[Images
and captions are added by this website] "Smearing
me in person" -- David Irving The
Oliver Kamm Blog London,
Sunday, September 30, 2007 Irving, the
unsinkable rubber duck TALK
of the devil: only yesterday I referred to my
reader David Irving, the Holocaust denier
and racist. Today
The Guardian recounts Irving's unvanquished
ambitions: This
week David Irving, the discredited British
historian who was described by a high court
judge as a Holocaust denier and a racist, says
he is launching a comeback with a speaking tour
of British cities and a series of new books. "I
have kept a low profile for several months
because I have had to sort out where to live and
to address my financial situation," said Mr
Irving, who was declared bankrupt in 2002 after
an unsuccessful libel action over claims he was
a Holocaust denier. "But now I am ready to start
again." I am a fierce supporter of Irving's right to
express his views without legal hindrance and the
threat of prosecution. That doesn't mean I pay
attention to his views, and I confess I had lost
track of, and any interest in, the tergiversations
of his account of the genocide of European Jewry.
In his disastrous libel
suit against Deborah Lipstadt and Penguin
Books in 2000, Irving -- faced with at least
the nominal requirement to be seen to pay some
attention to documentary sources -- "radically
modified his position: he accepted that the killing
by shooting had been on a massive scale of between
500,000 and 1,500,000 and that the programme of
executions had been carried out in a systematic way
and in accordance with orders from Berlin"
(The
Irving Judgment, 2000, p. 116). This
opportunistic revision didn't prevent Mr Justice
Gray, whose words I've just quoted, from
concluding that Irving was indeed a Holocaust
denier. Now, Irving tells The Guardian, his views
have "crystallised": Asked
if he now accepts there had been a Holocaust
against the Jewish people he said he was "not
going to use their trade name". He added: "I do
accept that the Nazis quite definitely, that
Heinrich Himmler, organised and directed
a programme, a clandestine programme, for the
liquidation of European Jews . . . and
that in 1942-43 alone over 2.5 million Jews were
killed in those three camps." He added that
Hitler was "completely in the dark" about the
programme. What is there left to say about such arrant
nonsense by a discredited and dishonest man? On 2
April 1945, Hitler explicitly declared that
National Socialism would earn eternal gratitude for
exterminating the Jews of Germany and Central
Europe ("So gesehen wird man dem
Nationalsozialismus ewig dafür dankbar sein,
daß ich die Juden aus Deutschland und
Mitteleuropa ausgerottet habe"). The words were
recorded by his secretary and appear in Hitler's
Politisches Testament : Die Bormann Diktate vom
Februar und April 1945, edited by the late Hugh
Trevor-Roper. continued
below jacket image David
Irving comments: I SEE that the
ineffable Oliver Kamm -- although I
can effortlessly think up a number of
"f"-epithets to describe him -- happily
quotes from the fake Hitler's Political
Testament of April 2, 1945 which
Francois
Genoud himself admitted to me he himself
had faked. This document was
-- wisely -- not produced by Lipstadt's
equally ineffable defence lawyers, because
they knew I would make short work of
it. The only two documents
which they produced of which I was
inclined to doubt the authenticity were
the Bischoff
document, a document bristling
with anomalies and unknowns, giving
incredible figures for the capacity of the
crematoria at Auschwitz (some of which
were in fact out of service); and the
Müller
document of August 1, 1941. When challenged by me as
to the provenance of this latter document,
a rare piece of evidentiary fauna, a
Moscow-originated slug which neither left
nor followed any paper trail, they cited a
Bundesarchiv file; the Bundesarchiv
confirmed to me within 24 hours, that the
file cited did not contain
it. Kamm:
An unthinkable rubber dick? |
One of the many damning features of The
Irving Judgment concerns "Irving's readiness to
challenge the authenticity of inconvenient
documents and the credibility of apparently
credible witnesses" (paragraphs 13.148-13.150, pp.
342-3). Mr Justice Gray declares: I
accept that it is necessary for historians, not
least historians of the Nazi era, to be on their
guard against documents which are forged or
otherwise inauthentic. But it appeared to me
that in the course of these proceedings Irving
challenged the authenticity of certain
documents, not because there was any substantial
reason for doubting their genuineness but
because they did not fit in with his
thesis. There are thus no prizes to my other readers for
guessing how Irving deals with the documentary
evidence I have just quoted. Not long ago Mr Irving
urged his tiny band to write to me and the editor
of The Times to complain about the injustice
of a brief reference to him in an article of mine
about the late Kurt Vonnegut. If he wishes
to complain again, I can assure him he will have my
undivided inattention. -
David
Irving's Books
-
Our dossier on The Board of Deputies of British
Jews
-
-
Traditional
enemies shocked, awed, as The Guardian reports:
David
Irving plans a
comeback
(interview)
-
Gerald
Gable's criminal vendetta against Mr Irving
began when the historian caught him burgling his
apartment in 1963
-
Mr Irving's diary of his visit to
Auschwitz
-
Mr
Irving's diary of his visit to the three
Reinhardt camps, Sobibor, Belzec and
Treblinka
|