John, Here is something real that is
amiss with David Irving, I feel. Why has he chosen (or did he?) this young man
to give opinions on subjects about which he obviously knows very little?
----- Original Message
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 12:10
Subject: Sorry about the
If I find one more of your multi
coloured (ie almost illegible) emails
in my system I am afraid I put
your address on a stop list. I very
rarely do so but you are testing my
patience. It will make it
impossible for you to write to me about
things that matter. I see that
you have also disregarded my request that you
desist from harrassing my
David Irving (now
writing in Key West, Florida)
pp Focal Point Publications
cellphone: 305 923 6259; or tollfree: 1 877 447 5678 --
David... Is this better? My 82 year-old eyes find a dark monitor background much
less troublesome than a white background. Doubtless in another 15 years or so
you will concur. Many professional computer users use other than a white
monitor background, realizing that the screen really isn't a sheet of white
paper. And as you yourself find on your own web pages, the use of
color is useful to draw attention.
During the Lipstadt debacle
you were bold and thoughtful enough to provide cyberspace with transcripts
of what was occurring. I was reading them - they were lengthy - sometimes at 2
and 3 AM in the morning. Using my probability analysis I quickly discovered that
Judge Grey was leading you in one direction, then another. Clearly, this was a
theatrical production, a show trial. I told you that and you were irritated at
me. When the decision was announced it was abundantly clear that it had been
written before the trial had ever begun. I also told you that.
You were further irritated at me. Why is it, David, that insightful truth -
nasty as it is - irritates you?
The Jews are predators. They
have been such for centuries. They are very good at their trade. They study
their prey for weaknesses. Our weaknesses are primarily our fixed beliefs and
dogmas because they continually lead us into actions that are not well
thought out, each as a special case. Rather we proceed as if we were
dealing with a known and trusted category of events.
You had successfully sued
other people. The Jews watched this and recognized that you had gained trust in
that process. So, when you sued Deborah et al they simply bought the British
court system. This was to you a totally inconceivable move. They knew
that. Did Judge Grey make the wrong decision? No, of course not, he made the
decision he was paid to make. From that viewpoint it was the
right decision, wasn't it? Thereafter you sought to redress the 'error' in the
same court system the Jews had already bought...
My comment is that while you
are an excellent analyst of past historic events, you are much less capable in
real time situations. So, is Tom Stoneburner, one of your featured
speakers, a Jewish plant, a Zionist plant, a Neo-con plant? There is no
'yes' or 'no' answer to that, at least not at this present moment. Could he be?
Yes. What is the apparent probability that he is? At least a bit better than
50%. Uncomfortable, that, isn't it? These are hardly gaming odds, are
Your symposium is supposed to
be 'leading edge,' right? So this young gentleman will debit his address that
the 'official story' on both the JFK assassination and on 9/11 are essentially
true... have I understood correctly? Yet, the work that has been done on
BOTH of these subjects by a very large number of very good analysts
clearly indicates - with extremely high probabilities - that these
two official stories are fabrications. Most of your audience will know
that. Stoneburner's address will send all sorts of garbled messages to your
paying guests. And he is one of your featured
Are you thus so uninformed
about this subject matter? Or is something else or someone else forcing this
decision? Don't get mad at me, David. I'm asking the right
Documents on Real History
© Focal Point 2004 David Irving
Index to the Traditional Enemies of Free
Speech Alphabetical index
Letters to David Irving on this
Unless correspondents ask us not to, this Website will
post selected letters that it receives, and invite open
Stoneburner of Texas
doubts, Saturday, August 14, 2004, that there are many real
anomalies about 9/11
Cell phones that work in planes
THE linked article on your website,
Miracles and Wonders of 9/11
contains some questionable things. In the claims
of 'impossible' cell phone calls and the 'Pentagrass' comment, where
is the documentation?
Granted, it is a short column. However, many
of the 'obvious problems' with the official story of 9/11 are
nothing more than the product of overactive imaginations or planted
disinformation. Where are the experts?
If the cell phone calls from planes in mid
air were impossible, where are the experts from the airline and cell
If the object that hit the Pentagon was
'really' a missile or alternate vehicle, where are the engineers and
I was briefly engaged to a young lady that
worked for Dr. Henry Lee. He is probably the best forensic
scientist in the US. I browsed through the Lee Institute's
collection of material on President Kennedy's assassination while
waiting for my fiance to finish her workday.
I saw the same bad analysis of 'obvious
problems' in regard to the assassination as I see with the current
crop of 9/11 theories.
* A featured speaker at this year's
(2004) Real History weekend in Cincinnati (September 3-6).
- Dossier: Mysteries about the Crash of United Aurlines
DAVID IRVING writes:
I READ the article
with interest as the cell phone anomaly has puzzled me ever since
the first moment.
I noticed it a few
weeks ago - flying down to Miami from Chicago, a lady in the next
row had her cell phone out somewhere over the Appalachians. The
flight attendant hurried over: "You must put that away. Cell
phones don't work in planes anyway."
That rang a bell,
metaphorically speaking. I pulled out mine, furtively, and watched
its face for some minutes: The words "Searching for Sprint
service..." never left the screen. It could not connect, and did
not until we were about two hundred feet above MIA and descending.
So how did Todd Beamer
and the rest of those doomed airline passengers manage to use
theirs at a time when most of the US cell phone network had
crashed anyway, as it was suddenly unable to handle that morning's
True, I am one of
those who thinks, "Well, there must be some obvious explanation I
haven't thought of." None has been offered so far, except for the
seat-back Airphones, at $10 a minute (but that's not what we were
originally told). I guess if you suspect that you're going to be
dead in a few minutes anyway you don't really care what size
charge hits your Visa card.