George
Swift
of London urges Mr
Irving to respond to a published attack by conformist historian Andrew Roberts,

[The Spectator]

Sneers at an ex-historian

I am surely not the only regular visitor to your
website who is impatient for your comments on the
cover article in the current edition of The
Spectator (28 December) in which Andrew
Roberts says the claim that Churchill was
bought by the huge quantities of Jewish money he received
before the war is made only

by “ex-historians of the
extremist kind, like David Irving“.

I trust you will not allow seasonal bonhomie to cramp the style of your rejoinder to the impudent young puppy.

—

I think you will find the Roberts article most interesting as it seems to me it goes to the heart of the
“real history” question.

In particular, you will note that the paragraph which describes you as an “ex-historian” also suggests that the charge Churchill was the “hired help” of the anti-Nazi lobby is based on the payment Sir henry Strakosch
made to his stockbrokers. But, of course, the charge rests mainly on the payments from The Focus. Yet The
Focus is mentioned nowhere in the article!

More generally, Roberts argues that, because Churchill was a Great Briton, he was above being influenced by the huge subsidies he trousered. But the idea that a great man on the winning side is not flawed like other human beings is exactly the sort of hero-worship rather than history that, for example, makes Macaulay’s
hagiography of William of Orange appear so ludicrously unhistorical today (except, of course, that
Roberts can’t write like TBM).

On the other hand, I have just reread your coverage of Strakosch and The Focus in “Churchill’s
War” and I can only say you are most restrained in letting the facts speak for themselves without heavy comments of your own.

Roberts also argues that today’s media make too much of politicians’ finances. But, to give just one example, the media have lamentably failed to persist in asking the right questions about Lord “Mr Cashpoint”
Levy and the interconnections between his support for Israel, his vast fund-raising for the Labour Party and his appointment as Blair’s “personal envoy to the
Middle East” (not to mention the tasty fact — recently reported by The Sunday Times

— that Levy happens to be a friend of the tax lawyer Martin Paisner
who in turn happens to be one of the trustees of the
Blairs’ famous “blind trust”).

So you can see why I look forward to reading your riposte to Roberts … [see below]

George
Swift

Did Mr
Winston Churchill rely on funds from the Jews?
Andrew
Roberts “reveals” that British industrialists
proposed in 1939 to Göring a four-power conference
on Poland; but Irving reported this first
Evening Standard review of “Churchill’s War”,
vol.

ii: “Triumph in Adversity” misses the point:
“Churchill
was a flasher who exposed himself to foreign
statesmen” |David Irving launches an
Israeli-style pre-emptive strike against Mr
Roberts

Did
Churchill order Rome flattened or not?
David
Irving writes to The Spectator August 11, 2001
David
Irving writes to The Sunday Telegraph, Jan 16, 2000,
rebutting Andrew Roberts’ lie about the Halifax
diaries

Free
download
of David Irving’s

books Bookmark
the download page to find the latest new free
books