Counterpunch III: David Irving
Accusing others what he himself does
By Gregory Douglas
The following Letter to the Editor was written by British Writer David Irving to The Observer. Since it was not published, Irving subsequently published this letter in his newsletter "Action Report" and on his website:
Letter to the Editor of The Observer
London, April 23, 1996
M AY I comment on Gitta Sereny's entertaining article (Review, Apr.21). She is right in exposing "Gregory Douglas," who has crafted the latest historical forgery -- a book of supposed post-war interrogations of the missing Gestapo chief Heinrich Müller, as Peter Stahl the well-known American counterfeiter and forger. I first encountered this impostor in 1980, eight years before Ms. Sereny, and saw through the documents he was then offering me after making a few simple cross-checks (in that case with the U.S. Military Academy, West Point, and the Library of Congress). I have been warning everybody about him since -- including, it is proper to say, Ms Sereny herself who was at first taken in by Stahl when researching an article about the Nazi mass-murderer Odilo Globocnik which she published in The Independent on Sunday, Jul 19, 1992; it was no doubt thanks to the five page letter which I wrote to that newspaper exposing Stahl that Ms Sereny realised she had been conned.
I also wrote to the German publishers of this latest book, warning them that many of the Müller "1945 interrogations" reproduced almost verbatim chunks of Stahl's 1980 conversations with me (which I had taped); the result was a string of abuse from the publishers accusing me of envy and malice, and they went -- or should I say forged? -- ahead with their publication plans.
If one is capable of reading between the lines, this "unpublished" letter that Irving now claims he sent to the editor of the "Observer", speaks volumes.
As a matter of fact, the truth about Peter Stahl is just the other way around: he is a well-know expert on counterfeiters and forgers and has published numerous books exposingfakes and frauds, see my article on Third Reich Memorabilia. And as can be seen from the same article, it is actually David Irving who is well-know to have been dealing in forged and stolen documents and memorabilia.
In the 90s, few people in the British media paid any attention to the rantings of an obviously unbalanced and failing Irving and it is extremely doubtful, if he ever wrote such a letter to any newspaper editor, that he seriously expecting them to publish it.
This eruption ocurred after the Druffel Verlag in Germany had published the first two edition of my series on Heinrich Müller. The publisher, Dr.Gert Sudholt, advised me that he had received a frantic letter (mentioned in his "unpublished letter") from Irving attempting to convince him that he should not publish anything written by myself.
Sudholt, who was well aware that Irving had deliberately and knowingly swindled a number of German publishing houses by taking money for non-existent manuscripts which he was unable to even begin writing due to his failing creative abilities, wrote in response that "…you are obviously envious of the superior writing ability and research skills of Mr. Douglas… I am fully aware of your dishonest activities with other publishing houses in Germany and with the numerous accusations that you have stolen valuable historical documents from private persons and libraries."
And further, Sudholt said, "I have been informed by Herr Genoud of Switzerland that you falsely obtained original Goebbels material from him and then tried to publish it against his express instructions." Sudholt said later that Genoud had stopped the publication, in Germany, of Irving’s work on Goebbels that contained copyrighted material.
Sudholt continued: "And the German publishing house lost much money because of this, money you refused to return to them." Irving had been the target of several lawsuits in England and had been jailed over failure to return a £50,000 advance from a German publisher.
When I brought this documented matter to the attention of the St. Martins Press in New York, to whom Irving was attempting to peddle his book on Goebbels, I was subsequently informed that they refused to publish Irving’s book on Hitler’s Propaganda Minister exactly because of his previous legal problems with German publishers. They were well aware, I was told, that Irving had a "terrible" reputation for fraud and theft in the trade and that they would never publish anything coming from him for fear of lawsuits.
It was also known to them at that time that the so-called "Moscow papers" purported by Irving to be "original Goebbels diaries" and on which his book was based, were, in fact, well-known post war KGB political fakes, designed to embarrass the West German authorities.
In 1998, Irving launched another attack on me in quite the same manner, in his pathetic navel gazing newsletter "Action Report":
A. talks to me at length about Gregory Douglas, admits that Douglas and Peter Birch are one and the same, as Douglas himself says. As police records show, this identifies Douglas also as Peter Stahl. He says Douglas is now sixty-six (which fits the man I knew as Stahl), and lives currently in Freeport, Illinois. Stahl is said to be helping (!) the Swiss authorities in their fight against the Bronfman suits, providing them with documents. Oi! Douglas is also associated with the Hitler Diaries forger, Konrad Kujau. Small world indeed. All my protests to A. that he should have nothing to do with the man evince nothing. Surely there is some element of truth in the files, he suggests? I say: Stahl/Douglas has shown nobody anything original, whatever, whenever. No films, no documents. Just promises upon promises for decades. A true thief and forger.
This is yet another example of the irrationality of David Irving. He simply cannot grasp that Peter Stahl and Gregory Douglas are two different persons. Also, the author of this article does not know Konrad Kujau, has not helped the Swiss authorities against anyone, and does not live in Freeport, Illinois. Also, I did not assassinate Abraham Lincoln, assist in the sinking of the Titanic nor was I a lead pilot in the Pearl Harbor attack. Where Irving comes up with these fictions quite escapes me.
The only reason that I can determine that could possibly explain his prolonged hysteria concerning myself is that some years ago, I bought a collection of the correspondence between Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun. These letters were in the Schloss Fischhorn collection and came from a Eugene Frankenfeld of Philadelphia. Frankenfeld was a CIC operator that was part of a team that discovered the papers of Hermann Fegelein that were buried at the SS Riding School run by his brother, Waldemar. Instead of turning these letters, and other important historical papers, in to the U.S. Army authorities, Frankenfeld kept many of them and sold them off to various collectors.
Irving, true to form, erroneously believed the documents to be in the possession of a man named Guiterrez in New Mexico and hounded him for several years in a futile attempt to get them for publication. When he discovered that I had purchased them from another party, he called up the seller and screeched like a petulant florist for nearly an hour.
The seller, a retired U.S. Army officer, told me later with some humor that Irving was probably the most obnoxious individual he had ever encountered, was in all probability a mental case, and wished me well.
It is interesting to observe a constant thread that runs through all of Irving’s hysterical outbursts aimed at me. He consistently accuses me and Peter Stahl, quite falsely and without any evidence to substantiate his claims, of the very things he himself has been repeatedly accused of, and been charged in court for, namely fraud, theft, and dealing in forged and stolen documents and memorabilia.
In a phrase popular in late 19th Century America, Irving likes to dish it out but he certainly can’t take it. Further evidence for this is his hysterical and disorganzied reaction to the launch of this website:
It is always the kicked dog that yelps, and since my postings on the Internet were made recently about failed writer David Irving, three feeble attempts have been made to send my email a virus. The senders were from the UK and were caught out by the server. These messages have been coming in for about a day since the Irving postings and all emanate from London.
Master Liar Irving
On his website, Irving on June 11, 2002, made the following statement:
David Irving comments: […]
While reading Irving's insinuations and allegations, instead of anger and terror, the author found the various bizarre "expositions" to be extraordinary entertaining. If Irving realized how entertaining he was, he would doubtlessly turn to shoving kittens into his microwave--if he still has one, after his property was seized by the British authorities--or poisoning pigeons in the park. Irving's claims are so ludicrous--none of them supported by any evidence--, that it is hard to believe anybody would take Irving seriously in the first place.
It is strongly recommended that viewers seek out Irving's website in general and his section on this author in particular to gain a better understanding of the sort of irrational bombast that the author has been subjected to for the past ten years. Far from being either terrified or offended by his hysterical and disjointed cries, the writer is still laughing at the pathetic mewlings of a man who wears dignity pants and has just been chucked out of his shabby apartment by order of the London court.
The surest sign that Irving is enmeshed in the beginning stages of Alzheimers's Disease are his frantic bleatings that no one should look at my website because it is full of virus attachments! There are none, in spite of his feeble attempts to put them there, but the main reason for his frenzied efforts to prevent any one from reading my views on this disintegrating scribbler is what they might learn about him. All of my comments are properly cited, but Irving's lunatic rants are not.
Irving spent most of his rapidly waning energy in inventing diary entries and phone calls he allegedly had with a "Peter Stahl," mainly focusing on an alleged Himmler letter to Oswald Pohl from October 20, 1943. This is an excellent example of mendacity that clearly exposes Irving as the fraud and liar he really is. Irving claims to be almost perfect in German, and in this claim, at least, he is certainly correct. He claims, that on June 16, 1980, "Peter Stahl" dictated him the content of above-mentioned letter, and Irving transcribed it. However, the German of this letter is so bad that anybody fluent in German would immediately recognize that this alleged document was written by someone with English as his first language whose German was very poor. To make this point clear, Irving's transcript and a proper German language version as it should read are juxtaposed here (for a picture of the actual forgery, scroll further down):
1 Berlin SW 11 den 20. Oktober 1943.
Prinz Albrecht Straße 8
SS Obergruppenführer und General der Waffen SS Oswald Pohl,
SS Wirtschafts- und Verwaltungshauptamt
Unter den Eichen 126-135.
Sehr geehrter Herr Obergruppenführer,
Der Reichsleiter Bormann hat mehrmals im letzten Monat eine besondere Interesse an der Degussa-Aktion und Ihr Verhältnis mit dem KZ-System. Wie Sie wissen, eine solche Interesse seinerseits völlig überheblich ist und gefährliche Folgerungen haben können.
Bis jetzt habe ich eine direkte Gegenüberstellung mit dem Reichsleiter vermieden, aber der gebraucht natürlich sein je näheres Verhältnis mit dem Führer um diese Einmischung in KZ-Gelegenheiten zu verlangen. Er hat dem Führer eingeredet, daß er erlernte Arbeiter von KZ-Insassen herausholen kann, und hat sogar den Reichsminister Dr. Speer wenigstens teilweise überzeugt von seine Fähigkeit eine solche Aufgabe durchzusetzen.
Der Führer hat mich gebeten in dieser Sache den Reichsleiter zu assistieren. Ich bin informiert worden, daß eine Kommission von fünf Männern der Bormann-Staffel wird in zwei Wochen das KZ Buchenwald besuchen. Zu dieser Zeit habe ich keine Liste ihrer Namen bekommen; ich habe gehört, daß ein Buchhalter unter ihnen sein wird.
Natürlich kann ich nicht gegen des Führers Wunsches die Erlaubnis für eine Untersuchung verweigern, aber unter keinen Umständen dürfen diese Einmischer die Akten der Degussa-Aktion nachprüfen.
Weiter muß die äußerste Sorgfältigkeit gebt werden, daß irgendeine Nachricht über unsere Methoden in der Endlösung der Judenfrage den Ohren des Reichsleiters nicht gelangt. Als der Führer keine Ahnung dieser Endlösung hat und glaubt, die Juden arbeiten in Übersiedlungsgebieten im Osten, es wäre höchst unratbar, ihn zu dieser Zeit zu informieren, besonders nicht mittels des Reichsleiters, der keinen Anlaß hat, uns sonst zu lieben.
Ich verlasse ganz und gar auf Sie für die Sicherheit dieser Sache und erwarte von Ihnen einen vollen Bericht alsbald die Kommission abreist.
Herzliche Grüsse und Heil Hitler
1 Berlin SW 11 den 20. Oktober 1943.
Prinz Albrecht Straße 8
SS Obergruppenführer und General der Waffen SS Oswald Pohl,
SS Wirtschafts- und Verwaltungshauptamt
Unter den Eichen 126-135.
Sehr geehrter Herr Obergruppenführer,
Reichsleiter Bormann hat im letzten Monat mehrmals ein besonderes Interesse an der Degussa-Aktion und ihrem Verhältnis zum KL-System geäußert. Wie Sie wissen, ist ein solche Interesse seinerseits völlig unangebracht und könnte gefährliche Folgen haben.
Bis jetzt habe ich eine direkte Konfrontation mit dem Reichsleiter vermieden, aber er nutzt natürlich sein enges Verhältnis zum Führer, um diese Einmischung in KL-Angelegenheiten zu verlangen. Er hat dem Führer eingeredet, daß er aus den KL-Insassen ausgebildete Arbeitskräfte machen kann, und hat sogar den Reichsminister Dr. Speer wenigstens teilweise von seiner Fähigkeit überzeugt, ein solches Vorhaben umzusetzen.
Der Führer hat mich gebeten, den Reichsleiter in dieser Sache zu unterstützen. Ich bin informiert worden, daß eine Kommission von fünf Männern der Bormann-Staffel in zwei Wochen das KL Buchenwald besuchen wird. Bisher erhielt ich keine Namensliste, habe aber gehört, daß ein Buchhalter unter ihnen sein wird.
Natürlich kann ich die Erlaubnis für eine Untersuchung nicht gegen den Wunsch des Führers verweigern, aber unter keinen Umständen dürfen diese Schnüffler die Akten der Degussa-Aktion prüfen.
Weiterhin muß äußerst sorgfältig darauf geachtet werden, daß keine Nachricht über unsere Methoden bei der Endlösung der Judenfrage dem Reichsleiters zu Ohren kommt. Da der Führer keine Ahnung von der Endlösung hat und glaubt, die Juden arbeiteten in Siedlungsgebieten im Osten, wäre es höchst unratsam, ihn jetzt zu informieren, insbesondere nicht über den Reichsleiters, der auch sonst keinen Anlaß hat, uns zu mögen.
Hinsichtlich des sicheren Ablaufs dieser Sache verlasse ich mich ganz und gar auf Sie und erwarte von Ihnen einen vollen Bericht, sobald die Kommission abgereist ist.
Herzliche Grüsse und Heil Hitler
I am aware that it requires good German language skills to judge how awful the German in this Irving "document" really is, and it might not be possible for the average reader to find such an expert in German language, but everybody who can read German fluently will easily confirm the ridiculous quality of this faked document.
The last entry in Irving's alleged diary about this ominous letter purportedly offered to him by "Stahl" is from July 20, 1981, when "Stahl" allegedly called Irving to verify whether he received the copy of said "document" which he had mailed (Irving's answer was "No"). This is more than one year after Irving allegedly transcribed this letter! In other words: Irving wants to make his readers believe that "the great historian" David Irving, who is completely fluent in German, took this alleged letter seriously for more than a year! And this, without "Stahl" being able to send him even a primitive Xerox or fax copy! Everybody who knows Irving's short tempered and egocentric personality knows that Irving would never put up with this this sort of a delay. What David Irving wants, David Irving wants now, not later. Even if Irving is on one of his regular begging trips across the United States, he wants his donations immediately and will not permit any delay!
Better even, Irving claims that "Stahl" was reluctant to send his "document" by mail in fear of losing it, and that he preferred to have it hand carried. According to Irving, "Stahl" finally did send a copy of the first page of the "document" by mail on Friday, July 17th, 1981. In his diary entry of July 21, 1981, however, Irving claims he met "Stahl" in San Jose, CA. If this meeting took place, it must have been planned well in advance. But why then should "Stahl" have sent Irving documents by mail just a few days before the scheduled meeting, considering "Stahl's" alleged fear of the mail getting lost?
And then finally, after one year of Irving's alleged obsession with trying to get a copy of this Himmler letter, this fictive meeting with "Stahl" takes place, and in his alleged diary, Irving mentions NOTHING about this Himmler "letter"! Instead, he babbles mindlessly about documents on forgeries of Rodin casts. Irving's (invented) diary entries are so internally inconsistent that this alone proves them to be phony.
But then comes something even worse: As the alleged entries in his diary show, he allegedly discussed this obviously faked document with colleagues. One of these exchanges he claims to have had about this letter is extremely revealing:
June 21, 1980
7:25 pm Telephoned Professor Joe Hobbs at Raleigh, North Carolina, and told him about the Peter Stahl document. He was astonished, and full of admiration and congratulations. He compared it with Copernicus and said that the difference was that I was living to see myself vindicated in my lifetime. He added that a few days ago he had seen a picture book on aerial warfare with several pages on the Dresden raids and drew the conclusion that even if I had written only the Dresden book I would have justified my writing activities for my lifetime. he will be in Washington at the end of next week and we will probably meet then.
Irving dicusses the fake Himmler letter with one of his colleagues.
Here we have David Irving in a nutshell: "admiration", "congratulations", "justified... for my lifetime", repulsively megalomaniac, comparing himself even with Copernicus. In his 1977 book Hitler's War, he first uttered his thesis that Hitler didn't know anything about the final solution against the Jews, which stirred up quite a controversy and was rejected by all reputable historians. In this (probably invented) diary entry from June 21, 1980, he openly writes that he was searching for corroborating evidence to support his controversial thesis that Hitler didn't know, a theory that seems to be supported by the above quoted faked Himmler letter. In other words, this entry suggests that Irving is not adjusting his theories according to the evidence he has at hand, but that he is frantically trying to find evidence to support his theories; that because of his ideological zeal, he turned a blind eye for more than a year to the obvious fact that this "document" was a forgery!
Furthermore, in his invented diary entries, he never mentioned that (and when) he finally received a copy of this "document" (or at least he didn't post it), which he certainly ought to have immediately recognize it as a very crude forgery and to expose the evil man "Peter Stahl" who had cost him so much time and effort and led him on the wrong track. Such an outrage must have left traces in his alleged diary, certainly producing the longest and most vicious attack on "Peter Stahl" to be found in it, but no such entry exists! (I am sure, though, that after he will have read this, he will invent this entry and post it immediately). It is not before February 15, 1997--17 years after Irving allegedly wrote down the text of this "document"!--that he describes this Himmler "letter" as being "phony." But surprisingly, he does not mention the impossible German language of this forgery.
unavailable unavailable The forged Himmler letter to Oswald Pohl, Oct. 20, 1943. In contrast to Irving's version, this one has no address and a different opening. (Handwritten additions stem from a German scholar who checked the document's German language for the author after the latter had received it. Click on picture to enlarge.)
In the end, of course, it doesn't matter whether Irving met Peter Stahl, Freiherr von Möllendorf, Mr. Dianne Schreiber, or the Pope, in California, Buffalo Breath, Kansas, or the Lost Continent of Atlantis. I have stated that I am not "Peter Stahl" and have never had any contact whatsoever with David Irving nor, considering his endless senile squallings, would I ever want to.
It is the considered opinion of a legion of people who have encountered the bombastic ideologue David Irving, that he is probably one of the most unpleasant and crude individuals extant. He is cited as being ungrateful, ungracious and boorish in his contact with members of civilized society. Now, it very clearly appears, Irving can add progressive madness to his catalog of faults.
In attempting to be serious, Irving degenerates into slapstick behavior that would be more appropriate to a burlesque theater than a literary salon.
To claim that anybody with the slightest knowledge of German language and German wartime documents would seriously believe he could successfully offer such a gross forgery to David Irving, is utterly ridiculous. As a matter of fact, the author himself received a copy of a similar document (the letter head is different) several years ago from the document collector Thomas L. Shutt II who claimed to have received it from David Irving--which is just as unbelievable as the opposite claim, i.e., Irving would have gotten this transparent piece of fakery from any person well-versed in German wartime documents.
Whoever the forger of this ridiculous Himmler "letter" is, or was, it is certainly neither Peter Stahl, Gregory Douglas, David Irving, Mark Weber, nor anybody else with the slightest knowledge of either the German language or history. It must have been a thoroughly dim-witted, uneducated individual that produced it and, more to the point, an even more dim-witted and uneducated individual who, for more than a year (or perhaps even seventeen years), accepted its authenticity.
Another easily refutable lie of Irving is his ranting about "Peter Stahl's" alleged involvement in counterfeiting and selling Rodin casts (diary entries of July 22, 1981, Nov. 23, 1982, Feb. 15, 1997). As a matter of fact, the author himself (Gregory Douglas!) has published an article "Anatomy of a Fraud" (a title that could easily be applied to Irving himself) roughly 15 years ago in the magazine The Connoisseur that eventually resulted in the exposure of the notorious Rodin frauds. Here as well, Irving does not only get the name wrong, but he actually turns the truth upside down.
The lower-middle class Irving probably never heard of Auguste Rodin and wouldn't recognize a bronze sculpture by him if it hit him on the head. His former apartment, according to those who visited him while he still lived in it, was filled with the sort of cheap junk that one gets at seaside resorts for less than ten dollars.
Desperate to raise money to move his bankrupt remains to the United States, Irving is now attempting to sell off his own "rare and original Lina Heydrich papers" that were manufactured by Wolfgang Schulze of Marcos Island, Florida, a neighbor of Irving and the man who stood behind the fake Hitler Diaries that Irving once loudely proclaimed as original: Schultze invented it, and Kujau wrote it.
These few, but telling examples should suffice to demonstrate that Irving is quite obviously disintegrating, both physically and mentally, to the point where he will sooner rather than later have to be institutionalized. Irving's best epitaph will probably be the title of an old British music hall turn: "He's Dead But He Won't Lie Down."
Irving's grotesque nonesense about Douglas' most recent book "Regicide"
On his website, Irving comments on the author's most recent book "Regicide. The Official Assassination of John F. Kennedy." After reproducing most of the information as posted on the publisher's website, he makes the following, again complete unfounded and often libelous comments to various points:
CROWLEY is another alias of Peter Stahl himself. See too Weber's alert about another mysterious alias, Christopher Crowles.
Douglas: Crowley was Assistant Deputy Director of the CIA. Does Irving seriously believe that the author can make the "Washington Post" publish a fake obituary? The author is neither identical with Crowley nor with Crowles. Like Weber, Irving obviously is completely paranoid when it comes to alleged pen names of the author. AMAZING, or perhaps not, how the career of "Gregory Douglas" dovetails into and runs parallel with the career of the fraudster and admitted Rodin counterfeiter Peter Stahl. See the July 22, 1981 diary entry describing my first meetings with Stahl, who proudly hinted at his own forging of Rodin statues. He was Peter Stahl then, not Gregory Douglas; [...] As for Odilo Globocnig, see Stahl's involvement in furnishing the fake Globocnig documents to Gitta Sereny. It was not Stahl/Douglas who exposed to the authorities the serious mass theft of files from the Berlin Document Center, but I! Stahl's participation appeared, uh, rather to be on the other side of that particular felony. Douglas:
a) Great Historian Irving isn't even capable of spelling Globocnik's name properly.
b) Irving can not even read his own alleged diary, since the entry quoted does not mention that "Stahl" "hinted at his own forging of Rodin statues", but that he talked about "his theory" on existing forgeries. See Douglas' article about this.
c) Gitta Sereny has provided no evidence for her claims, and got fired after she published her false, unsubstantiated and libelous article.
d) Again, Irving makes accusations of the author or "Stahl" having been involved in a felony, without any evidence. Fact is that the author worked together with U.S. and German authorities so that those responsible for the BDC-theft ended up in German custody.
"GENUINE?" Ho-ho, in view of the author's track record it seems a highly pertinent question. But note how he cites John Costello as his authority. Costello, a respected if controversial independent historian of the Real History school, had no time for the phoney Peter Stahl, as he frequently told me when he visited me in London. He died tragically, in mid-Atlantic, five years ago and so cannot now expose Stahl for the cynical fraudster that he is. Douglas: There you have it: Irving isn't interested in "Real History", but in exposing competing authors as "fraudsters".
a) The author has not quoted Costello as an authority for anything.
b) Whether Costello would confirm the author's claim how he got in touch with Crowley, must remain just as open as Irving's claim, Costello allegedly told him repeatedly, he "had no time" for "Stahl".
Photocopies -- a familiar Peter Stahl trick. He knows that makes it harder to test the authenticity of documents (though not impossible). Not many people know that on orders of the US Treasury Department, every modern colour copier sold in the US has a digital dot code built into its dot-matrix system which fingerprints its serial-number, i.e. its identity and exposes would-be counterfeiters. Stahl had nothing whatever to do with exposing the infamous Hitler Diaries in 1983.
Note incidentally his curious preoccupation with typewriter-authenticity. . !
Douglas: The background of this alleged "Stahl trick" is very simple: Irving has a very bad reputation of always wanting to have the originals of all documents he can lay his hands on; he wants them right away, and he doesn't want to pay anything for it, because he thinks he is the only human being God bestowed the dignity upon to own original documents. And when demanding that somebody hands over his originals to Irving, he is extremely rude and aggressive (well, Irving always is). He therefore gets turned down very often, and he never sees the reason for his failure in his own attitude, because in his own eyes, Irving is infallible. Other researchers are more modest or polite and are either happy to have photocopies, or behave properly and be so doing may even receive the originals.
Also, Irving's story about the digital dot-code of color photocopiers is totally unrelated to anything that matters in this regard. He obviously tries to hide his total lack of evidence for any and all of his claims by trying to impress people with his alleged competence in recognizing forgeries.
Stahl may have had nothing to do with exposing the Hitler Diaries, but the author did expose Wolfgang Schulze (to be posted) as the brain behind this operation--Konrad Kujau was merely the writer.
About Irving's Lack of Expertise and Character | About Irving Dealing With Stolen Documents
© Gregory Douglas, June 9, 2002
updated June 11, 2002
Home | Books | Articles