The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: people/i/irving.david/press/irving-vrs-lipstadt/Press_Summary.000321



(Friend of Deborah) exits trial believing Irving is one to =91beware'

By Rela Mintz Geffen

LONDON, March 21 (JTA) =97 It is the Ides of March and the week before=
We know who Agag, King of Amalek =97 the enemy of the Jews =97 is, but are=
sure who should beware.

As an FOD (Friend of Deborah Lipstadt) I sit in the British courtroom on
March 15 and watch the expressions on her face as her career and her
scholarship are taken apart by David Irving.

She is described both as a powerful Queen Bee manipulating drones all over
the world =97 including JTA, the ADL, the Board of Deputies of British Jewry
and the governments of several countries =97 and in the next moment as a
little lamb who was "led astray" by Yehuda Bauer, director of Yad Vashem.

I have checked, and David Irving is mentioned on just 16 of the 278 pages of
Lipstadt's "Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory,"
the book that prompted his lawsuit. If one never looked at the book and just
listened to his ranting, one would think that a personal critique of his
oeuvre and the destruction of his livelihood is the main focus of Lipstadt's

Deborah is by turns incredulous, amused, angry and impassive. From time to
time, she taps the keys of her laptop, eyes intent on the small screen. As
always during the formal proceedings, she is silent. Her voice is not heard
and her name is not mentioned in the official trial listings.

The case is labeled Irving vs. Penguin & anr. She has been reduced to
"another" or, at other times, "the second defendant." This silence is very
difficult for her and it is infuriating to Irving, who constantly berates
her for not appearing in the witness box in her own defense.

But Deborah will not even give the appearance of debating a denier.
Cross-examination by Irving would have put her in the position of responding
to him on a one-to-one basis, suggesting that they have differing but
equally legitimate versions of history. Her scholarship will have to stand
on its own.

Richard Rampton, Deborah's attorney, speaks eloquently for just about an
hour before midday. Then, before the lunch break, Irving begins what is to
be a nearly five-hour presentation.

The break is spent by most of the non-press spectators standing in line to
assure entrance for the afternoon session. They discuss the trial. An
attractive middle-aged blond woman whispers to me, "Who are you for?
Irving?" Then quickly, "You don't have to say."

I reply, "I am Deborah's friend."

"Oh good," she replies. "I'm behind her too =97 and so are the old soldiers,
they were there, they saw the camps and can't believe the case was even
accepted for trial!" I'm not as sanguine that so many are behind Deborah.

With the exception of the judge, all of the principal participants =97 the
attorneys, the clerks, the researchers and the parties to the case =97 have=
pass through the throng to enter the courtroom. So we see them all "up close
and personal."

Asking someone to save my place, I go to the Ladies Room just as Mr. Irving
is coming out of the "Gents." I am silent. What could I say?

Court resumes. David Irving continues reading his 100-plus page closing
argument. The judge had urged him to summarize, but Irving hews closely to
the text that was distributed =97 only skipping a paragraph here and there.

Then, nearly two hours into Irving's presentation comes the most dramatic
moment of the day. Irving departs from his prepared speech. In the midst of
refuting the defense contention that he is a neo-Nazi, illustrated early on
in the trial by a video in which he is shown addressing a rally where young
men begin to chant "Sieg Heil," Irving turns to the judge, addressing him

He says, "They shouted, =91Sieg Heil, Sieg Heil' " =97 and then instead of
saying "my Lord," he calls the judge "Mein Fuhrer."

There is a collective gasp, then a ripple of laughter. Someone tells us
later that the judge laughed out loud. I happened to be watching Rampton,
Deborah's attorney. His face rapidly registered incredulity, astonishment,
wry amusement and finally satisfaction.

No one could believe what had just happened. Had we imagined it? Could he
actually have addressed a British judge as "Mein Fuhrer?" Without a pause or
change of inflection, Irving goes on with his speech as though nothing
untoward has happened.

Later, Anthony Julius, Deborah's brilliant solicitor, believes that either
Irving wasn't even aware of what he had said or just held himself under
rigid control.

Irving has contended all along that he does not deny the Holocaust. But he
spends the last hour and a half of his peroration "proving" in excruciating
detail that the gas chambers at Auschwitz were air raid shelters for the SS
that happened to be built over a mortuary. He even repeats his horrifying
statement that more women died in the back seat of Kennedy's car at
Chappaquidick than in gas chambers at Auschwitz. In other words, he repeats
the denial in its crudist form. Doesn't he realize what he is saying?

It is over. I agree to meet Deborah and close friends of hers from Atlanta
at a dinner sponsored by a Jewish organization at a kosher restaurant in
Golders Green where Anthony Julius will speak about Holocaust denial.
Feeling like a very official FOD, I find myself at a table with Deborah,
Anthony Julius and his family, and others.

Asked about the importance of the trial, Anthony Julius declines to
speculate on the view of history. After all, he notes, if one had asked
about the most difficult place for Jews at the end of the 19th century, one
would have cited France after Alfred Dreyfus, the military officer wrongly
convicted of treason.

As to more immediate gains, he clearly takes pride in having defended
Deborah Lipstadt and her work; the honor of historians from those who
besmirch it; and litigating the Holocaust for the first time in England as
first generation witnesses fade away and there is a resurgence of neo-Nazi
activity in Europe.

Finally, he says, it shows a side of British Jewry that is often hidden. As
he puts it, "We don't look for a fight but if it comes to us, we will do=

The whole extraordinary defense team has "done it" for four years. Now their
work is completed and the decision is up to the judge, who has promised a
speedy opinion. Deborah Lipstadt's work reminds us, as the Torah does in its
passage about Amalek, of the importance of memory.

In my opinion, it is David Irving and his ilk who should beware.

Rela Mintz Geffen, a professor of sociology at Gratz College in Melrose
Park, Pa, attended much of the London trial as a show of support for her

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012

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.