps 3.5 million Jews now, what
21with all their kinfolk and hangers-on. We cannot shoot
22these 3.5 million Jews, we cannot poison them, but we will
23be able to do something with them which somehow or other
24will have the result of destroying them, in fact, in
25conjunction with the grander measures still to be
26discussed at Reich level". I think that is a fair

.   P-96

 1translation of that passage.
 2 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     It is not complete, but it is fair.
 3 MR IRVING:     Ah, your Lordship says it is not complete. This is
 4an extract taken from a seven or eight page printed
 6 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     Yes, it is what Frank says he was told in
 7Berlin that I think perhaps is not there, but, anyway,
 8press on.
 9 MR IRVING:     I would -- well, I will press on. The December
1018th 1941 diary entry by Himmler reads, this is the diary
11entry made by Himmler, it is an agenda for his meeting
12with Hitler on December 18th 1941, Himmler jotted down the
13words "Judenfrage", Jewish question, and next to that in
14German the words "als partisanen auszurotten", Himmler
15had, as I pointed out to the Court, repeatedly referred in
16earlier documents to the phrase "Juden als Partisanen".
17This was nothing new or sensational therefore, and the
18words he was recording were, in my submission, not
19necessarily Hitler's but more probably his own stereotype
20phrase. The correct pedantic translation, is in any
21case "Jewish problem, to be wiped out as being
22partisans". Not "like partisans", which would have been
23"wie partisanen". There can be no equivocating about
24this translation of "als". Wie is a comparison, als is an
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     I think that probably is a convenient

.   P-97

 1moment. 2 o'clock.
 2 (Luncheon adjournment)
 3 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     Schlegelberger, Mr Irving.
 4 MR IRVING:     Before Schlegelberger, my Lord, on December 16th
 51941, there was a meeting in Poland which Hans Frank
 6referred to discussions he had in Berlin, in the course of
 7which he said in Berlin the people asked us ----
 8 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     Liquidate them yourselves, something like
 9that, was it not?
10 MR IRVING:     He said to the people in Berlin: "Imagine that we
11are housing these people in nice little housing estates
12here in the Baltic, in the Eastern territories. We tell
13them we cannot handle it here, liquidate them yourselves.
14My submission on that is that this is a reference to the
15Gauleiters from the Ostland whom he had met in Berlin, on
16whom the Jews being deported were going to be dumped, and
17they had made that remark to him, it is remiss of me not
18to have put that in this closing submission. I looked at
19that text again actually three or four days ago and my
20attention was drawn to the sentence before the remark
21about "liquidate them yourselves", in which it becomes
22quite plain he is referring to the Gauleiters of the
23Eastern territories by inference on whom these people are
24going to be dumped.
25 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     Yes, thank you very much.
26 MR IRVING:     I now come to the Schlegelberger document, which is

.   P-98

 1another most difficult piece of historical paper for my
 2opponents. It is a document -- I would explain for the
 3benefit of those who do not know it -- which comes in a
 4file of the German Ministry of Justice.
 5     In late March or early April 1942, after seeing
 6Germany's top civil servant who reported only to Hitler,
 7Franz Schlegelberger, who was acting as Minister of
 8Justice, dictated this famous memorandum, the
 9Schlegelberger Document as we call it here in this
10courtroom, upon which all Holocaust historians, and the
11Defendants' experts witnesses in this case have hitherto
12turned enough blind eyes to have won several battles of
13Trafalgar. For many years after the war it vanished, this
14document, but that is another story. Asked about this
15specific document after a lecture in the German Institute,
16here in London in November 1998, Dr Longerich, who is now
17the Defendants' expert witness, who had the function of
18chairman, rose to inform the audience at that meeting that
19the speaker was not prepared to answer questions from
20David Irving. It is a genuine document, the one I was
21going to ask him about, the Schlegelberger Document, and
22he refers in one breath both to Hitler and the Solution of
23Jewish Problem. Confronted with it in the witness box,
24he, Longerich, and his fellow experts have argued either
25that it was totally unimportant, notwithstanding its
26content, or that it concerned only the Mischlinge, the

.   P-99

 1mixed race Jews, and not the Final Solution in any broader
 2sense. Ingeniously in fact, Dr Longerich even tried to
 3suggest it may have originated in 1940 or 1941 and not in
 41942 at all. The document has them, in other words, in a
 5breathless panic.
 6     The document's own contents, and this is the
 7wording of the actual document, it is only very short, the
 8document's own contents destroys their latter argument.
 9In the first sentence, it says: "Mr Reich Minister
10Lammers informed me that the Fuhrer had repeatedly
11declared to him that he wants to hear that the Solution of
12the Jewish Problem has been adjourned (or postponed) until
13after the war". That that is the broader Final Solution
14is plain from the second sentence which follows. It
15shows, namely the Mischling question, the mixed race
16question, was something totally different: "Accordingly",
17the memorandum continues, "the current deliberations have
18in the opinion of Mr Lammers purely theoretical value".
19Those deliberations were, as my opponents themselves have
20argued, solely concerned with what to do with the
21Mischlinge and the like. The document is quite plain. It
22was dictated by a lawyer, so presumably he knew what he
23was writing. There is no room for argument. My opponents
24have pretended for years that the document effectively
25does not exist. So much for the Schlegelberger Document.
26     I have dealt at length in my statements in the

.   P-100

<< 1-5221-222 >>