A Jewish website ran an interesting (and telling) poll asking:
"Does author Deborah Lipstadt's legal victory Tuesday over Holocaust denier David Irving mean that Holocaust denial is behind us for good?"
Here are the replies - (and please remember: the person did not know how to round off decimals):
Yes 4% (26 Votes)
No 90% (477 Votes)
Don't know 4% (23 Votes)
(Source: http://www.virtualjerusalem.com/channels/interact/)
Indeed it isn't over. In fact, the struggle has barely begun.
From David Irving we have this, apparently to a supporter:
No change.
Life goes on here as normal. Thanks for the kind thoughts.
I am fighting an appeal shortly.
The press coverage has been immense -- whole front pages and whole inside pages of the main broadsheets of newspapers around the world -- and not entirely hostile.
In fact, there have been the warmest tributes to my work in "The Daily Telegraph," "The Times" and other broadsheet newspapers.
I am staggered.
Wall-to-wall live radio and television interviews. That is the best.
Your kind remarks were much appreciated.
Perhaps some can consider repeating gestures of support in a letter to local or national newspapers.
I (am) now back in London with my family.
On the David Irving home page he has posted a few quotes from the Verdict:
What your newspaper may not have quoted from the Judgment.
Judge Gray said
On "Irving the historian":
13.7 My assessment is that, as a military historian, Irving has much to commend him. For his works of military history Irving has undertaken thorough and painstaking research into the archives. He has discovered and disclosed to historians and others many documents which, but for his efforts, might have remained unnoticed for years. It was plain from the way in which he conducted his case and dealt with a sustained and penetrating cross-examination that his knowledge of World War 2 is unparalleled. His mastery of the detail of the historical documents is remarkable. He is beyond question able and intelligent. He was invariably quick to spot the significance of documents which he had not previously seen. Moreover he writes his military history in a clear and vivid style. I accept the favourable assessment by Professor Watt and Sir John Keegan of the calibre of Irving's military history (mentioned in paragraph 3.4 above) and reject as too sweeping the negative assessment of Evans (quoted in paragraph 3.5).
13.8 But the questions to which this action has given rise do not relate to the quality of Irving's military history but rather to the manner in which he has written about the attitude adopted by Hitler towards the Jews and in particular his responsibility for the fate which befell them under the Nazi regime.
and
The scale of the killing of Jews in the gas chambers
13.71 I have to confess that, in common I suspect with most other people, I had supposed that the evidence of mass extermination of Jews in the gas chambers at Auschwitz was compelling. I have, however, set aside this preconception when assessing the evidence adduced by the parties in these proceedings. [...]
The documentary evidence
13.75 Vulnerable though the individual categories of evidence may be to criticisms of the kind mentioned in the preceding paragraphs, it appears to me that the cumulative effect of the documentary evidence for the genocidal operation of gas chambers at Auschwitz is considerable.
Michael Berenbaum, Professor of Holocaust Studies at Clark University in Massachusetts, said it is important for the court to help set professional standards for historians.
<<http://jta.virtualjerusalem.com/index.exe?pol>
To that, we say: Since when?
Zundelsite readers reacted as follows:
* "Irving endure(d) decades of an orchestrated Jewish hate campaign...and it is somehow improper for him to speak in forums of those that oppose his self appointed enemies...without 'hurting' his image. That is really a hoot!!!"
=====
* "People who poo-poohed tons of bookish information will presently stop when they see a single newspaper title or five seconds of prime time on TV. (...) They seem to ask 'what? are real people denying the "Holocaust" too?!' Real people to them is faces on TV, not the fellow working on the next office.
"Last week, the Leuchter movie made four entire pages in the second largest weekly paper around here, but the articles were awful. Nevertheless people ask about that too. It does mention 'Leuchter's crazy denial of the gas chambers' in several paragraphs and subtitles." (This one came from Portugal!)
=====
* "Lipstadt prevailed because they portrayed David as 'politically incorrect,' and the judge wants to continue his profession - however contrary to English jurisprudence his decisions may be."
=====
* "Gray starts out saying he is no historian and unfit to make judgements about facts of history, and that history should be left to the historians. Then Gray in completely contradictory manner determines that Irving has consistantly and deliberately twisted and distorted history. Gray's ruling on this matter should be overturned because Gray starts out by disqualifying himself to make such a ruling."
=====
* "Revisionists must focus on exactly what happened here and what didn't happen. What didn't happen is that the court did NOT find that 'the Holocaust' stories were proven. The court made it clear that that was not the issue.
"The court found that Lipstadt did indeed defame Irving but that she was justified in doing so. There is no rule of law, logic or morality that says we have to agree with that finding."
=====
* " I doubt seriously that there will be a clear-cut winner but the Zionists lose regardless, as more people begin to try to find out what it was all about."
=====
Thought for the Day:
"Truly there is a tide in the affairs of men, but there is no gulf stream setting forever in one direction."
(James Russell Lowell)