Unless correspondents ask us not to, this Website will post selected letters that it receives and invite open debate.
A writer (identity known to us) is curious (Sunday, March 24, 2002) about David Irving's alleged "distortions" of history
How wrong were you?
THE Christopher Hitchens article really is an excellent bit of writing -- in style as well as in content. The Daughter of Time analogy was a master-stroke (as well as the exquisite bit of sarcasm you referred to. Very satisfactory from your point of view as well.
I don't by any means agree with all he said, but one could see that he has really taken the trouble to think his position through thoroughly and conscientiously.
Main purpose of this e-mail: Is there a place on your website where your dozen or so historical errors, and alleged historical errors in your entire output, are collected together and commented on by you? If so, I should be grateful if you would direct me to it, since I find myself defending you against the charge of being a dishonest historian [. . .].
Bookmark the download page to find the latest new free books
David Irving replies:
I have not yet had time to put these ripostes on my website, but I did prepare a lengthy (322 page 24 MB) pdf file of rebuttals for our Counsel, which dealt (or began to deal) with most of them. We were not permitted to tackle them at appeal however. Suffice it to say that Prof. Richard ("Skunk") Evans was grossly dishonest in his expert report for the defence -- for example he omitted one line of statistics in the 1933 Jewish "insurance fraud" figures which proved that I was totally right and he was wrong.