Dear Mr
Irving.
Is there any good reason that your above reply differs substantially from that posted onto your Web site?
You have left out the fact that your absence from the country or your staff may have been to blame for your oversight in not replying to my letter. I wouldn’t like to think that you engineered the Web reply so as to give the impression to your readers that my letter was an eight month afterthought designed to assist the defence council of Deborah
Lipstadt.
I think you owe it to your web visitors to show the complete picture and not “engineer” your or my correspondence for the sake of a cheap shot. For the record I deny that I have been approached by Lipstadt’s defence counsel at any time. I am sure she has ample material to defend herself adequately without my evidence. I am not particularly interested in your little squabble with Lipstadt and others.
These amount to a feeble attempts to rehabilitate yourself in the eyes of the mainstream historians, and once again be allowed access to various historical archives. It does not take a rocket scientist to see when I mailed the original message. This information appears at the top of the page on the last letter.
I have now read your diary several times, and in all honesty how does this help your case? Your diary FAILS to give any details as to the content of the speech that you delivered in South Africa. In your diary you admit to your association with [Clive] Derby-Lewis. Other than that NOTHING! Please spell it out ! What you are trying to prove by showing me this diary that contains nothing of relevace.
I suspect your motive is a little too obtuse for those of us who enjoy hard fact. (A little bit of bullsh*t baffles brains perhaps?).
I have recently read [Ron] Rosenbaum‘s
Explaining
Hitler.
He devotes a whole chapter to you. I strongly urge all your
“truth seekers” to read this excellent book. The author certainly was able to answer most of my unresolved questions that I have about you. What was of particular interest to our current discussion was your little
” OOPS” dilemma with the Eichman diaries.
What was fascinating was your explaining away the clear
“Führer Directive” alluded to in the Eichmann diaries by saying that the man wrote with the thought in mind that these very same diaries would one day be valuable evidence in his defence. If I understood it correctly you accuse
Eichman of engineering a “Führer Directive” in his diary so as to cover himself in any future conviction. Now isn’ t that something Mr. Irving? Your plot not mine. What an elaborate thing to do.
I hope that you do not write your diaries with the same intention in mind.
Your replies to my correspondence on your web site have become increasingly shrill. I appeal to you to try and retain a little composure in this matter. May I also take this opportunity to state that I do not give a damm what effect my replies are having on the anti-Semites of this world. I am only interested in stating the truth of the events that took place at your Johannesburg speech 1987 no matter the consequences.
Spellings
corrected, and hyperlinks
added, by this Website.