"On October 26, 1992".
In fact the only relevant crossing
was that by David Irving into Canada on October 30,
1992 (at the Douglas, British Columbia / Blaine,
"The most significant
"At considerable expense"
Brian Fisher did not give David
Irving a figure, but he clearly regarded the Kujau
engravings as an investment. Fisher said in court
DM300 (£100); Irving believes that Fisher
clearly meant DM300 each, not for all fifty.
"In return for his help"
There was no talk of this until Fisher was
driving Mr Irving in his car toward the Tsawassen
ferry to Victoria, BC. Fisher then asked if Mr
Irving would be willing to go to the USA briefly
with him, and Mr Irving had to agree.
[Confirmed by the affidavit
sworn by Fisher.] No evidence of his striking
any such bargain as Thomson averred here was
produced before the hearing.
"You testified ... [to]
... crossing between 10:15 and 10:30 p.m."
Comment: these times are correct. Mr Irving
admits that his later references to "11 p.m." were
muddled, not surprising after a night in jail.
"U S Immigration officer"
He has now been identified as Mr George Jackson.
"No stamp was placed in your passport" [by
the US Immigration officer].
Nor was one needed, because the US
form I-94 was still pinned to the passport's page,
indicating that Mr Irving was only making a side
trip to Canada from the USA, which he had entered
on October 8 at Los Angeles International airport.
The I-94 was torn out of the passport on November
1, when renewed entry was denied to him
[because of the fake data that somebody had
planted on the US Immigration & Naturalisation
Service mainframe computer to that
"You proceeded to Mr Fisher's home "
Thomson does not mention that in
his testimony (not heard by Douglas Christie), Mr
Irving had been able to give the court
spontaneously the most detailed account of the road
journey from the ferry to the border and through it
to Blaine, together with the stricter speed
regulations on the US side, the remarks by Fisher
with the US Immigration official on the border,
a description of Fisher's fiancée Helga and
their home, the main security gate, the garden, the
garage, their wide screen television, etc., none of
which Mr Irving had seen before (or since).
"watched the Canadian news"
Only one Canadian channel was available on their
cable company at Blaine.
Correct: Sonya Koppe
"You testified that this was at 11:15 p.m."
Since Thompson makes this
discrepancy in time his only surviving reason for
calling Mr Irving and all his witnesses perjurers,
Mr Irving emphasises: the statutory declaration of
Tartaglia (of Canadian Immigration) showed that he
was arrested at three a.m., November 2; his
typewriter was locked up at 3:15 a.m. it was after
four a.m. before they had finished inventorying the
contents of his three suitcases in his presence. He
was awakened in his cell at the statutory 6:30 a.m.
for breakfast and the Immigration Hearing (still
November 2). I.e., after an exhausting Sunday
November 1, Mr Irving had had just two hours' sleep
and was now faced with examination in a public
deportation hearing. It was perhaps a miracle that
he got so many times and facts right, as he tried
to reconstruct the events of October 30 under
"A telephone call to Mr Paul Norris"
Note that the diary entry typed
by Mr Irving into his typewriter's electronic
memory two days before his arrest timed this second
call "at one a.m." It in fact is recorded as having
been 1:18 a.m. (EST).
"Signed the fifty lithographs"
Fisher had phoned Helga ahead
from the home of Douglas Christie on the afternoon,
as Mr Irving collected his belongings, to ask Helga
to get the four framed lithos out of their frames
ready for Mr Irving to sign when they arrived later
on US soil that evening. Fisher, who flew 3,000
miles from Vancouver to Toronto to give evidence,
produced some of the lithographs signed by Mr
Irving to Thomson in court to substantiate the
whole episode. This, like all the other concrete
evidence that Mr Irving had told the truth, was
ignored by this obedient civil servant.
"Where you met with Sandra [sic]
Thomson does not mention that
precisely this rendezvous was what had been
arranged by Mr Irving's late night phone call to
Sonya Koppe from Brian Fisher's house on US
Again, Mr Irving's memory was at
fault. Not surprising under the circumstances.
"At 23:20 hours"
Mr Irving had until midnight to
leave Canada voluntarily, by agreement (after which
he was free to return). If the time was really
11:20 p.m., he was still legally in Canada. Why
therefore did the officers detain him? The Canadian
officer at the Whirlpool Bridge crossing said that
he had to go up river to the Rainbow Bridge, "Where
they are expecting you?" (His precise words). Mr
Irving asked to do so, but the officer then told
him: "You can only go there via the US" (which was
of course a lie) and he sent him back over the
bridge -- making him buy a second toll-ticket -- to
the US end of the Whirlpool Bridge. Evidently his
attempt to leave via the Whirlpool Bridge had upset
something that had been pre-arranged at the Rainbow
Bridge, where he had earlier announced he would
cross. At the US end of the bridge, Mr Irving was
delayed on a pretext until five minutes after
midnight, then returned to the Canadian end with
the message, "There are some problems with the
papers that can only be sorted out in the morning."
There was much telephoning across the bridge in the
meanwhile, as Mr Irving could hear.
"As for the issue"
Is this issue relevant? Probably not.
Precisely. Not definitely.
"You were provided with
But Mr Irving challenged the word
"And may become"
Note: not, "And will become."
"You were not free ... to return as an ordinary
On the contrary, the Adjudicator
at the October 30 hearing in Vancouver specifically
told Mr Irving that subsequent to having complied
with the Voluntary Departure notice, he was "free
to re-enter Canada" as often as he pleased. That is
the law. Precisely this was the outcome which the
Traditional Enemies of the Truth were angry
"Much to do"
Why not? They were claiming the document was
"It is the same form issued to
persons under a Removal Order."
The significance of this remark is not
This paragraph goes to Mr
Irving's state of mind
The following paragraph however relies on
Immigration's State of Mind, to refute it!
"There is no mention"
Not by Murray Wilkinson in his
Statutory Declaration, no. But it was precisely to
enable me to depart at Niagara Falls that he agreed
to let me have forty-eight hours, instead of say
four hours to get out. Mr Irving had to have time
to get to the city of Victoria, via the ferry; then
fly across three thousand miles to Toronto; then
drive to the Niagara Falls cross. This was the
bargain he had struck with Canada. And, as the
Canadian Official at the Whirlpool Bridge had told
him, they could not let him cross there, "They are
expecting you at the Rainbow Bridge," a mile
"Why would immigration officials
care where you left Canada...?"
"interim departure" "confirm ...
But this is nowhere stated in the law, nor in
the documents, nor elsewhere.
Thomson omits the testimony
"testified ... occurred exactly
as you described"
Testified? Where did Mr Irving so testify?
"Exactly" or otherwise.
If Thomson's errors are disregarded, the
evidence does coincide, precisely.
discrepancies and inconsistencies"
This "several" (next page "four") is however
reduced in fact to one, namely that Mr Irving
mistakenly said eleven p.m. from memory, instead of
"Mr Fisher testified"
Mr Fisher did not so testify. He
did not admittedly testify very coherently
sometimes. But he clearly could not have given the
testimony Thomson alleges.
"You met Sandra Koppe"
This is precisely what Sonya Koppe
confirmed in her sworn affidavit. The fact that
Fisher also "described" this meeting, as Thomson
continues, confirms of course that he witnessed it
and had not returned at once to the USA.
To put a benevolent
interpretation on Thomson's remarks, although he
was an Immigration Adjudicator presiding over the
personal fates of visitors to Canada, he seems
remarkably ignorant of the fact that 03:11 Pacific
time is 00:11 a.m. Eastern Standard time, the
Washington time zone on which US computers are run
(as their officials later confirmed to Brian
Fisher and to Mr Irving's lawyers).
"This is significant"
"The fourth contradiction"
Not at all. See above.
"When you testified ... around
Mr Irving's memory had had only two hours'
sleep, in an immigration holding cell, when he made
this minor error.
"You testified you were
Again: Mr Irving's memory had had only two
hours' sleep, in an immigration holding cell, when
he made this minor error.
"Until 11:15 p.m."
Again: Mr Irving's memory had had
only two hours' sleep, in an immigration holding
cell, when he made this minor error.
"Improbable lapses in procedure"
No evidence was given as to the
proper passport procedure when people make brief
cross-border visits between Canada and the USA. To
all accounts, it is very informal and lax; it
certainly seemed so to Mr Irving that night of
"Your name and case was
[sic] the subject of local media
No evidence was given to this effect, nor did
the Canadian officials so testify in their
"Contradicts your testimony"
Once again: Mr Irving's memory
had had only two hours' sleep, in an immigration
holding cell, when he made this minor error. But
Sonya Koppe's statement confirmed precisely ("10:45
p.m.", "10:43 p.m.") Fisher's telephone billing,
which was provided by Pacific Bell after she swore
"At 12:45 p.m."
An error in drafting. It should
of course have been 11:45 p.m. as the as the timing
of the rendezvous with Sonya Koppe (11:43 p.m.)
You testified ... 11:15 p.m.
Thomson is making the same old
hay. Mr Irving had had only two hours' sleep, in an
immigration holding cell, when he made this minor
error reciting events from memory.
"You were the source of the information"
Of Heinz Koppe, Sonya Koppe and
Joyce Chen. True, but why should Mr Irving have
lied to them on October 30, if he had no
expectation whatever that he would be needing an
alibi like this two days' later?
"It does not show any entry"
True, but Murray Wilkinson did
not claim in his attached declaration that it was a
complete record of all the car's
crossings. Brian Fisher pointed out that it also
omitted other crossings he had made.
"I find it difficult to believe."
As said, Mr Irving's passport had
a valid US INS I-94 form pinned inside it,
whereupon any US immigration officer would know he
was returning from a brief side-trip and would not
bother with formalities.
"US Immigration officials had an interest in you
which I believe is confirmed..."
Thomson produced no proof of this
allegation. The whole uproar was ignored by the US
press and media. The US official at the Whirlpool
Bridge, Mr Howe, said to Mr Irving, evidently
acting innocently on instructions from the Canadian
end of the bridge, "Come back tomorrow morning
after you have sorted out your papers with the
"A lookout was placed concerning
you ... [It] contained a photograph of you.
The lookout notice stipulated that you were to be
referred to Immigration Secondary..."
No evidence was introduced to this effect.
Either Thomson misread, or he was using privileged
information not shown to Mr Irving and his lawyers.
The only photograph introduced was one from a
newspaper, of Mr Irving wearing spectacles (which
he does not wear except for reading).
"Told the officers"
Mr Irving did not speak at all with Tufford.
As stated, Mr Irving did not speak at all with
"Not wearing a uniform"
Mr Irving did not mention
uniform, merely that British immigration officers
adhered to a "dress code" which Musetescu -- pony
tail, T-shirt, jeans --clearly did not.
"Showed you his badge"
This Mr Irving adamantly
contested, calling Musetescu a liar and a perjurer.
Why should he then have had to ask Mr Norris to
challenge him to show a badge of office and other
ID? Norris's testimony, which exposed Officer
Musetescu as a fraudulent and liar, was not
mentioned by Thomson at all. Mustescu was
subsequently shown up by Internal Canada
Immigration and security service investigations for
what he is, and expelled from the Immigration
"Upon return to the lecture room"
Thomson again confused the times.
Irving's meeting with Musetescu was around three
p.m. Norris was at the airport, shipping books off
to Calgary, and returned to the hall at four-thirty
p.m., when Mr Irving at once instructed him to ask
Musetescu to produce any ID to substantiate his
unlikely claim to be an Immigration officer. See Mr
Irving's verbatim remarks on learning about these
"officers," in his speech a few minutes later
(link). His speech clearly shows his apprehension
that the officers were up to dirty tricks.
Norris did not use the word, nor
did Mr Irving, since they had neither of them seen
any credentials to "confirm". The word "confirm" is
"You again asked"
This was Musetescu's allegation. Mr Irving
denied it, and so did Norris, both on oath. This
demand by Mr Irving to Musetescu, to see his badge
(for the first time), was made in the lift, as they
departed from the hotel's top floor at around six
"No reasonable explanation"
This is not true. I had testified
to being raided by Jewish terrorists in London
disguised as Telecom engineers (link) complete with
ID cards. Of course Mr Irving had also been
attacked by Jewish thugs, he had seen printing
works burned down (by Manny Carpel) and he had told
the press that he would not put it past the same
opponents to use dirty tricks to stop him from
departing from Canada before that night's deadline,
thus earning him a mandatory Deportation Order
(precisely as subsequently happened).
McCaffrey, Musetescu, etc., of
course were never "confrontational" to me: who was
holding whom in handcuffs and a jail cell?
to top of Page|