He who casts the first stone?
I was pleased with the thoughtful nature of the many responses I received about the waitress, a withered old retainer comment, and I apologise to those who feel like Maureen that this is gossip, which it is!
But it does clarify things and it indicates that Revisionists have not only intellectual but also moral concerns, i.e. Revisionists are human after all, and most attempt to balance the physical and mental qualities within their person!
As a right of reply is precious to me, and I offer it wherever possible, I did not receive a reply from David Irving.
Here is a selection of responses, and with that the matter is now closed.
1. If David Irving wants to air his comments in Action Report, I think it is mischievous for others to hone in and publicise these remarks. This
really amounts to trivia and gossip.

2. Fredrick! - ditto to your comments!
Regardless of the outward appearances! Whether guests are present or not, let your table etiquette be faultless. Show some consideration/respect. Address everyone with courtesy - to show you follow the laws of good conduct and courtesy. Usually the custom for well-mannered and well-bred individuals, is to always display the gift of good manners, followed by gentle and polite conversations/replies in unknown places - lack of etiquette-indicates the neglect of the tenets of good breeding!
Regards Vicky

3. If what Irving writes is true, then as a Canadian, I am shocked too. But as my British father--later a naturalized Canadian--used to say, insulting and being rude is natural to "upper-class" Brits because they are trained to be superior snobs while in school. Maybe the trend is changing.
[..."the upper class" knows how to behave and only upstarts thereto flounder in their behaviour - is this owing to the fact that 'class -thinking' is false consciousness?FT]

Perhaps we could benefit from Benjamin Franklin, who "farted proudly" at politicians but was a master of politeness.
Also, "On his first trip to England, in storm or calm, he was always the
same: sober, polite, speaking little, keeping his troubles to himself and
lightening the burdens of others with the charm of his presence. Everyone liked him."  (
Franklin obviously learned foreign manners faster than Irving!  :-)
Kindest regards,

4. Subject: FW: American customs
Art, Fred, Mark, Just a few words. We're old timers and don't have time for newspeak. I've been in the so called movement for freedom  all my life. During this time, in numerous states, individuals  -who didn't know one another-  had similar remarks about DI. Some of these men were from the cremedla creme.
When I was a kid it was said that personality defined man's definition. You see, that was the layman's term and it was really okay. When studying for my doctoral degree, I was told about the five major variables of personality. Because psychology is not a science, we can get to the chase without any semantics. Here, one could use two words that are generally prevalent: (a) Traits; and (b) characteristics.
The character of any individual who will act as you describe, demonstrates a rotten intrinsic mould. Such behavior paradigms denote obvious facts: (1) A disregard for the feelings of another human being;  and (2) A disrespect for those in one's environment.   Bottom line:  Such an individual, as you described, would do the same to you (especially if you crossed him).
Dozens of patriotic men, of different Euro-American ethnic backgrounds, have indicated that DI has the most primitive behavior, is rude and obnoxious. I have no personal contact with the man and so cannot present more time on this matter. However, in all probability, all those indicating the traits of DI can't be wrong.
Look, when I was distributing AB's book to ministers within the Polish Gov., some disliked Germans. Others were merely full of trepidation. None were rude. All privately admired Prof. B.  To say such publicly could have cost them their lives. Yet, not a single official  -privately-  could induce anything but praise towards Mr. AB.  On the other hand,  if I had shown the book to an individual belonging to the "best of all people,"   a trait similar to that attributed to DI would have proven a disorder...
Sometimes we are overjoyed with great writers. At the same time we cannot separate the pen from the man. I have no idea why you shared this with me. To me it's old news. Besides, I believe my few lines will make the adjudication of what you already know, easier. I hope so.
Friends, it is one thing to argue. It is quit another to have a primitive
(in a suit) within one's environment. Nuff.
As always, all the best/Bruno
I am inclined to agree that most Americans, at least those with whom I am acquainted, are naturally inclined to exceptional good manners but I am sorry to say that, as a British citizen, this is becoming less the case with my fellow countrymen. I have always held the opinion that good manners are a mark of a civilised people but then you get bad eggs in every nation. It is a cultural thing, with Arab nations, especially, offering a genuine hospitality as a matter of course ... their exceptional good manners following a strict code. Wo betide those who transgress it.
In the case of David Irving this could be a wanna-be "great man" imitating a genuinely great man whose memory lives on in a way that Irving's never shall. Irving is an admirer of Sir Oswald Mosley but never an active supporter of Mosley, as I can claim to have been.
Mosley's late secretary, Jeffrey Hamm, recalls an episode in his
autobiography, ACTION REPLAY, published in 1983. Hamm travelled to Le Havre in France to meet up with the Mosleys in a hotel at midday to take down some dictated letters. After three hours delay Sir Oswald and Lady Mosley arrive.
Sir Oswald said, "We have a lot of work to do, I think we'll have that table over here". No lunch was ordered, although Hamm had anticipated some and was suffering the pangs of hunger after three hours wait, and the patron was waved aside after enquiring if they wanted a room.  When Lady Mosley ordered some coffee and rolls for the hungry Hamm, Sir Oswald looked disapprovingly, allowing Hamm only a sip and a bite.
After using the hotel for several hours in order to complete their work,
Mosley ordered one bottle of wine and left Hamm to it with the parting words of, "I don't think we'll come here again. It was rather noisy".
Hamm, ever loyal, poses the rhetorical question of whether this was
arrogance or contempt and then goes on to claim that it was really the
"supreme self-confidence of a man conscious of his great talents, driving
himself hard and demanding equal dedication and devotion to duty from all who served him, impatient at any petty impediments to the grand purpose".
Make of this what you will. Was Hamm being sycophantic towards his leader or did he recognise that true greatness transcends what some would regard asbourgeois pettiness?
Irving's blunt remarks to the beleaguered American waitress are another
matter altogether. To tell someone who enquires after one's well-being to
"go away" is not only arrogance but threateningly hostile. I have no doubt that Irving is acquainted with the story of the Mosleys' meeting in Le Havre and wrongly thought he could pull off something similar in California and win admirers for having done so. Unfortunately, Irving lacks the style found in true greatness and comes out of it with the attitude of an obnoxious barrow boy.
That Irving actually boasts of this episode in his self-obsessed ACTION
REPORT is remarkable for its insensitivity. "I do not understand these
American customs [good manners] , even after all these years", seems to
suggest that Irving has learning difficulties and his long-suffering
American admirers must now be looking elsewhere for a revisionist champion. Who needs Irving, anyway?  "Please go away", is a phrase that springs to mind.

6. Irving! At a speech Mr. Irving held in a hotel in Durban some years ago, during question time I raised the question: "Mr. Irving, have you had any access to Russian archives?"   Unfortunately I asked:  "-- -- have you had any access, (stressing the last syllable) instead of access (stressing the first syllable).  Irving on the spot made a fool of me before 50 listeners because of wrong pronunciation. Sometimes he can really be a tactless bastard.
Schwacke with a grin.
7. Dear Fredrick,  I have dined in a few restaurants where they have taken to the American  affectation of asking "how's everything? or "how's your meal?" or "is everything alright?", usually several times whilst my group is eating. May I suggest that;
(1) If the waitress wanted to know how everything is, she'd have to ask some one a hell of a lot smarter than me;
(2) If the waitress wanted to know how much I had enjoyed my meal, the least she could do is give me the courtesy of letting me finish it uninterrupted as by then I could have given a reasoned and factual reply. Mechanics don't ask you how well the car is going halfway through a tune up;
(3)If anything was NOT alright, I would be perfectly capable of summonsing a member of the staff myself.
I DO find it rude for an unknown person to interrupt me mid chew (or gulp) and I believe that this situation has been brought about by the American system of every person who does ANYTHING for you expects a gratuity. This constant interruption is merely a fishing opportunity for money. A meal out is meant to be with friends, not sundry hangers on who will dive in as soon as you pause mid forkful. I was once asked "how did you find the steak?", and I replied that it would have been easier if it wasn't hidden under a lettuce leaf.
If I have been well watered and fed, I will always leave something extra for good service given, but to me good service is meant to be neither seen or heard unless it is summonsed. Yes, manners are important...from BOTH sides.
Oh, and by the way..."Have a nice day!".
8. Hi Guys - I would imagine the question put to Irving and his companion was "Is everything alright, sir?". This is a standard question which American waitresses are obliged to ask after a customer has eaten a few mouthfuls of food in order to avoid lawsuits arising from contaminated food.
If the answer is "No" then the food will be removed. If the answer is "Yes" then don't expect to sue the diner if you later go down with e-coli poisoning as you have agreed that everything is alright. There is no getting round this - answering "I'll let you know tomorrow" will be taken as "No" - and the food will be removed, the manager will be called and you will be expected to leave (without being billed) and to not return.

I am not trying to defend Irving's rudeness, only to shed some light on the probable circumstances. Persecuting someone who is only doing her job is indeed inexcusable. She would be fired for not asking the question. Not that she has ' employment' as we understand it. In most US 'Greek' diners the waitresses work for tips alone and are merely permitted by the management to work given tables at given hours. That permit would be withdrawn if she did not cover the diner legally by asking the required question.

American society extends across a much wider spectrum of behaviour than in Europe and elsewhere. The most mannered people I have ever met have been Americans - and the biggest, rudest arseholes too.
Having said that, I've never met anything nastier than an Englishman. I recall one fellow warning me to be careful because "there are some real nutcases in New Jersey". I could only reply that he had obviously never visited England. By comparison with Britain, New Jersey is tame. In New Jersey you really do have to cross the Mafia to get in trouble.
In England your only crime needs to be that some other fellow's girlfriend is looking at you. In fact she is probably looking at you in order to provoke a fight, since English women traditionally love to watch their men fight.

=========and the item that started it all========
----- Original Message -----
From: <
To: <
Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2004 12:41 PM
Subject: American customs

David Irving's Action Report (#25, January 20) describes a lunch he had with "Mark W", apparently in southern California:

"When the waitress, a withered old retainer by whom however Mark seems disproportionately taken, interrupts to inquire if everything is alright, I say: 'It was, until you interrupted our conversation. Please go away. And don't interrupt again.'
"Mark is shocked. I don't understand these American customs, even after all these years."

I am shocked too.

A.R. Butz

Fredrick Töben comments:
Most Americans have a gentility and politeness that I admire. There is
something morally wrong with individuals who are not shocked as Butz and Mark are - there is such a thing as manners because morals  and manners maketh man!
Any comments?