David Irving |
Documents on the International Campaign for Real History
Posted Wednesday, November 5, 2008
© Focal Point 2008
Later, of course, we found out how much he was paid for defaming me on oath
November 4, 2008 (Tuesday)
Windsor - London - Windsor (England)I SET out via Eton for London at three pm. Great difficulty parking at the Aldwych with the pay-by-phone system. Into King's College Liddell Hart archives for the first time in over twenty-five years, with Jaenelle. Chat there with two ladies about US universities' acquisitions policy.
Jaenelle has her long blonde hair carefully gathered into a queue; she looks like a ripe plum in her city suit, which fits her like a glove. We stroll down the Strand and sit in the gathering darkness outside a café for half an hour watching passers-by hurrying homewards at five-thirty pm.
At six-fifteen pm we are in the Sheikh Zayed Hall -- a sign of the times, that -- at the London School of Economics in Kingsway; the woman guarding the LSE main entrance spots me, and as we go down the stairs I glance back. She is calling over a man and pointing at us. So what; unless they decide to do what Deborah Lipstadt did in Atlanta in 1995, when she tried to have me evicted by armed campus police after I loudly offered her $1,000 (I waved the greenbacks in the air) if she could produce the "gas-chamber blueprint" which she had just told her audience of gullible students that she had.
After a while there are slow handclaps and booing. The speaker, Professor Richard "Skunky" Evans, right, has still not arrived by 6:45 pm. Unpunctuality, the worst discourtesy. Dr Gerhard Frey once docked 1,000 deutschmarks (around $500) from my fee for not arriving at a meeting in Erfurt on time.
Eventually Evans comes scuttling in, to begin his talk twenty minutes after the appointed hour. His face is pinched and scowling, and he is clutching a canvas hold-all, its broad khaki strap strung across his opposite shoulder, like an elderly American tourist nervous that somebody may snatch her bag.
A brief introduction by the lady chairman mentions his previous works. He himself hesitates as he continues rehearsing his list of accomplishments, and when he reaches his appointment as chief expert witness in "a major libel action" it seems he has decided, in the circumstances of my presence, against including the name of the Plaintiff.
In a flash I am transported back to February 18, 2000, the first day of the long cross examination to which I subjected him in the High Court, during which he earned the nickname "Skunky" for the way he poured bile over the names of the greatest historians of the age who had praised my research and writings for thirty years. They were all negligent, lazy, or incompetent in his view.
After lunch that day, I challenged him on his obvious lack of neutrality -- a quality required of all expert witnesses.
- David Irving: . . . Very well. We can move straight on to the next question. You do not like me, do you?
- Professor Evans: I have no personal feelings about you at all, Mr Irving.
- David Irving: I think we have seen this morning and from a number of your remarks that you dislike what I write, you dislike what I stand for, you dislike what you perceive my views to be. Is this correct?
- Professor Evans: I do not have any person feelings at all. I was simply asked to write a report, which I have done, about your writings and speeches.
David Irving: Well ----
- Professor Evans: I have tried to be as objective as possible.
- David Irving: Yes of course.
- Professor Evans: And to leave any personal feelings I might possibly have out of it.
- David Irving: There are a number of remarks which are now a matter of record on this morning's transcript, which indicate that you hold strong personal views which are antipathetic towards me.
- Professor Evans: Such as?
- David Irving: Well, they are a matter of record and I am sure that the court is familiar with them and this is why there was a rather astonished chuckle when you said that you held no views about me from those who had been listening to you this morning. You are aware of the fact of course, having written an expert report, that you have a duty to impartiality?
- Professor Evans: Absolutely. That is described in the last paragraph of my report.
- David Irving: Professor Evans: : Precisely. I was beginning to express astonishment of that fact and that is why I asked the question because I had the impression from this morning's answers to the questions that you were averse to answering questions and that you held something bordering between distaste and loathing towards me and the books I write or the views that you perceive me to hold?
[see Transcript Day 18, February 10, 2000]
To all the above Evans testified on oath. Months later, when his appropriately titled book, Telling Lies about Hitler, was published, which he had been actually writing during the trial, we found that he had nonchalantly written that he and his colleagues all felt that by my very presence I "defiled" every room I was in. So much for his neutrality. Richard Evans: A skunk and perjurer, with all that that implies.
Later, of course, we found out how much he was paid for defaming me on oath: a quarter of a million pounds up to the time of the appeal and -- as we learned only a year or so after that -- a secret million-pound deal signed with Lipstadt's co-defendant, Penguin Books Ltd, for a trilogy on the Third Reich (which he tonight singularly calls a try-logy). He dashed this off in the short time since the trial.
If we wonder which suffered -- his academic work or his research for the book -- his talk this evening gives us several clues. For example, he tells his audience that the great RAF raids on Hamburg which killed fifty thousand began in August 1943 (every real Third Reich historian knows that the raids were in July 1943, Hitler's mens horribilis).
His talk is a hodgepodge of chit-chat, based entirely on published volumes: he is the archetypical historian sitting in his book-lined cave, plundering the brainwork of others. As question time comes, I toy with asking him this: "Professor Evans, you have clearly read many books while writing this history. Have you spoken with any of the principals involved?"
Then I decide not to. It is clear that I will not catch the eye of the lady chairman. Besides, she has introduced an odd method of taking two or three questions from the floor at a time before asking him to answer.
I leave a few minutes before the end, and a number of old friends come up to me outside before we drive over to the West End for supper with Jessica. She ... is happy to be back with all her friends at school after two weeks of grim half term holiday. She does not seem to have internalised what must be inevitably approaching.
November 4, 2008 (Wednesday)
Windsor (England)Up early. I go online: "In a huge win, Barack Obama was elected the 44th president of the United States Tuesday. The 47-year-old Illinois senator won a string of battleground states that included Ohio, Florida and Iowa. His Republican opponent graciously conceded defeat at a rally in Arizona. Obama delivers his victory speech in Chicago. 'Change has come to America,' he said."
The elephant in the sitting room is not mentioned: he is Black, and was born a Muslim. His middle name, Hussein, rarely mentioned, is a particular slap in the face for the George Bush family. Of course, given that John McCain was opposing him, there was no real choice for thinking people: six of one, and half a dozen of the other.
What's next? A Jewish president? I briefly wonder if they can be pleased at Obama's win. Or have "they" manoeuvered again behind the scenes to get a young man they see as green, inexperienced, and pliable into the White House. Unless God intervenes, and Vice-President Joe Biden takes over (whom I liked after watching him, in my Vienna prison cell, tackle the dreadful US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales in a Senate hearing about his approval of torture of prisoners), it is a massive, but not final, humiliation of White America, which has been steadily abdicating power for decades accompanied by the pious chants of the media.
"Race was not an issue," say the liberal pundits: for fifty million Black voters it was, as they were 95 percent behind their man.
A friend writes:
So let's see. . . In a time of severe economic uncertainty and increased governmental surveillance, a dubious character with an obscure background and a messianic complex emerges. This figure is largely an outcast from the fringes of mainstream society, raised mostly by his single mother. His worldview is shaped by his impoverishment, and with this comes a sense of anger and resentment towards those in power.
With a gift for oratory, he sets off his career in politics by community organizing, directing his message of hope and change to the disenfranchised masses. He even adopts his own symbolism and banner. With the overwhelming support of media and academia, hungry for revolution, his message is heard and enthusiastically received by the youth of the country, idealistic and eager, with dreams of a romantic utopia of fraternal brotherhood and peace.
In their quest for change, and with their leader's consent, they set out to convert the masses, using all forms of persuasion, including intimidation, harassment, ridicule. and character assassination of opponents, all the while staying within the framework of the existing democratic constitution.
Eventually, their tactics pay off, and their Leader, now with messages of unity -- One People, One Nation, One Leader, Hope, Change, We are the People, A Level Playing Field, is demanded by the elites and the masses.
In January of the following year, he is voluntarily given the power he has striven for all his life.My friend asks: "Who comes to mind?" According to Dr Heinrich Brüning, his predecessor as Chancellor, Jewish bankers foolishly bankrolled Hitler's run for office too.
How Prof Richard Evans got the job as Regius Professor: "Skunky" Evans applied for it! Unheard of, and "vulgar," says The Independent
(MORE ON EVANS BELOW AND AT LINK)
- (MORE ON EVANS AT LINK)
Contribute
once