AAARGH
The Atlanta Constitution, which is the major paper in prof. Lipstadt's home town of Atlanta, says developments in the trial have not warranted coverage by the paper since the first week. The editor's response to a reader's complaint about the lack of news coverage in the paper about the trial is included below. There are no other new media reports as of 0630 MST 02.14.00.
Colin Bessonette - Staff Monday http://www.accessatlanta.com/partners/ajc/epaper/editions/today/news_19.html
Q: An author in Britain named Irving sued an Emory professor and her publisher for calling him a "Holocaust revisionist." The trial was covered extensively for some days, then disappeared from the news. What's the status of that? --- Ruby Saks, Norcross A: The trial of historical writer David Irving's libel lawsuit against Emory University professor Deborah Lipstadt ended its fifth week Thursday. It is expected to continue until late March. The defense has been presenting a series of witnesses to challenge Irving's merits as a historian, and to attack his honesty as a writer. Under English libel law, attorneys representing Lipstadt and her publisher, Penguin Press, must prove the truth of assertions contained in a book by Lipstadt that Irving denied conventional accounts of the Holocaust and manipulated historical facts to support his position. Lipstadt's book, "Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory," was published in Britain in 1994. Irving says the book misrepresented his position, damaged his reputation, and generated waves of hatred against him. Lipstadt's lawyers accuse him of being a liar and a falsifier of history. Journal-Constitution correspondent Bert Roughton Jr., who is based in London, is following the trial and will continue to report on it when developments warrant coverage. ###
Press Association Newsfile, February 14, 2000
Cathy Gordon, PA News.
Historian David Irving today rejected an accusation that he placed a faith in the reliability of oral testimony given to him by Hitler's former aides that was "almost entirely uncritical". The author, who denies distorting history to exonerate Hitler, told the Holocaust libel trial at the High Court that on "numerous occasions" he had persuaded those he interviewed "to reveal to me matters which were against their interest or against that of Hitler" and had not concealed that information. Mr Irving, who is representing himself in his damages action at London's Law Courts over a claim that he is a "Holocaust denier", was answering one of the criticisms of him contained in a 740-page report before the court by top academic Richard Evans, professor of modern history at Cambridge University. Cross-examining Professor Evans, who has been called as an expert for the defence by author Deborah Lipstadt and Penguin Books, Mr Irving put to the witness that he was accusing him of "gullibility in falling for what they told me". Professor Evans, who says he does not regard Mr Irving as a "reputable historian", replied: "I wouldn't accuse you of being gullible Mr Irving." In his report, Professor Evans states that Mr Irving makes "massive use of oral testimony" and, in particular, had over the years "interviewed a large number of Hitler's former aides and other leading former Nazis, and he places, as this report will demonstrate repeatedly and in detail, a faith in the reliability of their testimony that is almost entirely uncritical". It was in the interest of former Nazis of all kinds, he wrote: "to deny all knowledge of, let alone participation in, the crimes of Nazism, including the extermination of the Jews". Professor Evans said that if they had an incentive to avoid implicating themselves before a court: "they had a motive for persuading Irving to be their mouthpiece in continuing their personal quest for public exculpation at a later date". He added: "Their testimony has to be subjected to particularly searching critical scrutiny. The need for a critical attitude is borne out by the evidence of the memoirs that many of them published - self-serving, mendacious, dishonest and designed to minimise their own involvement in the crimes of Nazism. "This report will examine many examples of this kind of evidence, much of it relied on by Irving in an entirely uncritical way." Mr Irving claimed that Professor Evans had made: "an over-hasty rush to judgment on me which is not borne out by the evidence". Professor Evans said he did not deny the fact that Mr Irving had obtained "a great deal of material" which others had not, and that his interviews with former members of Hitler's staff "have contributed in some way to historical knowledge". The author of Hitler's War is suing Professor Lipstadt and Penguin over her 1994 book, Denying The Holocaust: The Growing Assault On Truth And Memory, which he says has generated waves of hatred against him. The defendants, who deny libel, have accused Mr Irving, 62, of Duke Street, Mayfair, central London, of being a liar and falsifier of history.
http://news2.thls.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid%5F642000/642724.stm
David Irving is defending himself at the High Court Historian David Irving has denied claims that he placed too much faith in Nazi accounts of World War II. In his continuing libel trial at the High Court, Mr Irving insisted that before conducting interviews with senior Nazi figures, he had persuaded them to be frank enough to reveal information even if it was against their interests, or those of Hitler. Mr Irving is suing author Deborah Lipstadt and Penguin Books over a claim that he is a "Holocaust denier". He insists on "numerous occasions", he persuaded Hitler's former aides and other leading Nazis to reveal full details of what had happened. Mr Irving's comments came as he cross-examined a defence witness, Professor Richard Evans, who states in a 740-page report to the court that Mr Irving placed an "almost entirely uncritical" faith in the details supplied by his Nazi interviewees. It was in the interest of former Nazis of all kinds, he wrote: "to deny all knowledge of, let alone participation in, the crimes of Nazism, including the extermination of the Jews". "They had a motive for persuading Irving to be their mouthpiece in continuing their personal quest for public exculpation at a later date". Mr Irving put it to the witness that he was accusing him of "gullibility in falling for what they told me". Rush to judgement Professor Evans, who says he does not regard Mr Irving as a "reputable historian", replied: "I wouldn't accuse you of being gullible Mr Irving." Mr Irving claimed that Professor Evans had made "an over-hasty rush to judgement on me which is not borne out by the evidence". Professor Evans said he did not deny the fact that Mr Irving had obtained "a great deal of material" which others had not, and that his interviews with former members of Hitler's staff "have contributed in some way to historical knowledge". The defendants, who deny libel, have accused Mr Irving, 62, of being a liar and falsifier of history. The hearing was adjourned and is expected to last for several months. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Extracted from Nizkor, people/i/irving.david/press/irving-vrs-lipstadt/Press_Summary.000214
Ce texte a été affiché sur Internet à des fins purement éducatives, pour encourager la recherche, sur une base non-commerciale et pour une utilisation mesurée par le Secrétariat international de l'Association des Anciens Amateurs de Récits de Guerre et d'Holocauste (AAARGH). L'adresse électronique du Secrétariat est <aaarghinternational@hotmail.com>. L'adresse postale est: PO Box 81475, Chicago, IL 60681-0475, USA.
Afficher un texte sur le Web équivaut à mettre un document sur le rayonnage d'une bibliothèque publique. Cela nous coûte un peu d'argent et de travail. Nous pensons que c'est le lecteur volontaire qui en profite et nous le supposons capable de penser par lui-même. Un lecteur qui va chercher un document sur le Web le fait toujours à ses risques et périls. Quant à l'auteur, il n'y a pas lieu de supposer qu'il partage la responsabilité des autres textes consultables sur ce site. En raison des lois qui instituent une censure spécifique dans certains pays (Allemagne, France, Israël, Suisse, Canada, et d'autres), nous ne demandons pas l'agrément des auteurs qui y vivent car ils ne sont pas libres de consentir.
Nous nous plaçons sous
la protection de l'article 19 de la Déclaration des Droits
de l'homme, qui stipule:
ARTICLE 19
<Tout individu a droit à la liberté d'opinion
et d'expression, ce qui implique le droit de ne pas être
inquiété pour ses opinions et celui de chercher,
de recevoir et de répandre, sans considération de
frontière, les informations et les idées par quelque
moyen d'expression que ce soit>
Déclaration internationale des droits de l'homme,
adoptée par l'Assemblée générale de
l'ONU à Paris, le 10 décembre 1948.
You found this document at: <http://aaargh-international.org.fran/polpen/dirving/di000214.html>