The Irving Manner Is No Manners At All

Compiled by John "Birdman" Bryant

 

Surprise!!! So-called historian David Irving continues to show his bad character. And if you say "It's only manners", I reply that bad character will show itself in virtually any context, so we may count this encounter -- and one he BRAGS ABOUT yet -- as a tiny window on a festering slimepit. After the two major exposes of Irving -- the first by Alexander Baron, and the second by Yrs Truly (see the Net Losses section) -- we can only wonder why Irving continues to have any credibility or acceptability among revisionists -- are revisionists just slow on the uptake, or are they hypocrites who delight in pointing out the Establishment's bad guys, but can't stand to acknowledge the lowlifes among their own?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Adelaide Institute" <info@adelaideinstitute.org>
To: "Adelaide Institute" <info@adelaideinstitute.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2004 2:52 AM
Subject: Fw: American customs


----- Original Message -----
From: <ArtButz@aol.com>
To: <ArtButz@aol.com>
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?

===========

Date: 1/18/04 8:47 AM
From: RobertEdwards
To: "Adelaide Institute" <info@adelaideinstitute.org>
Copy:
Subject: Re: American customs


REGARDING IRVING'S BAD MANNERS:
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.
http://www.nationeuropa.mysite.freeserve.com
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 as
bourgeois 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 attituide 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.

Robert Edwards

 

YOUR DONATION = OUR SURVIVAL!

Please contribute today - buy our books - and spread the word to all your friends!

* * * Back to the Home Page of John "Birdman" Bryant, the World's Most Controversial Author * * *