No video :(

David Irving - Can you trust ANYTHING he wrote?

Подписаться 382 тыс.

Просмотров 229 тыс.

50% 1

Can you trust ANYTHING that David Irving wrote? In 1996, David Irving sued Deborah Lipstadt for libel (in the "Irving vs Penguin Books Ltd" trial) because Deborah Lipstadt had said Irving was a Holocaust Denier. Historian Richard Evans was called upon as an expert witness, and he examined Irving's works for two years, discovering many major factual errors in David Irving's works. Richard Evans came to the conclusion that Irving cannot even be classed as a 'historian', and says "not one sentence" in any of his speeches or written works can be trusted. Richard Evan's "Telling Lies About Hitler" presents a solid case against David Irving that casts serious doubt about every 'historical' text that Irving wrote, and this video presents 3 examples from Evan's brilliant book (this video is not a sponsored video, I genuinely think Evan's book is brilliant and you should get yourself a copy) that really should make you question the opinions of those who still promote Irving's works.
Holocaust deniers may continue to deny that the 'Final Solution to the Jewish Question' took place, but in actively distorting the evidence, they undermine their own cause. The term 'distorian' describes their 'writers' better than the term 'historian'.
And, in case it isn't blatantly obvious, I'm NOT a Fascist, NOT a Nazi, NOT a Marxist, and am NOT promoting said evil ideologies. This video is for educational and historical purposes, so that we may learn from the past and prevent it from repeating.
🔔 Subscribe for more History content: / @theimperatorknight
⏲️ Videos EVERY Monday at 5pm GMT (depending on season, check for British Summer Time).
- - - - -
📚 BIBLIOGRAPHY / SOURCES 📚
Evans, R. “In Defence of History.” Granta Books, Kindle.
Evans, R. "Telling Lies About Hitler: The Holocaust, History and the David Irving Trial." Verso, 2002.
Irving, D. "Hitler's War:1939-1942." PAPERMAC 1983.
Irving, D. "Hitler's War:1942-1945." PAPERMAC 1983.
Lipstadt, D. "Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory." Penguin Books, 2016.
Rees, L. "The Holocaust: A New History." Penguin Books, 2017.
Seidel, G. "The Holocaust Denial: Antisemitism, Racism, & the New Right." Beyond the Pale Collective, 1986.
Shermer, M. Grobman, A. "Denying History: Who Says the Holocaust Never Happened and Why Do They Say It?" University of California Press, 2009.
Steinbacher, S. "Auschwitz: A History." Penguin Books, 2005.
The FULL list of all my sources: docs.google.co...
- - - - -
⭐ SUPPORT TIK ⭐
A big thank you to my Patreon, Craig Heinrich, for asking today's question!
Do you want to ask a question? Please consider supporting me on either Patreon or SubscribeStar and help make more videos like this possible. For $5 or more you can ask questions which I will answer in future Q&A videos. Thank you to my current Patrons! You're AWESOME! / tikhistory or www.subscribes...
- - - - -
📽️ RELATED VIDEO LINKS 📽️
Hitler's Socialism | Destroying the Denialist Counter Arguments • Hitler's Socialism | D...
The REAL Reason why Hitler HAD to go to War in WW2 • The REAL Reason why Hi...
The MAIN Reason Why Germany Lost WW2 - OIL • The MAIN Reason Why Ge...
How to Ideologically undermine Holocaust Denialism • How to Ideologically u...
It's NOT acceptable to DENY History • It's NOT acceptable to...
History Theory 101 • [Out of Date, see desc...
My “Why I'm Passionate about HISTORY and What Got Me Into it” video
• Why I'm Passionate abo...
- - - - -
ABOUT TIK 📝
History isn’t as boring as some people think, and my goal is to get people talking about it. I also want to dispel the myths and distortions that ruin our perception of the past by asking a simple question - “But is this really the case?”. I have a 2:1 Degree in History and a passion for early 20th Century conflicts (mainly WW2). I’m therefore approaching this like I would an academic essay. Lots of sources, quotes, references and so on. Only the truth will do.
This video is discussing events or concepts that are academic, educational and historical in nature. This video is for informational purposes and was created so we may better understand the past and learn from the mistakes others have made.

Опубликовано:

28 авг 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 7 тыс.

@TheImperatorKnight 4 года назад

If you want to know how to undermine National Socialist ideology, see 01:24:54 of my “Hitler’s Socialism” video ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-eCkyWBPaTC8.html Edit: A lot of comments are being auto-hidden by RU-vid. I've just approved a bunch now. I'm NOT the one deleting your comments. Fact 1: There are ~196 countries in the world. Fact 2: Holocaust Denialism is only illegal in ~17 countries. Most of these countries are European because Europe never embraced Classical Liberalism (of the John Locke variety: free speech, free markets, free trade etc). Fact 3: Both Richard Evans and Deborah Lipstadt, as well as many historians (including myself), oppose laws against Holocaust Denialism because they don’t work and just give ammunition to the deniers. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_Holocaust_denial#Prosecutions_and_convictions

@franks471 4 года назад

IDK. I like to look at everything. I haven't read his books, but I remember looking at his website once years and years ago and I'm going by vague recollection at this point. I was researching the massacre at Babin Yar in Kiev. After looking at a map he posted, I found some photos and some other info that show that something indeed happened there. There was one odd thing I found though: by comparing a topographical map and photos to the official location, there seemed to be a discrepancy of about 500 feet or so. Then again its been a long time and maybe things changed since then. It's not an important detail I just remember this when I was looking the subject up.

@Francois15031967 4 года назад

Meh. The fact that it isn't illegal in many countries is just because, being the question totally eurocentric, they don't give a f*ck about it.

@Goyakahian1 4 года назад

You're such a shill, Lewis. I knew you would use Evanstein's boneheaded shit as your guide.

@aquilatempestate9527 4 года назад

TFW you don't know if it was Tik or Tribetube that deleted your comment. I love my white male privilege. Imagine if you will a historical narrative so true and a powerful interest group so innocent; you could be imprisoned for questioning either of them.

@boristhebarbarian 4 года назад

@@franks471 1. The area was subject to extensive remodelling post war including during a 1961 mudslide and its cleanup. 2. I read somewhere that a few years after WWII a raging storm swept thrue the area around Baby-Yar. It caused flash flooding witch washed remains out of the ravine downstream. (i may be misconstruing this with this story i read in NY Times www.nytimes.com/1981/09/27/magazine/babi-yar-s-legacy.html near bottom it speaks of the 1961 floods and aftermath.)

@nodarkthings 3 года назад

We're so lucky to have the freedom to criticise Irving without the threat of jail. Imagine if questioning his ideas was prohibited by law.

@Mr.MFuckingYTchangedmyname 3 года назад

But how many out there would like to see his type of questioning banned by law? Remember, it has to work both ways.

@nodarkthings 3 года назад

@@Mr.MFuckingYTchangedmyname There are certain areas of historical enquiry that are banned by law. This is unacceptable. For instance, we are free in all countries to have an academic debate about how many millions were killed by the soviets in the holodomor. But academically debating certain other genocides will either destroy your career or send you to jail in many countries. This should raise alarm bells in any rational being.

@PMetheney84 3 года назад

You mean like questioning the holocaust?

@nodarkthings 3 года назад

@@PMetheney84 no, the paddy potato famine. Question that and your career is over.

@nodarkthings 3 года назад

@@LibertyWarrior68 Funny isn't it? You are not allowed to question certain aspects of history. As long as you stay within the permitted borders you are OK.

@stillpist Год назад

“It says here in this history book that luckily, the good guys have won every single time. What are the odds?” -Norm MacDonald

@vin8754 11 месяцев назад

history is written by the victors

@treytrapani9813 11 месяцев назад

Adam Eget read this guy all the time

@seanmurphy7011 11 месяцев назад

Which history book says that?

@stillpist 11 месяцев назад

Are you autistic?

@alonnehring402 11 месяцев назад

In WW1 there were no good guys

@docvaliant721 Год назад

If you have laws against questioning history then that leads to more questions. It’s very suspect behavior.

@deeznutz8320 Год назад

Exactly

@Hadesthief Год назад

It is, but European governments see it as necessary to avoid another catastrophe like this one

@docvaliant721 Год назад

@@Hadesthief A lot of what is taught is either propaganda or censorship. The victor writes the history. Every war has been shrouded in deception.

@Hadesthief Год назад

@Jamesp wickstrom Nazism started as a populist movement against the establishment

@dajjukunrama5695 Год назад

Stop rapping KanyeYe, I’m sorry, I’m stuck in a month ago when Ye was known as baddy bad bad, I guess now he’s ok so hmmmmm I’m sorry but I can’t call you a White Kanye because media murks opinions

@MamaMia84oo7 2 месяца назад

You should definitely read it. You should read EVERYTHING, especially whatever is being censored and told not to read. David is awesome smart guy.

@boomer166 3 года назад

An interesting tidbit is that everyone thought Irving was an excellent historian, until he wrote the book on Hitler. After that, pariah.

@colonelsmith7757 3 года назад

You've got the timeline wrong, Hitler's War was his most highly-aclaimed work, it was after he was invited to Canada to testify as a WW2 expert to a Canadian court persecuting Ernst Zundel that he started to become a pariah because he looked too deep into holocaust details.

@oni2662 3 года назад

Actually that is not true.

@Blessed_V0id 3 года назад

True but once people gauge others they act on new knowledge. I myself had a friend of 7 years. He got into a fight calling a kid the N word. I and his own girl cut him off. People shouldnt have to respect prejudice...instead, if you spit on a race, prepare to get spat on. I truly hope you havent been manipulated by liars and manipulators, but am not some fucktard looking for issues on the internet assuming peoples views

@eppiehemsley6556 3 года назад

@@colonelsmith7757 Well said Colonel. Poor old Oni has got it wrong I'm pleased to say.

@jenpsakiscousin4589 3 года назад

Does using a racial slur, especially when angered make a person racist? No it does not. I served in a unit made up of 15 different ethnicities and I've hear them all, been called them all. But I know that none of those guys are racist, if they were I wouldn't be here today.

@godefroybaudricourt2974 4 месяца назад

If you want to know who is really in power, find out who you cannot question

@keithad6485 2 месяца назад

Good point

@alexjack4538 2 месяца назад

I tried this with the bald kids at the Children's Hospital and now I'm banned. Cancer doesn't exist.

@anton2192 Месяц назад

Then it most certsinly isn't the Jews considering the amount of backlash Israel has recieved over their war in Gaza at the time of the writing of this comment. Who could it be then?

@HiddenHistory45 Месяц назад

@@anton2192 You do not understand, you can criticise Israel all you want. The entire world knows this, but they are not criticising the Jew. Once you criticise the behaviour of the Jew, you suffer consequences.

@jaiden3473 18 дней назад

@@HiddenHistory45saying that the Jews control the world isn’t criticizing them though, it’s just spreading a stereotype. It’s fine to say that there are people in power who are bad that happen to be Jewish, but trying to attribute these factors to their genetics is wrong

@tomislavschicklgruber9024 Год назад

If RU-vid banned all his videos he’s must be talking truth

@AVOIDAVOIDVOID Год назад

All his books are incredible. They’re a must-read if you’re interested in WWII.

@KINGPUTIN Год назад

Exactly 💯

@zbj4240 Год назад

@@matthewmendez2394 The term "Logic" can be used extremely loosely her. Seriously though, if I was to try and show a Leftist friend of mine, why you shouldn't censor even the worst of people, then this would be my go to video and comment. All that does is radicalize Nazi's and "confirm" their biases. TIK gives example after example as to why Irving is a hack here, and all these folks can do is fall back on the old "Well our Marxist enemies censored it, therefore it's true. Who needs books, sources, data, and an alternative perspective, when I can just resort to this lazy mode of thinking."

@user-vh3fr3lb8w 11 месяцев назад

@@AVOIDAVOIDVOIDneo nazis as usual are convinced by conspiracy theorists.

@alonnehring402 11 месяцев назад

can you please explain why if RU-vid banned his videos that means they are true

@Jackthesmilingblack 6 месяцев назад

Keep in mind that Churchill's book "The History of the Second War" does not mention the Holocaust.

@mikebrownhill8955 6 месяцев назад

Neither does De Gaulle's memoirs

@coffeehousedialogue5684 5 месяцев назад

Why would it? It was about the war.

@mikebrownhill8955 5 месяцев назад

@@coffeehousedialogue5684 I think you'll find the "holocaust" happened during WW2

@coffeehousedialogue5684 5 месяцев назад

@@mikebrownhill8955 And? It would only have had relevance to the Allies closer to the end as Germany was on the verge of losing and abandoned the camps, so it hardly matters. The only other group fighting that it would matter to is the Poles.

@cba46 4 месяца назад

@@mikebrownhill8955 the holocaust was a tragic event for Jews and a blight on German history. Although hyped up in the media the truth is no one outside that groups probably cared. It's no as if the Nazis weren't slowly building up to genociding Jews for 20 years, the writing was always on the wall. People don't really care about the holocaust past it being a political tool.

@unapologeticallywhite7920 Год назад

The only historical event that your not allowed to debate, investigate or deny.

@Hadesthief Год назад

Except in the vast majority of countries

@YourNemesis23 Год назад

You can absolutely investigate it. But i suspect you belong to those people who've reached a conclusion in their head long ago and now only seek to validate it - that's not how historical research works, that's just wishful thinking. But you much rather claim such BS instand of ACTUALLY doing any work at all or do some thinking of your own.

@sheep5514 11 месяцев назад

@@YourNemesis23I have a question. A sincere one. Why is it that any other historical event can be denied in essentially every country on the planet. But 15 european nations have a law specific to one even criminalising its denial

@madzistropudzitto3229 10 месяцев назад

@@sheep5514Wait countries that were affected by holocaust dont like when you deny holocaust but those who did not experience it dont care about it ? WORLD CONSPIRACY

@jordanbey870 10 месяцев назад

I wonder why...

@jasonobrien1989 Год назад

We need a Ministry or Truth to tell us what we are allowed to believe.

@dendradwar9464 11 месяцев назад

And the people who are advocate of that are the authoritarians!

@potatoesblink3299 10 месяцев назад

Rather, we need a source or a form of machinery that tells us what is simply false And let people be free to make Thier beliefs from there. I believe it should be illegal to allow people to believe in (and act upon) things proven to be false. Of course, I understand that it is near impossible to enforce such a thing Because we should always be questioning and learning things. Still, I find it annoying that Flat Earthers and Holocaust deniers exist. People that take advantage of freedom of speech, it's ironic because freedom of speech was made so people could be able to reason the truth of from varying perspectives It wasn't made to validate stupid belief systems that have no factual basis

@jasonobrien1989 10 месяцев назад

@@potatoesblink3299 Hopefully people like you wil never have unchecked power - unfortunately our Leaders are Sociopaths and Psychopaths...

@christopher9727 10 месяцев назад

God created the world in six days He can also save you from hell and have a personal relationship with him today He can give you his Holy Spirit to guide and teach and comfort you today Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Come to Jesus Christ today Jesus Christ is only way to heaven Repent and follow him today seek his heart Jesus Christ can fill the emptiness he can fill the void Heaven and hell is real cone to the loving savior today Today is the day of salvation tomorrow might be to late come to the loving savior today John 3:16-21 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. Mark 1.15 15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel. 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. Hebrews 11:6 6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. Jesus

@KittensAndHugs 9 месяцев назад

We already do and they banned most of his content.

@papasha408 Год назад

Richard Evans is a court historian. David Irving is a truthful historian. It is your choice, which to read.

@Ocrilat 13 дней назад

Richard Evans was not a court historian (whatever that is). He was a defense expert witness. He's also a history professor at Cambridge, a respect author, and an expert on modern German history. Irving is a proven liar and propagandist. Agreed, it is everyone's choice who to read, but know what those choices are.

@ivermektin6874 2 года назад

Everyone's a well renowned historian until they tackle the wrong topic.

@slavikches6090 2 года назад

Why do u recreate accounts to type different comments with the same point?

@terrorbird8957 2 года назад

Or until they just make stuff up and attempt to mislead people about history.

@FelyspG1999 2 года назад

@@terrorbird8957 Why is someone's career completely destroyed when they quote something negative about Jews?

@terrorbird8957 2 года назад

@@FelyspG1999 Have you actually read Richards book?

@koko2bware 2 года назад

@iver mektin Well Said! Agreed!

@oliverstianhugaas7493 4 года назад

*David Irving* is a international treasure, all he says is that the truth does not fear investigation.

@pasisovi 2 года назад

Fully agree!

@JL_Lux 2 года назад

Except when he sued and lost lmaooooo

@koko2bware 2 года назад

Agreed! Irving is the best, no other historian even comes close!

@rustynailbolt 2 года назад

@@JL_Lux oh yeah because that was a totally fair trial 😂

@Rokaize 2 года назад

@@rustynailbolt The only reason you’re saying it wasn’t fair was because it didn’t end in the result you wanted. You’re also probably a Nazi.

@markcrouch8547 Год назад

"His books wrong because this books right" lol absolute waffle.

@morgs456 Год назад

Hah yea

@serpens8 Месяц назад

the sources...

@Ricky-oi3wv Месяц назад

That's the source you cockwomble.

@pierre8654 Год назад

I'm a historian and i have met irving as well. He was speaking (on a non controversial subject) in a hotel close to where i lived and it was reported on in the news, i thought why not go there, see what all the fuss is about and ask the man some questions. Bomb threats and violent activists made the hotel cancel the event at the last minute. Most of the people wanting to attend were already gone and i found a old ostracized tired man who clearly was radicalized because of this isolation, censorship and persecution. I'm a firm believer in free speech and debate as the best way to combat bad ideas. The 'monster' that irving has become is largely to blame on how our soceity has treated mr irving. Like christopher hitchens said Irving is a great historian who wrote better books (despite some bad conclusions that are suspicious) on hitler and wwii than most historians that mosty copy paste from other historians. For those who doubt how to handle cases like irving watch the great speech on RU-vid by Christopher Hitchens on free speech.

@AR15andGOD Год назад

Yup. The same way I was radicalized as a teen and got into the whole nazi thing. Being open, honest, and most importantly kind to others is the best way to fight nazism and authoritarian ideologies.

@pierre8654 Год назад

@@AR15andGOD Couldn't agree more! Thanks for sharing your valuable experience.

@Carrancka Год назад

European politicians use men like him as a scapegoat

@liamfeely Год назад

Yep tik just reports from other historian's

@snippletrap Год назад

Ernst Zundel suffered an even worse fate. Really makes you think.

@jonhinch 3 месяца назад

So the guy spent two years investigating Irving's claims and that's the best he could come up with ? In the first instance a different interpretation of the policeman's hearsay evidence is plausible . Who knows what was in Hitlers mind . For me its very possible ( certainly back then ) he did not want the party to be tarnished by thuggish criminal behavior and the idea that he was actually annoyed that the person he chucked out of the party did not proudly wear his party badge whilst engaging in a criminal act is absurd . Second Jews of Rome incident . The idea that because Hitler knew there were " reprisal killings " he must have known there was a policy of mass killing is a stretch . If such a policy really was in place why on earth were the " troublesome Jews of Rome " even being discussed when as jews they should have been automatically marked for murder . Third example - merely mistakes about numbers and different definitions . Being burnt down is clearly destroyed wheres being looted and smashed up not so much . I have to say im frankly more of the opinion that Mr Irving has merit than before if these really are his worst " transgressions "

@jenpsakiscousin4589 3 года назад

David Irving was at one time considered the best in the field of WW2 history. If you want to get a taste for his work without the controversy then read his early works, particularly the Dresden book. Once you get an idea of his style and the way he interprets the archives and historical records then you can read his later works with a much better understanding of his writings. Irving was one of the first westerners to have access to the Soviet archives which I believe is one reason why they stand out. Irving's books are truly different than anything else ever written on the subject and as a person who has read more than 100 books on WW2 I would consider them essential to understanding that whole part of history.

@FelyspG1999 2 года назад

Why is someone's career completely destroyed when they quote something negative about Jews?

@Del-Canada 2 года назад

@@FelyspG1999 Yea, society goes into full Def Con 5 mode if you even become a tad critical of Israeli policies and people go absolutely nuts when someone denies the Holocaust. Seriously? Let them deny whatever they like. It's a bit odd that this one topic can never be criticized but you hear nary a mention of Holodomor.

@FelyspG1999 2 года назад

@@Del-Canada It is interesting and curious how they play the card up their sleeve to anyone who criticizes them, almost automatically they call them nazy, or racist, to try to obfuscate the criticism and make people side with them for fear of being called racist too.. .

@koko2bware 2 года назад

Irving is different and stands out from other historians. He uses the very best primary sources and archives for all his works. He is the best in this subject, there are no comparisons!

@benfennell6842 Год назад

He literally says up to 250,000 died in dresden, that's moronic.

@philipbrailey 4 года назад

Since most of his stuff has been deleted by RU-vid and also the videos of the sceptics have been deleted. How can we judge for ourselves.

@jasoncollins6518 4 года назад

Spot on!

@bolivar2153 4 года назад

You could try reading books ...

@auschwitzwelcomecommittee3593 4 года назад

All of the deleting just proves their point of view correct, though. If they were wrong, or just talking nonsense, RU-vid wouldn't care. Nobody would. But because they were getting at an uncomfortable truth, they had to be removed.

@bolivar2153 4 года назад

@@auschwitzwelcomecommittee3593 Just like Irving trying to silence Lipstadt. I wonder which uncomfortable truths he was trying to suppress?

@auschwitzwelcomecommittee3593 4 года назад

@@bolivar2153 Nice try, but libel doesn't qualify as free speech.

@JustAnotherDayInEngland Год назад

Everything Evans said can be completely reversed back on him. Irving was 100% fluent in German and spoke with high ranking members of the 3rd Reich in their own native tongue. I remember Irving once held out his hand and said "This hand has shook hands with more people that shook Hitler's than any other person alive today" and I knew all these other historians are just pretenders and he was the real deal. Israeli secret service once broke into Irving's apartment and destroyed all of his research, at the time Irving was writing the most fastidious biography of Adolf Hitler's life during the war years, he had research and accounts that were one-off's and verbal testaments by men that had died, once destroyed they were lost forever and the Israelis made sure they would be completely lost to the west.

@davidfaulds2960 Год назад

We simply cannot ignore everything that Irvine wrote,Irvine went to Germany and lived among the Germans of that era and had access to many people and things that others did not. Lot's of books on the 2nd WW are simply a rehash of other peoples work but not Irvine,having said this,this is no excuse for blindly following every word that he says!

@michaeld7945 Год назад

and? wow, he talked to a bunch of supposed "high ranking members" (i'm sure you can source that btw), so that means all he wrote is 100% true. because the Nazi's totally don't have a reason to lie or try and make themselves look less evil then what they actually were. and it totally discredits the work of thousands of historians who say differently then Irving who, unlike him, didn't have to make their sources up. "Israeli secret service once broke into Irving's apartment and destroyed all of his research" lmao, sure and they also stole his lunch money, peed in his bed and got the tooth fairy to give him a flat tire. not only do you not have any actual proof that such an outlandish claim ever happened, you don't have the common sense of understanding how mind-bogglingly stupid it makes your claims look. this makes "the dog ate my homework" excuse sound believable

@spockofdune8657 Год назад

I remember that crime, when they came in and took his 40 000 notes. When they had to give him back his things, the authorities said that it just got accidentally burned down in storage. How can you accidentally burn down 40 000 things and just those in storage

@snowflakemelter1172 Год назад

Of course they did. 😂

@NeverSeenAMooseIRL 7 месяцев назад

This is wild. Do you have a link regarding that story about his notes being stolen? I can’t find anything online about it.

@conradgaarder2789 3 месяца назад

Why don’t you read Irving’s books and decide for yourself?

@FulhamboyH 4 года назад

How can you be jailed for questioning something 🤔

@rhysnichols8608 4 года назад

Probably because you’re shaking a multi - billion industry at its core

@ginskimpivot753 4 года назад

Whose indictment or judgement said they were found guilty of questioning something?

@aquat715 4 года назад

@@ginskimpivot753 Ursula Haverbeck, a 91 year old German woman who has been in and out of jail for a while now for holocaust denial.

@ginskimpivot753 4 года назад

@@aquat715 ?! She fell foul of German statute law. She wasn't indicted for _'questioning something,'_ as there is no law against that particular activity.

@aquat715 4 года назад

@@ginskimpivot753 "Germany's jailed "Nazi grandma" Ursula Haverbeck, 89, on Friday lost a challenge before the country's highest court, which reaffirmed that constitutional free speech guarantees do not cover Holocaust denial." - "German law makes it illegal to deny the genocide committed by Adolf Hitler's regime, which in the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp in occupied Poland alone claimed some 1.1 million lives, mostly of European Jews. Holocaust denial and other forms of incitement to hatred against segments of the population carry up to five years in prison, while the use of Nazi symbols such as swastikas is also banned. The Constitutional Court ruled that "punishment for denying the National Socialist genocide is fundamentally compatible with Article 5 (1) of the Basic Law," which guarantees freedom of speech." This was on a German news site in 2018 I found it through a simple Google search

@fernbracken Год назад

evans is not an expert he does not speak german he has not had the files opened for him and he is a know nothing

@JUAN_OLIVIER 3 года назад

It is kind of funny how people say he can’t be trusted because he has pro-axis views but then claim how all the people with pro-allies views can be trusted. As Napoleon said: “History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon.” In this case the people being the winning side that gets to decide.

@dayswithoutjewishtricks0416 3 года назад

They don't call them the "All-lies" for nothing.

@benfennell6842 Год назад

That's not why he cant be trusted: he cant be trusted because he is a politician; not a historian. Go look at the evidence brought against him as evidence that he is a racist by the defence at his trial against penguin Ltd. Specifically Irving v. Penguin books Ltd. (2000) paragraph 9.6 This is not a historian, it's a total nut nut bending and fabricating sources (as displayed in the above video) to fit a narrative.

@brucetucker4847 Год назад

Most English-language accounts of the Eastern Front have been based almost entirely on the German POV, so you're wrong.

@agentminecraft9986 Год назад

That’s why we rely on primary sources, which Irving distorts

@stillpist Год назад

“It says here in this history book that luckily, the good guys have won every single time. What are the odds?” -Norm MacDonald

@mrsuperger5429 Год назад

I've read that Irving was highly respected and revered by his academic peers as an historian until he started writing on the Holocaust.? Is this true.?

@chickenandksivideoreviewer9739 Год назад

More or less

@mrhooomdly682 Год назад

He sold more books than every other historian combined from the 1960s to the 1980s

@spockofdune8657 Год назад

Yes ! It is true. This is notorious and easy to verify, I encourage to ! He was successful, and had he never touched what others want to hide, he would be rich and very comfortable in his life. Not the reverse

@keithad6485 10 месяцев назад

From what I have read, it appears Irving could do no wrong with his books, was teh golden boy of his publishers, .....until....he published Hitler's War. And the lack of any mention in his book that Hitler knew of or issued orders re the systematic slaughter of the jews, seems to have brought on the incessant attacks up on him ever since.

@sonofsueraf 5 месяцев назад

@@spockofdune8657more like lied about the topic he's talking about.

@radupascariu4670 4 года назад

Basically you are saying trust Richard Evans not David Irving...

@BigSock099 4 года назад

i mean, evans legit went to court where everything he's said stood up to scrutiny, while david irvings does not. we can't ignore everything that irving has done, but he's not a historian as what he writes too often spits in the mouth of the historical method

@thefrenchareharlequins2743 3 года назад

@Commander Rockwell XII David Irving and the Boche Agency for Hunland

@thefrenchareharlequins2743 3 года назад

@Pep Believe it or not, I am watching Europa the Last Battle (on Bitchute) right now. I usually say stuff like that as a pisstake when people don't make an argument.

@grafzeppelin4069 5 месяцев назад

@@BigSock099 Because historical fact is determined in court.

@WillyEckaslike 5 месяцев назад

@@grafzeppelin4069 it was Irv and his secretary vs a 10m budget of top briefs/ reseaarchers and paid witn essses..also the verdit was decided by one man who was obviously picked for the job.

@Azoria4 Год назад

“He must have known”, “he must have known” said evans. That isn’t evidence but presumption. How ludicrous.

@snowflakemelter1172 Год назад

Probability that Hitler who micro managed everything just overlooked millions of deaths and the massive infrastructure set up to acheive those deaths is zero.

@keithad6485 2 месяца назад

I agree with your assessment. 'He must have known' is the argument of a person who has no proof, no evidence and saying the populist view.

@josephdestaubin7426 Год назад

"The past does not exist in the present. Therefore history is what happens in the mind of the historian when he views an artifact of the past" J. Mason historian extraordinaire.

@Luke_D_Brown_2000 Год назад

Who is J. Mason?

@grahamblack1961 Год назад

@@Luke_D_Brown_2000 Some guy the OP met in a bar.

@Swaaaat1 Год назад

Is that a re-wording of O'brien?

@ReformedWhiteKnight 11 месяцев назад

Historians don’t write about history (unless they meet individuals themselves and are able to interview them). Historians write about or interpret the accounts of history! That is an important fact when we consider history!

@colonelsmith7757 11 месяцев назад

"The job of the historian is to find out what happened and why." -David Irving

@ravenkahne8484 5 месяцев назад

"The Truth is so fragile, It needs a bodyguard of lies to protect It." -Winston Churchill Irving presented another viewpoint and was immediately attacked by the "Bodyguard of Lies."

@matthewbenne8700 3 года назад

I think everyone who reads David Irving needs to understand he tells WWII from the German viewpoint. His experiences at Krupp and as an author interviewing hundreds of Germans directed him, if he was to be truthful, to adopt the German point of view. The German people loved AH long after he was gone, David could not help but get some of that raw emotion in his work because it was in everyone he interviewed. No German could write what David wrote without prison and having their work burned. He is a one of a kind and this perspective needs to be heard and understood to see both sides of the war.

@nerome619 Год назад

Irving is liar and distorter of fact. This is NOT a German perspective.

@cockoffgewgle4993 Год назад

There is no "German viewpoint" or consensus of German opinion.

@JasperJohnD 9 месяцев назад

I disagree. Irving documented the evidence that he uncovered and fell afoul when his work offended powerful people.

@pantelisraptis7685 7 месяцев назад

Even if what you are saying its true name us one historian that you are absolutely sure that he wasnt affected by his personal emotions at all!?Every person has his subcoscious mechaninsms and there is nothing we can do about it.The thing is even under that human ''dysfunction'' to make the best possible research and besides i do not agree with Irwin everywhere he is an expert of ww 2

@klausphx 3 месяца назад

We Need more Documents from German Side People Really knew they would have different opinions.

@liamfeely Год назад

Irvings more legit than evans

@Daggz90 6 месяцев назад

Benjamin Netanyahu said just 3 days ago that A.H didn't try to eliminate them but to relocate them. Interesting that the leader of the Israeli state says this publicly. So anyone doubting Irvings claims now have access to hearing the truth from the horses mouth itself. Irving deserves the world's grandest apology.

@dolanpls3330 19 дней назад

Please link this to me.

@wrichard11 4 дня назад

@@dolanpls3330I don't think there's any chance they will link it and I think I can guess why.

@dolanpls3330 4 дня назад

@wrichard11 Why?

@wrichard11 4 дня назад

@@dolanpls3330 1 it's been 2 weeks. 2 had Benjamin Netanyahu said such a thing it would have been widely reported. Therefore my conclusion is that he never said such a thing so there is nothing to link to. Hope this helps.

@TheZaluchi 2 года назад

So The dresden bombing is revisionist history now is it? SMH you lost all credit right there!!!!

@MADM-tinus 3 месяца назад

Indeed, it was a major red flag for me.

@BRTaylor Год назад

I would be more impressed if you had a face to face interview with Irving, giving him the opportunity to respond to your accusations. Anyone can cherry pick sources to discredit another, maybe in an attempt to make themselves appear superior.

@AR15andGOD Год назад

Taylor, what a disingenuous comment. Why would a grown man care about appearing "superior" by talking about what another man said? And irving did give his own account of things, that's why his books are quoted repeatedly in this video. There is no cherry picking, he has the entire book. Also, saying he should have interviewed him otherwise it's worthless is a pitiful tactic that I only see done when no other argumentation can be made. As a former nazi, this is just not a good comment.

@BRTaylor Год назад

@@AR15andGOD I suggest you find another word rather than disingenuous, because my initial comment was sincere. I can point you in the right direction of a good dictionary if you are struggling with your grammar.

@jakubszczuka8060 Год назад

funny

@CardinalBiggles01 Год назад

@@AR15andGOD Wanting someone to talk to the actual person who wrote those books to have a 2 way discussion about points of disagreement is a "pitiful tactic"? OK Jesus. Just remember, as Hemingway said, "There is no nobility about being superior to your fellow man, true nobility comes from being superior to your former self".

@jp__878 Год назад

@@BRTaylorno, you original comment does appear disingenuous. Like half these brain dead comments you just say “blah blah cherry picked” yk you gotta actually provide something of substance. You the type of guy that just wants to be oppressed 😂

@unknownkingdom 3 года назад

Would you interview Irving himself about these points in depth? He is pretty responsive by email and I think very willing to speak to any audience.

@jonkennedy4846 3 года назад

yes I emailed David Irving about "Hitler's food tasters"...of course he said it was not factual...

@HW-sw5gb 3 года назад

Lol you’re very obviously just trying to get Irving exposed to a larger audience. In person debates are a terrible way to figure anything out philosophically.

@JUAN_OLIVIER 3 года назад

@@HW-sw5gb - You seem very obvious in trying to silence Irving, see what I did there?

@HW-sw5gb 3 года назад

@@JUAN_OLIVIER That’s literally exactly what I’m trying to do. I wish it worked even better. There’s a reason there’d be huge outrage if any respected TV show brought Richard Spencer on. An inherent part to the freedom of speech is the right to oppose ideas you think are stupid and harmful. That includes imposing social consequences for holding those ideas and asking others to do the same and not accept those who do. I’d do the same for any flat earther or climate change denier or anti-vaxxer or a cult member. Irving deserve to be disrespected and have his stupidity exposed to as little people as possible. Otherwise people who are in vulnerable positions in their lives might not recognize it for the obvious dumbness that it is and buy into it (see Scientology or Heaven’s Gate for another example of this). Anyone denying the Holocaust deserves the same respect as someone at an astrophysicist convention arguing a turtle is holding up the Earth.

@colonelsmith7757 3 года назад

@@HW-sw5gb and you're very obviously trying to keep him hidden because he's put half the world's WW2 academic historians to shame.

@ADHD55 Год назад

Cannot question "The thing" Cannot historically analyse "The thing" Cannot even name it because RU-vid will remove the comment If you dare to ask questions about it your career , banking, business will be destroyed

@kzms4220 Год назад

I wonder if Tik would even be brave enough to debate on codoh

@scoobtube5746 Год назад

@@kzms4220 Zero chance of that ever happening. He would get trounced inside of ten minutes. He knows it, they know it, and we know it.

@pheebobobeanie7680 Год назад

Read Irving yourself. Don’t listen to anyone else tell you what to think about anyone. Make your own mind up.

@spockofdune8657 Год назад

I concur. Read books. Specially good ones like his

@coffeehousedialogue5684 5 месяцев назад

You don't think he already has? He even quotes Irving.

@pheebobobeanie7680 5 месяцев назад

@@coffeehousedialogue5684 I’m going to assume you have misunderstood me. What I am saying is that people should read for themselves and not trust short format RU-vid videos that are conveniently placed at the top of any David Irving search you put in (whereas any of David’s actual videos are hidden away). Doesn’t that tell you something?

@coffeehousedialogue5684 5 месяцев назад

@@pheebobobeanie7680 No, it doesn't. Shorter videos are the favored ones for everything. YT screwed over everyone. Don't act like Irving's special in this regard.

@pheebobobeanie7680 5 месяцев назад

@@coffeehousedialogue5684 Well, he is special in this regard because he’s being censored. If you don’t believe that then you’re obviously below par in terms of intelligence. I’m afraid to say there isn’t a cure for being soft.

@triggerhappy1yearold 4 года назад

Why don’t you have an interview with him and show how wrong he really is?

@rhysnichols8608 4 года назад

I would love to see it. Irving is reachable via his website maybe they could set up a web cam interview. I’m interested in Irving’s view as he has stood up well to apparent debunking attempts in the past

@triggerhappy1yearold 4 года назад

Rhys Nichols it certainly would be interesting to see what TIK has to say to him and what his responses are

@MK-hs9ck 4 года назад

Because he doesn't have the ability to prove Irving wrong about anything and RU-vid bans any genuine interviews/debates with him for this reason.

@rhysnichols8608 4 года назад

MK Agree with you there...this man is relying on richard Evans books, Evans was paid 75 grand to smear Irving. I wouldn’t trust him what’s to say Evans sources aren’t faked to make Irving look bad. Time and again the mainstream has prevented fake ‘evidence’ that later came out to be proven phoney. Obviously Irving isn’t right about everything, and has admitted to errors of interpretation in the past. But the mainstream is far more guilty of this. For instance half the shit at Nuremberg that these so called professors were basing their books on in the 1960s and 70s later was admitted fake....so much for their ‘evidence’ then hahah, the Katyn forest massacres were blamed on Germany time and again until the 90s when the NKVD files finally showed the truth. So all the ‘professors’ who called Irving a faker for saying it was the Russians turned out to be wrong 😂 I’ve researched both sides of the story and I’m convinced Irving is closer to the truth. But these limp wristed intellectuals just follow the heard and don’t want to get criticised.

@MK-hs9ck 4 года назад

@Big Bill O'Reilly Not an argument.

@roarkeshea9158 4 года назад

The TRUTH FEARS NO INVESTIGATION

@greenland1405 4 года назад

Why would they gas them 😂 if you have gun

@raydematio7585 4 года назад

THE TRUTH FEARS INDIGESTION The creep cannot be trusted

@alexandredelneste270 3 года назад

@Let's Make the Holocaust Great Again! Well if you had some knowledge about Nazi archives related to Einsatzgruppen, you would have seen SS reports related to soldiers being mentally affected from shooting child, women or elders nearly every day on Eastern fronts. And so why they bringed T4 staff leading to gas van first, then the AR camps in Poland. One should maybe know a bit more about the subject he's talking before saying it has no sense ...

@tomorrowneverdies567 Год назад

@Let's Make the Holocaust Great Again! but he never claimed they were "too nice, sensitive and too affected to shoot them". Also, not every person is the same. One should accuse someone only for what they have/have not done.

@tomorrowneverdies567 Год назад

@Let's Make the Holocaust Great Again! it's possible. Because in the beginning they may be wanting them to work as cheap labor (slaves) making weapons (in Poland etc.), and after some point (maybe 1943) they noticed that the cost of feeding them was in fact bigger than the products they gained by having them produce them. As for cruelty, don't be surprised. I live in Greece, and whole villages of innocent people, whole families were burned alive (you read correctly, burned alive) in their houses on purpose, just because there was a suspicion that someone from the village had sabotaged, or killed a German soldier. There are pictures of women having their children taken out of their wombs with gun bayonetts. So I wouldn't be surprised by such attrocities to the khazar people as well.

@URAFANNY 2 месяца назад

The more history is sensored the more i ask questions, the more questions i ask the more questionable history becomes...

@mitchrichards1532 2 месяца назад

Try questioning a denier, see how productive that is. Seriously, try it.

@KansasHempMan 2 месяца назад

DIs stuff can be found on alternative websites.

@TitusMaximus-g8w 11 дней назад

What is a denier exactly?

@mitchrichards1532 11 дней назад

@@TitusMaximus-g8w A denier is someone who denies the existence of established fact on a topic.

@TitusMaximus-g8w 11 дней назад

Oh I see...like Copernicus

@mattnolan5527 Год назад

the truth is Irving had access to files and documents that other historians did not both Roper and Hastings used his research but were too cowardly to admit it

@mikejames5743 3 месяца назад

That's accurate, Trevor Hugh Roper definitely used David's work.

@silverstar8868 2 месяца назад

So we just so happened to have access to super secret files that no one else has? Why is that? Who gave it to him? He just happened to find it or?

@keithad6485 2 месяца назад

Irving also walked the areas where these historic events took place, I suspect there is a lot of professional jealousy of Irving from these so called 'academic' historians. To me academic means - Desk bound, quotes the works of other historians and largely, do not get out of their office to walk the ground where event occurred and reluctant to visit places such as the PRO to conduct their own research. and very likely never travel to places such as Bundes Arkiv and similar places to read original docs for themselves. Nor ever took the trouble to learn and speak fluent German to better understand original documents. I have no respect for any historian who seeks to denigrate others without also, at the same time, showing evidence of their spurious claims against the person they are attacking. Evans appears to be once such denigrator and who has the appearance of being jealous of Irving's capacity for seeking out original documents, speaking with people with first hand personal knowledge of historical events, seeking out contemporary letters home to family, war time diaries, etc etc. And appears to be jealous of Irving's fame (but not his debatable infamy). Did Evans ever get his hands dirty with physical labour like Irving did when he went to work in a German steel mill in the 1960s?

@alexjack4538 2 месяца назад

@@keithad6485 The guy's respect went down after he questioned if Hitler even knew the Holocaust took place. The main problem with that is you can't just have that infrastructure appear and NOT know about it, especially if his high command knew. There is also the fact that Nazi propaganda made it very clear that the Jew was to be seen as a threat. Eventually that evolved to denying the Holocaust even happened at all.

@vortex162 Месяц назад

@@silverstar8868 Not secret at all IF you are willing to do the footwork!

@dr.corneliusq.cadbury6984 4 года назад

Regarding the first example with Hitler kicking a guy out of the party after he smashed up a deli without his party badge on, Irving's interpretation is much more plausible than that of Evans. All Hitler said was that the removal of the badge was in effect an act of resigning from the party. This does NOT imply that Hitler would have been happy to have his guys smashing up shops WITH their badges on. Evans: "Had the brownshirts kept their badges on, Hitler's words indicated that he might well have had no objection to their action." What tf is this "might well have had no objection"??? That's not a real argument.

@dr.corneliusq.cadbury6984 4 года назад

That all said, Irving does spin the whole thing a little strangely as Hitler nobly protecting Jews. He could also merely be acting out of practical considerations. It's not hard to understand why a party leader wouldn't want party members running around and smashing up stores like common thugs. It's not a good look.

@colonelsmith7757 11 месяцев назад

@@dr.corneliusq.cadbury6984 Hitler literally gave the order to stop all hostile actions against Jews, this order was relayed to every single SA and police HQ across the entire Reich on the same night of the outrages, it was signed for and sent by Rudolf Hess himself, Hitler's second in command. It wasn't Hitler who instigated these actions, it was Goebbels, who exploited the murder of a German diplomat in Paris by a Jew.

@thehaus6998 6 месяцев назад

that is an argument, we can't fully know what hitler might've done, but the fact is that we have the consequance for the opposite action, might show that there would of probably been an opposite response for the opposite action

@philiplavere 6 месяцев назад

That whole disingenuous opening to this video sets up the narrator as a liar far beyond what he is trying to defame Irving with. Even supposing he had any sort of real point, his subsequent dismissal of "every word" of Irving's, points to a lack of rational thinking and a pathetically transparent agenda.

@jonhinch 3 месяца назад

@@philiplavere For me if after two years those three examples are the best he could come up with Irving must be pretty accurate 99 % of the time !

@robZzdaboss Год назад

Zealots calling David Irving an ideologue for his heresy of the ''Holocaust'' dogma is hilariously ironic.

@Pantokrator1 6 месяцев назад

Over the years, I've followed up on David Irving's research. So far, there's very, very little of what he stated was untrue. Most of his research was done with first-hand witnesses, including next of kin of the top dogs in power. I'm not for one minute denying that attrocities took place, but from a war strategist's POV, it makes sense that Hitler's generals and indeed himself, would want to postpone the 'special actions', as he concentrated on initial battle tactics. He also wouldn't have wanted to globally taint his image so early in the war. But to completely disregard Irving based on his Lipstat trial is foolish. His definitive Hitler's War book cannot be disputed, even by his detractors.

@Noah-qp6oe 6 месяцев назад

Why does Irving place importance on key witness testimonies when it comes to National Socialists, or ‘top dogs’ as you say but when it comes to survivors of the holocaust and concentration camps he disregards eye-witnesses completely. Seems hugely biased. Also former top officials in the Third Reich have every reason to lie and save themselves and their ideologies reputation, and I would argue camp survivors had gone through such an ordeal there would be no benefit of lying because the truth was already so unbelievably devastating and diabolical. Lying would only hurt the truth. Irving bends the truth to his truth, and disregards truths that don’t meet his world view, plain and simple.

@MaxCadyS 6 месяцев назад

@@Noah-qp6oe because you can simply look at the facts and see these holocaust survivors are full of shit. Masturbation death machines? Rollercoasters of death? Human lampshades? Get real.

@Palestine4palestinies 6 месяцев назад

@@MaxCadyS my guy there's literally a photo and eyewitness testimony of Americans who found the lampshade And no Holocaust survivor ever claimed of a rollercoaster of death it was literally made up by Nazis to discredit Jews And there's literally photo/documented evidence of the nazi collecting Jewish semen to prove they were inferior

@peterd.1165 8 месяцев назад

I have bought several of Irvine's books - My opinion is that he is a man of great integrity and professionalism - He tells the truth and the truth hurts the tribe - The Tribe is evil - as the present events in Gaza prove beyond any doubt.

@binder946 7 месяцев назад

Not the whole tribe some zionist

@7sevenframes 7 месяцев назад

@@binder946 - who? name them.

@binder946 7 месяцев назад

@nine9n3 its all aipc, jdl and hedgefund media morddoor fed reserve its like a huge octopus with tentacles everywhere. International org like imf if bi's its hard to belief but its true. Bis ifc. Shipping Co Holding companies :"dark stone"

@FreemonSandlewould 6 месяцев назад

@@7sevenframes my buddy Roy. He's not in the syndicate. That's the dividing line as far as I can tell.

@Nasdaqslaktarn 6 месяцев назад

agreed

@napoleonfrank8455 3 года назад

I rather believe David Irving than all these mumbo jambo historians that follow the "winners" narative.

@philipbrailey 4 года назад

Let us read what we want.

@strawberrydragon1 3 года назад

there is nothing stopping you

@shlomoshekelberg7522 3 года назад

@@strawberrydragon1 TIK is clearly trying to stop people.

@philipbrailey Год назад

about all the films of David Irving have been taken down. There you go. So much for free speech.@@strawberrydragon1 What about

@skeetlegeetles9449 Год назад

I had to stop viewing before the 5 minute mark of this video. I'll read Irving by my own choice and draw my own conclusions. If you have to vehemently trash him like you do, it'll just arouse my desire to think for myself. Not sure if I trust you either.

@GlossaME Год назад

Bingo

@michaelveegh4508 3 месяца назад

So speculations by Richard Evans, an establishment British historian is the final word on events that took place in Germany?

@mitchrichards1532 3 месяца назад

Speculations? No, that's you trying to distort what happened when Dr. Evans examined Irving's work against his source material and was able to demonstrate when and where he omitted fact, took liberties, and fabricated lies to create a false narrative. That's not speculation, that's fact. He proved it in a public court and Irving was caught red handed.

@KansasHempMan 2 месяца назад

@@mitchrichards1532Historians make mistakes here and there. You acting as if DI is a coordinated liar shows your bias

@mitchrichards1532 2 месяца назад

@@KansasHempMan He was caught distorting the historical record by misusing his source material. He wrote lies and false narratives, so what do you call him?

@KansasHempMan 2 месяца назад

@@mitchrichards1532 Stop acting like he did that on purpose. Governments don't censor people who tell the truth. Governments censor inconvenient truths.

@mitchrichards1532 2 месяца назад

@@KansasHempMan Ya ok, and anytime something is "censored" it becomes gospel truth to certain people just because of that. Explain that little fact of nutter psychology? It's like: Oh "they" tried to suppress the info??? Then that proves it MUST BE TRUE!!! lol, explain that complete lack of critical or even rational thought by a segment of the population.

@jolevy4569 3 года назад

Richard Evans was given several million dollars by film director Spielberg and others which enabled him to hire two full-time researchers for two years. They found about twenty suspected errors in Irving's writing. The judge based his judgement mainly on three of these. In several decades of intense work that is not many. I have read Irving's works and some of Richard Evans's, and I have seen them both expounding on WWII history. In my opinion Irving is more intelligent than Evans, speaks far better German and has done massively more original research on the period. He is indisputably the greatest historian of the period, to the extent that if one were to give points out of 10, giving him 9 would mean that no other historian of the period could rate above 7, and Evans only 4. His reputation is up against the greatest obstacle of power that exists, but history itself will one day laud him as the genius he is.

@Lawofimprobability 3 года назад

As a lawyer, I'd like to point out that arguments in court rarely go into all the issues. Judges have time constraints and, even though there are times when I'd love to spend 20+ pages on a single issue, want to examine just enough to determine the proper conclusion of the case. There may have been hundreds of things Irving did wrong but actually discussing all of them would take more attention than the judge would tolerate. It is the usual practice in a case to maybe mention all the issues you want to preserve for appeal and then focus on only the most serious issues. "Only 20 suspected errors" usually just means "20 errors we are willing to focus on". If Evans can prove that Irving inserted false claims about a specific incident (like the fabrication of Goering's reaction to a source that never mentioned him), then that would be pretty damning evidence that Irving was deliberately dishonest. It only takes proving a pattern of deliberate dishonesty to sink a claim based on trust.

@haydenchristensen8607 3 года назад

Troll or neo-nazi?

@memorarenz 2 года назад

@@haydenchristensen8607 or Idiot...so probably a neo nazi

@maryconroy1835 2 года назад

@@LawofimprobabilityYou are correct that Irving was found guilty of fabricating history on a technicality , you are inncorrect to assume that this proves that much of his work is unreliable, indeed the fact that after three years of trawling through Irving's work this was all that Evans could come up with is a great vindication of Irving's work.

@Lawofimprobability 2 года назад

@@maryconroy1835 Only some of the simplest to explain misconduct by Irving are discussed here or in the popular press. Evans had written a 700 page report on Irvings misstatements of fact and misrepresentations of substance but that is far too specific for most people to care about. Some severe misconduct I care about because of how obviously unethical it is is how Irving insisted the Dresden Bombing death toll matched Nazi claims and that he had access to a local government document on the Dresden bombing death toll but could no longer produce it. The copies that were identified didn't have the same numbers of dead which pretty strongly indicates Irving lied. Irving has done more evil than just that but that is quite enough already.

@EsotericOccultist 3 года назад

I dare you to debate him instead of talking behind his back.

@deepcosmiclove Год назад

”No praise can be too high for [Mr. Irving’s] indefatigable scholarly industry. He has sought and found scores of new sources, including many private diaries. He has also tested hitherto accepted documents and discarded many of them as forgeries. His portrait of Hitler is thus, he claims, firmly based on solid primary evidence…An exact and scrupulous historian.”- Hugh Trevor-Roper (Lord Dacre), Regius Professor of Modern History at Oxford.

@keithad6485 2 месяца назад

This is not a criticism of your comment, this is a minor point, but Trevor-Roper was actually Lord (Baron?) Dacre of Glanton, this was to distinguish from another, unrelated, Lord Dacre. Hugh Trevor-Roper pops up in actual events of history which is lesser known - He actually worked with traitor Kim Philby in British SIS during the War. But never suspected at the time that Philby was betraying and continued to betray the country of his birth (England) to the Soviets. Source (from memory) H.A.R. 'Kim' Philby, 'My Silent War'. 1967. Following the War (late 1945) Trevor Roper was appointed to conduct Operation Nursery in Germany to investigate the fate of Adolf Hitler, apparently a British Government operation to rebut persistent claims by the Soviet propaganda newspaper Isvestia that the Brits were hiding the very much alive Hitler (according to Isvestia) in a schloss in West Germany. Later, in the early 1980s, during the fake Hitler Diary fiasco, he publicly stated the Hitler diaries were genuine; before Irving - in spectacular fashion - revealed at a German media event, that the diaries were fake. To be fair to Trevor-Roper, it appears he was rushed into deciding and declaring the diaries were genuine. Source - Robert Harris 'Selling Hitler' a book published in the 1980s.

@deepcosmiclove 2 месяца назад

@@keithad6485 I remember that. One of the things that tipped off Mr. Irving was that the diaries had artificial leather covers. He knw that Hitler would have only bought and used books with fine paper and genuine leather.

@keithad6485 2 месяца назад

@@deepcosmiclove Another tip off was Irving had discovered a 'diary' entry could not have been known by Hitler at the date it was written. Robert Harris's book is well worth reading. Even quotes Rupert Murdoch who told his news paper men to publish the diaries anyway (after they were discovered to be fake), 'are in the entertainment business' (not the news business).

@KENACT1 3 года назад

You concentrate on Irving's Hitler's War. I've read Irving's Insurrection Budapest and Rommel: The Trail Of The Fox. Are you suggesting that those books are also corrupted? Because they seemed pretty good to me. The Trail Of the Fox was on the recommended reading list at West Point.

@LeopardIL2 Год назад

Also war of Generals.

@mikebrownhill8955 6 месяцев назад

His book on the luftwaffe and Erhard Milch is also excellent

@marwentrabelsi2983 4 месяца назад

you are doing great until you talk about or question Isreal :) not a rocket science

@alg7115 2 месяца назад

His book on the v2 program is still the very best on the subject. He also is the one who translated alot the German generals memoirs into English. Which 'court historians' use.

@mg777-g4c 2 месяца назад

Strawman argument - just because Irving may be faithful to the truth on certain subjects, the *fact* that he has been shown to intentionally misrepresent the truth on other topics means that his work should be viewed with distrust by default, especially regarding the Holocaust.

@rdmountford3132 3 года назад

By the way.....skunky Evans is not fluent in German...and didn't even know who Albert Speer was...

@rdmountford3132 3 года назад

@Blanc Neige no he Can't either

@joaobruno9464 4 года назад

You failed to mention that in his veridict, the judge rejected evans most negative assessment of irving and accepted the more positive view of john keegan. Even though irving lost the libel case, the judge commended his "unparalled" knowledge of nazi germany and ww2.

@bolivar2153 4 года назад

He also said "The charges which I have found to be substantially true include the charges that Irving has for his own ideological reasons persistently and deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence; that for the same reasons he has portrayed Hitler in an unwarrantedly favourable light, principally in relation to his attitude towards and responsibility for the treatment of the Jews; that he is an active Holocaust denier; that he is anti-semitic and racist and that he associates with right wing extremists who promote neo-Nazism."

@joaobruno9464 4 года назад

@@bolivar2153 yes it's true, irving lost the case and has many flaws. Still, you shouldn't base your opinion of him solely on evans own view. Other reputable historians have praised irvings books. It's not a black and white issue.

@bolivar2153 4 года назад

joao bruno Yes, some historians have praised aspects of Irving’s work, as Irving is so fond of quoting in his ‘publisher’s blurb’. However, Irving also fails to quote the remainder of those same historians views with respect to his manipulations and his blatantly untrue claims. Again, Irving picks and chooses what he wants to use, altering or omitting anything that doesn’t suit his agenda.

@joaobruno9464 4 года назад

@@bolivar2153 I guess that could be applied to many other historians. In particular evans, who is not unbiased. He was in fact payed handsomely to right a negative report on irving. Anyone who is interested in this issue should do their own research and maybe read irvings books and judge for themselves. Not base their opinion on another single biased historian.

@bolivar2153 4 года назад

@@joaobruno9464 I don't base my opinions of Irving on a "single biased historian". Evan's was employed by the defence to investigate Irving's books and to find inconsistencies. He spent two years doing this, with great thoroughness. (Had Irving done this in the first place, this discussion would not be taking place). Does this automatically give him bias? No, it doesn't. He did the job he was employed to do as an historian. His research was thorough and has since been published for all to read and to critique. If you have found flaws in his work, please enlighten us.

@vespasianflavius8778 Год назад

Why is it that almost all videos regarding Mr. Irving have the comments disabled? What others Historians in the last 20 years have been put in jail for their opinions?

@keithad6485 2 месяца назад

Good point. Shows how much control and power certain sections of our society weild. Want to know who controls us? look to those who we cannot criticise.

@Lvx66 3 года назад

There's more integrity in Irving's work on Nazi Germany than most of the authoritative sources on the topic. It's unfortunate that history has become another platform for bias and political agenda but that's what sets Irving apart. The facts he presents are not always pleasant, but he presents all of them whether they conflict each other or they conflict with traditional belief is not his concern, he's a historian. The reputation he's gained reveals more the deplorable state in which mainstream history finds itself, than inaccuracies in his work.

@koko2bware Год назад

Well said! No Historian in recent memory has ever written with such detail from primary sources with the sole purpose to educate the masses. To dismiss his entire lifetime work motivated by political biasness all based on a few trivial examples is both malicious and scandalous.

@snorttroll4379 Год назад

upvote this

@lgic1 11 месяцев назад

Well stated

@coffeehousedialogue5684 5 месяцев назад

TIK is not mainstream either. He regularly goes after commies and other socialists.

@Waljoy 3 года назад

Mr. Irving is a very good, honest historian ~~ that's why he is being persecuted.

@rosesprog1722 3 года назад

Exactly, mainstream historians don't spend years in jail.

@RifleEyez 3 года назад

@@rosesprog1722 To be fair mainstream historians barely touch primary sources and their ''research'' amounts to piggybacking off the work that others have done, whereby those people before have done exactly the same thing, and repeat. All it takes is that original 'source' to have misconstrued something or put their own subtle spin on things - just like Irving is accused of - now EVERYONE is towing that same line because ''they got it from XYZ's book''. Even TIK is basically is a history aggregator - he'll say ''Oh, Stalingrad - okay, so I'll pick up Glanz, then the Stalingrad series, maybe Panzerkrieg as well...maybe even Beevor for some lite bits and pieces, maybe a memoir, or Voices from Stalingrad, okay video time''. I would be willing to bet that TIK has never uncovered a primary source and contributed anything 'new'. Not that it's a bad thing per se, it's good more people are interested in history.

@rosesprog1722 3 года назад

@@RifleEyez Now, don't get me started... he he. Historians should not take sides, only tell facts, TIK cannot do that so sdometimes I get angry at my computer screen... It's simpler to go elsewhere. There are a few interesting mainstream guys but the true history of these sad times still remains hidden behind the pack of lies invented after the war for as Churchill said: ''History will be kind to me for I intend to write it.''

@RifleEyez 3 года назад

@@rosesprog1722 TIK puts in a lot of effort into his videos - not denying this, but his political videos leave a lot to be desired, which makes me feel there's some bias and pandering to the ''WEHRBRO CROWD" with his "SIR LORD MANSTEIN OUTNUMBERED 8 TO 1'' routine, a claim I've addressed on that Manstein video (where it isn't so far fetched depending on what date and Army Group you're looking at it). But as I said there's a difference between being a history aggregator or not. I would be surprised if TIK has even been to any of these battlefields he discusses, can read German (let alone the old German script), or even Russian, and actually dug up something new.

@mg777-g4c 2 месяца назад

"honest historian" - except for when he deliberately makes up events which didn't happen 6:30😉😉

@edwinpassii8430 4 года назад

David Irving is a historian, you do not have to agree with him to see he put a lot of time and effort into his books. Also, what the hell was that guy talking about when saying David wrote his books for political purposes? He never denied the holocaust, all he did was question the camps. Are we not allowed to question historical events?

@Alte.Kameraden 4 года назад

David Irving joined the H.denial movement during the 90s. He gave quite a few lectures about it and even went to Holocaust lectures to debate and argue with other writers. Which is why he was included in Lipstabts' book on the subject and is also why Evans started researching for a book about Irving's deceptions of history even before the Liability trial. Irving has seem to have had a personal love affair with Hitler and tried to deliberately distort history in his favor by damning people around Hitler while down playing Hitler's involvement in war crimes. He the joined the H.denial movement at the end of the 80s and was an active supporter of the IHR, which I used to be a member of their website back when I used to drink from that toxic well and Irving was one of their champions until a few years ago when he finally started backpeddling on the H subject.

@edwinpassii8430 4 года назад

@@Alte.Kameraden Couple of questions. What was this movement called? Also, the video above never states what he exactly distorted about historical events of WWII. What specific historical event did David Irwin falsify and/or distort?

@Alte.Kameraden 4 года назад

@@edwinpassii8430 well I tried but YT deleted my reply. This is an insanely touchy subject that requires code words to dicusse in the comment section. I tried to give a history of thd IHR and what I know from the time I was with what remained of it like 10 years ago before I jumped ship but YT bots wiped the reply and I honestly can not discuss it without specifics including names without sounding like a loony. I really miss youtube before the censorship.

@Alte.Kameraden 4 года назад

But, put it bluntly. Irving tried to white was Hitler while scapegoating others in the regime. Like I said he seemed to like Hitler a lot. His criticism of the H came from research done by members if the IHR, who have been proven to be run by Antisemites after hackers broke into the personal emails of one of it's founders. Irving likely only jumped on their cause so he could use it to white wash Hitler more and only for this because of his past bias.

@sargonsblackgrandfather2072 4 года назад

Holocaust denial isn’t just about wholesale denier it ever took place. Mostly these days it takes the form of revisionism. Historians can be politically motivated, Irvin works from the conclusion backwards.

@ambianknight6816 6 месяцев назад

Dude lol. David Irving would run circles around you.

@cardboardcapeii4286 4 месяца назад

Bro I’m sure you can take 100 small mistakes (like the reason a party officer took off his badge before smashing up a shop) from other historians. This doesn’t reduce Irving’s credibility.

@thomasruppenthal7192 3 года назад

Evans and Lipstadt couldn't hold Mr. Irving's jock. Mr. Irving is one of the very best historians of WWII but he refused to genuflect to the ridiculous Holocaust and those who use it for power and money, so he had to be punished. Lipstadt's book was as if written by a high school C-student. One of the worst books I ever plodded through. Irving writes extremely well and often looked from the German perspective and treated the Germans as rational people and not humanized evil. The trial was a terrible injustice and one must wonder how much money it cost to have the judge find against a real historian who had been slandered by a third-rate one.

@gavinslater2047 2 года назад

good man..well said

@MrDarudin 2 года назад

Fuck off. Irving actually admitted to falsifying records about the holocaust.

@koko2bware 2 года назад

Absolutely true...well said!

@larrydickman5936 2 года назад

You know you have done good when the kosher mafia and their attack dogs are offended.

@MrDarudin 2 года назад

@@larrydickman5936 There is a difference between speaking truth to power and simply falsifying historical records.

@Guido_XL 4 года назад

It is hard to maintain the suggestion that Richard J. Evans is generally unbiased with regard to this subject. During the Irving versus Penguin Books libel case, Evans responded to Irving: "It is because you want to interpret euphemisms as being literal, and that is what the whole problem is. Every time there is an euphemism, Mr. Irving ... or a camouflage piece of statement or language about Madagascar, you want to treat it as the literal truth, because it serves your purpose of trying to exculpate Hitler. That is part of ... the way you manipulate and distort the documents." Evans took the Holocaust narrative for granted, whereas Irving did not. A truly unbiased historian does not take any narrative for granted, but seeks evidence that exceeds hear-say and the circular logic of accepting statements that are based on equally unproven assumptions. Evans seems to embrace the "euphemism" theory about Nazi rule during WWII. Whenever the narrative gets stuck in the process, due to blatant lack of actual evidence, the argument goes that the Nazis applied "euphemisms in order to hide their actual intentions". Of course, we are supposed to ignore the huge logical fallacy that ensues this assumption.

@CallanElliott 4 года назад

Well, fuck, those camps were there and they weren't conducting meditation classes...

@albertarthurparsnips5141 4 года назад

What utter rot and poppycock. All these pathetic resorts to ‘ euphemisms ‘ and sundry hints at underhanded semantic trickery and subterfuge. Nazis ( that is what you are : be frank and sincere, stop stooping and cowering behind scarcely believable wafer- thin masks as...” revisionists “, and other such subterfuge. Be honest and upfront and brave enough, for once, to describe yourselves as you precisely are....Nazis ! ),...and sincerely declare your admiration of the shootings of babies by the einsatzgruppen, and cease your laughable attempts to dismiss evidence of gas chambers. Your are acting precisely as the cowardly failed fowler, Himmler, allowed to be put down ON AUDIO RECORDING that these revolting crimes could NEVER be admitted to. Neo-Nazis of today, your useless denialiasm woluld certainly be lauded by the exemplary Aryan Heinrich if he were ( thankfully not ) be here to witness them today.

@Guido_XL 4 года назад

@@CallanElliott The camps themselves never were disputed in the first place. If that is your response, then first try to familiarise yourself with the subject, before you come up with useless replies. Are you really implying that we "deniers" are too stupid to know at least the basics about WWII? This subject has been discussed since decades and goes into great lengths to scrutinise all kinds of details. Simply assuming that a casual reference to "the camps" suffices to silence "deniers" is more than naive.

@CallanElliott 4 года назад

@@Guido_XL I was being sarcastic. So what parts exactly do you deny about the Holocaust?

@ElliotBougis 4 месяца назад

this is possibly the crux of the whole issue if the "euphemisms" were about what we now consider to be 'obviously' genocidal aims, where is the decoder key for the euphemisms? iow, if the meaning 'behind' the euphemisms was so obvious to everyone in the communication loop, what documentation is there of such a decoded platform? alternatively, if the alleged 'euphemisms' were actually just face-value statements among Nazi leaders, where is the documentary basis for a genocidal plan on their part? basically, if the codewords were effective to dupe underlings, then we should be able to document uncoded communiques that lay out the whole diabolical scheme; yet, all we have as evidence of such a scheme is a series of allegedly coded statements that never fit the bill

@truxton1000 Год назад

Irving did write from a viewpoint of the Germans, same as western historians wrote from a western point of view. Irving did go through the history by going back to the original sources which he found in German archives, how many historians did that? Except for the German historians of course… He actually made an archive of Hitlers movements day by day from the start of his career to his death, meaning he upset many western historians as he could actually prove that they were wrong about certain things as he knew where and what Hitler did say by day, something western historians of course did not. His archives were confiscated when he was on trial and he was told these archives were “lost” so he could not get them back. A criminal act by the British state.

@bertjesklotepino 3 года назад

David Irving spent time in jail for what he wrote. SO yes, you can trust everything he wrote.

@bertjesklotepino 3 года назад

Truth does not fear investigation. It also does not need to be protected by laws. Truth is self evident. Like a wooden door with a glass window in it that opens into a room. Self evident. Or an escape hatch right in the middle of the floor. Self evident. Take a step back and look at the bigger picture. What does it mean if Joe Biden once said: You do not have to be j....h. to be a z....t? Ah well. Then they was called that, now they are called Globalists. Same shit, same story.

@bertjesklotepino 3 года назад

@Paul Bensusan Half Js? What does that mean? Can a muslim be half muslim? Or a christian be half christian? Or can a humanbeing be half a humanbeing and the other half perhaps chicken? I dunno, just asking. But, my opinion about that is this: Its wrong. I always think of myself as a humanbeing. That is what i am FIRST. And all the rest of the crap has been told to me. I could be an african, i could be asian, i could be an Eskimo. I still produce the same colour as any other person, when i go to the loo or when i am stabbed. So basically it is in my opinion wrong, this indoctrination starting from birth, by religious people. Because they make sure there will for ever be division between us, PEOPLE!. Btw, just a question: Some rabbi once said that H. was right calling the Js a race. But, in my opinion this is bullox. What do you think? Its just a question. I do not hate People who consider themselves People, and who can behave like People and treat others as People as well. (and not as dogs).

@bertjesklotepino 3 года назад

@Paul Bensusan PS: i expect my comment to be removed. Hence the abbreviations. I copy it just in case...

@bertjesklotepino 3 года назад

@Paul Bensusan what do you mean: wake up? Btw, yes i know what you are trying to say, but...... Be honest: ethnicity? That is the illusion, or in my mind it is. I dont mean to offend you btw, not at all. But in my mind it is kinda nonsense. I believe a chinese guy has a bit different DNA than me, European. And ofcourse those coming from certain regions on this globe have different DNA than others. BUT, there are Spanish js, African js, etc etc etc. Do you get my drift?

@bertjesklotepino 3 года назад

@Paul Bensusan If what you say is true, and i believe you...... Then H was right calling it a race, wasnt he?

@seppshlllearningcenter419 3 года назад

14:12 Wait...so Dresden wasn't firebombed ? I'll be damned, learn something new everyday.

@kennyshortcake999 3 года назад

Oh no. Berlin women were not raped to death by the Bolsheviks either. Irving is a great man who has suffered more than most to get the truth to the blinkered masses.

@kennyshortcake999 3 года назад

@Loud Italian Berlin

@franklinbumgartener1323 3 года назад

@aard apel You just put them in the same sentence.

@bhaskarsingh1564 3 года назад

@@kennyshortcake999 Russian women also weren't raped and forced into brothels, slavs weren't starved to death and put in concentration camps, Ukrainians did not have all of the food they produced confiscated, Soviet POW's weren't thrown into concentration camp without any fuel to keep themselves warm or any food. And the jews weren't genocided.

@lukebruce5234 3 года назад

@@kennyshortcake999 Of course they weren't.

@mattatkinson1431 2 года назад

I trust him more than I trust you!! Sorry! Not sorry!!

@rupertsmith5815 2 года назад

Than why watch him ?

@spockofdune8657 Год назад

Same here, David brought proof, impartially, simply. An honest historian.

@user-vh3fr3lb8w 2 месяца назад

@@spockofdune8657you don't know history. David is an imposter

@rodrickspode6366 Год назад

In conclusion: read Irving

@jolevy4569 3 года назад

I do recommend reading Lying about Hitler written by Richard Evans. It is a work of pettiness and spite the like of which I have never before encountered from a "professor". That he was knighted shortly afterwards is a sad reflection on our society, and an indication of where the power lies. It brings me shame as a graduate of Cambridge that he held a chair there.

@Lawofimprobability 3 года назад

Actually knowing what happened and being able to examine it requires details. When a writer lies about details, it might look petty to some outsiders but is very critical to maintaining the trustworthiness of the field. Irving lied repeatedly and the minute examination wasn't just about him having a different interpretation. In History, facts matter. Citations matter. It may not be politically feasible to go after all bad historical claims (like the 1619 project) but you should go after crooks like Irving when you can.

@StephenCowley001 3 года назад

@@Lawofimprobability Irving's method of citation is not academic, but he did draw attention to the more controversial of his claims in the preface to his book ("Hitler's War"), thus inviting criticism. That at least was responsible of him.

@spockofdune8657 Год назад

exactly. Well said

@colonelsmith7757 11 месяцев назад

@@StephenCowley001If the academic way is just copy-pasting stuff from a bunch of other books in the library and then piecing together paragraphs to "create" a "new" book then I much prefer Irving's way of directly citing original documents from actual archives and not charlatans.

@keithad6485 11 месяцев назад

Same with Sir Antony Beevor. I bought one of his history books to get a different point of view to Irving's book on the same subject, Whereas Irving had cited the original documents he relied on, Beevor had not cited one source and expected us to believe his claims on faith. To me it was not the book of a genuine historian.

@Aethelhald 4 года назад

Irving is "trustworthy" in the same way that many Russian historians are "trustworthy" when they write about how the USSR didn't invade Poland and other Baltic countries, they were "invited" to "peacefully occupy" them. These types of people bend and twist the truth to suit a narrative. There is one thing I agree with Irving on though, and that is that many WW2 historians are very lazy. They write books, but the research for their books is just two or three other books by other authors on the same subject, so you end up seeing myths and untruths become accepted as factual WW2 history because nobody bothered to dig very deep for sources when they wrote their books, and we end up reading bullshit like how Polish cavalry charges at German panzers with their lances and sabres.

@Raskolnikov70 4 года назад

This is an excellent point. Better-researched materials would get more attention if there wasn't so much bad history written. And I don't mean "bad" in the sense that the authors have an agenda or are deliberately pushing a narrative, just that they're jumping on a bandwagon to write and sell WWII books as fast as they can.

@Aethelhald 4 года назад

@@Raskolnikov70 Exactly. In the 1990's, until around 2006-ish, there was a second wave of mass interest in WW2 (the first wave being in the decade or two after WW2 ended). Every history-based TV channel was running WW2 documentaries 24/7, all the most popular videogames in the world were WW2 based, and WW2 books were coming in like a tsunami. A lot of those books were basically just copied from other books but with the words switched around somewhat, kinda like how you'd copy from your friend's work at school but you'd use different words to make it seem like your own work. Same for documentaries. A lot of them had huge mistakes, and other documentaries copied off of those documentaries so they too had huge mistakes. They didn't necessarily have dishonest intentions, they were just cashing in on the WW2 craze at the time. The books that came shortly after the war were even worse, though you can forgive those because everything was still being pieced together and a lot of things were still classified, especially due to the ongoing cold war and everything.

@eddiejones4001 4 года назад

Excellent point, regurgitating untruths and down right lies! I like Beevor's books, he does good research and got access to the Russians files!

@SmotritelMayaka29 4 года назад

@@Aethelhald I am so glad that I see a true connoisseur of history! Obviously, only you can answer a few of my questions. After all, it is likely that only the whole truth of history is open to you. Please tell me please. 1. Why did the allies of Poland (England and France) declare war on Hitler, but did not declare war on the USSR? 2. Why did not the League of Nations declare the USSR an aggressor? 3. Why did the Supreme Commander of the Polish Army Rydz-Smigly give orders to the troops not to resist and not to shoot at Soviet soldiers? 4. Why did the Polish government not declare war on the USSR? 5. Romania had a military treaty with Poland against the USSR. Why did not Romania declare war on the USSR? 6. Why did all countries adopt the declaration of neutrality of the USSR? Everyone, including the warring Polish allies France and England, agreed that the USSR was not a warring power, did not participate in the war. 7. Where was the Polish government on September 17, 1939? And what status did it have at that time according to international laws?

@LazyPictures 4 года назад

Ah! Another great example of a smart logic - just like - Irving is a brittish therefore many brittish historians are "trustworthy" like him, when they write about "insert the point you try to argue without actual arguments". So if some belarus or kazhakh or ukraine historian will write about how USSR didn't invade anything you'll take that right of the bat right? And please tell me your nationality, so I could use some sterotypes to argue with you.

@davidfaulds2960 Год назад

We simply cannot ignore everything that Irving wrote,Irvine went to Germany and lived among the Germans of that era and had access to many people and things that others did not. Lot's of books on the 2nd WW are simply a rehash of other peoples work but not Irvine,having said this,this is no excuse for blindly following every word that he says!

@steveyoung1546 Год назад

Irving's work has Always and will always check out! NO GAS CHAMBERS!!!!!!!!

@commandershepard1944 3 месяца назад

This video made me buy David Irving books twice.

@aeroAdvocate 3 года назад

I wouldn't trust someone like Evans to render a verdict about Irving or anyone else for that matter. Evans lives off his fancy titles but has a rather limited knowledge of the subject matter. Embarrassingly limited to be honest, he has an extremely thin skin too. Irving isn't some holy man, people make mistakes but academia and history lives off interpretations. It's not math where 1+1 are always 2. If you want to take on someone like Irving bring on an actual neutral expert who doesn't have a bias and who doesn't get paid a fortune to analyze the works for a sham interpretation.

@geek2269 3 года назад

i've read hitlers war my interpretation was, That he was just showing what was going on from hitlers perspective its in the name. war is horrible on all sides if you focused on the americans or the Japanese the australians or the Italians you'd find endless horrors, sociopaths can run wild especially when the war is a by all means war regardless of the consequences. but please please find a passage where he paints nazis is a postive light.

@BoskoBuha99 4 года назад

I read the book Hitlers war and although i found it interesting i remember that Irving struck me as rather un-objective and with pro-German symphaties. Still Irving being imprisoned for Holocaust denial is rather absurd if you ask me.

@Mitch93 4 года назад

Where did he get imprisoned for it? Technically speaking, it is not illegal to deny the Holocaust in the UK, despite current hate speech laws.

@NathanMulder 4 года назад

@@Mitch93 He got locked up in Austria

@Mitch93 4 года назад

@@NathanMulder Ah, ok that makes more sense now.

@crimony3054 4 года назад

@@NathanMulder For years. In the 50's? No, 2005.

@BoskoBuha99 4 года назад

@@Mitch93 In Austria.

@enriquearaujo7653 Год назад

Contrary to what you´re trying to convey, this video entices me and I guess many more readers, to search for Irving´s works. Thanks!

@karamkatcha Год назад

So you didn't watch it?

@spockofdune8657 Год назад

YES ! Good deduction. Go see by yourself, read his books ...

@colonelsmith7757 11 месяцев назад

@@karamkatcha I did, and my conclusion was that TIK is a shill.

@solgierwillis790 5 месяцев назад

Yea, honestly listening to this guy I can't help but see a strange bias In the way he's reading off the police men's statement as if it contradicts what David Irving said

@acm1137 Год назад

As an undergraduate Irving was mentioned in a lecture. During the summer vac I went to my local library and ask if they had any of his works. The woman went away and brought another librarian who asked, more or less why I wished to read him. I explained that I was reading History, however he didn't seem convinced not even by the tweed jacket I was sporting at the time.

@shayneswenson Год назад

Reading Irving quite literally changed my life for the better.

@sanchoodell6789 Год назад

Sounds like that library is run by a bunch of *Packed Faced Lefties* just don't borrow from there again!

@jeffmattes5446 Год назад

@@shayneswenson how do lies, and distortions make your life better?

@scoobtube5746 Год назад

@@jeffmattes5446 You should ask yourself that question, since everything you think you know about that war is a lie and a distortion of the truth.

@BradBrassman Год назад

@@jeffmattes5446 Simple; you want to believe them. The above idiot, because of his comment, obviously needs a close eye keeping on him.

@varovaro1967 4 года назад

“Hitlers War” was the autobiography Hitler never wrote....

@MerchantPrince 4 года назад

Damn. I read hitlers war and assumed it was accurate

@MrMurica 4 года назад

@David Parry Dont you just hate it when you trip over in the morning and accidentily kill a few million people.

@MrMurica 4 года назад

@KLOLWTF "mega cringe" ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-8VEmni_QzYk.html

@kaletovhangar 4 года назад

@AIFAHRA HORGGHRO "Reading Hitler's books makes you anti-Semitic".I really hope that was sarcasm, you can't really be that dense.Books aren't magical, you know?You don't just open your brain so much that it falls out if you read something controversial.You should realistically only get informed about ideas wrote in it.

@carolusrex4008 4 года назад

AIFAHRA HORGGHRO I’ve read The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by William L Shirer, so does that make me a Nazi? I guess I’d better turn my US military uniform back in and start shouting “Seig Heil!” And clicking my heels at any reference to Hitler.

@yingyang1008 4 года назад

TIK knows what side his bread is buttered on

@GW_01 3 года назад

He's a shill

@Orxbane 3 месяца назад

You mean his bagel?

@Joseafrica 4 месяца назад

So you bring up a subject that the opposite view is illegal in many places or will get you cancelled or fired.

@kanewhitehead1522 Год назад

"History is a set of lies agreed upon" - Napoleon Bonaparte

@PaganWarrior100 3 года назад

I read Hitler’s War (1977 edition) and thought it was incredible. I am aware that David Irving is an admirer of the German dictator but his book didn’t really strike me as apologetic or even, as another person commented, “the autobiography Hitler never wrote.” It just made Hitler appear more human. Towards the end of the book, I had images of the film, ‘Downfall,’ in my head. Many of the points Irving highlighted in 1977 that were regarded as controversial at the time are now considered conventional wisdom. For example, Irving made it clear that Hitler never wanted war with the British, that Stalin was planning to break the pact and invade Germany and that atrocities committed against Jews were a collaborative effort between the Germans and the local populations in the East. You don’t have to agree with everything he says but it can’t be denied that Irving is a brilliant researcher. Hitler’s War can not be compared with other biographies of Hitler because it is strictly focused on Hitler as a warlord. If you want to have a more well-rounded perspective on Hitler’s life, I would encourage everyone to read the standard biographies by the likes of Toland but when it comes to books about the war from Hitler’s point of view, I think you will have a hard time finding a better one than Irving’s. Did you actually read the entire book or are you basing your opinions on other people’s reviews? I’m just curious because I am surprised that you didn’t like it all. I read a book with the same name by Edwin Hoyt. The author claimed it would apply a similar method, examining the war from “Hitler’s point of view” but it didn’t come close to Irving’s book and it had far more errors and speculation posing as fact.

@rickglorie 3 года назад

Irving's book is fiction. If you are used to reading good books on subject's, they are like well put together cars. With Irving's books the wheels come off. They can be a fun read offcourse, but then advertised as "iffy" history.

@drscopeify 3 года назад

You read a story not history. The thing is that history is account of events not opinion!!!

@sarahwilliams6384 2 года назад

Well said, bravo !

@mikekenyon8483 2 года назад

@@rickglorie just curious, how do you know Irving's book is fiction? You present no evidence of your own .

@rickglorie 2 года назад

First, this isn't a book, but a RU-vid comment. Second, how does one disprove a factless book more likened to mythology than actual evidence based history? That is the other way around.

@didles123 3 года назад

I don't see how Evan's interpretations have more credibility than Irving's. Both are reading into the source more information than is actually there. What's more incredible is how you present this stuff like as if it is somehow conclusive. I guess it goes to show that history is far more imprecise and unknown compared to the confidence with which historians talk about it.

@drscopeify 3 года назад

Evan did not twist history, when testimony and true information is available from a credible source you take them as they are you DO NOT modify them to fir your ideology!! History is an account of events NOT an opinion!!

@weareallanimals 2 года назад

@@drscopeify Did you just say, "History is an account of events NOT an opinion!!" Your statement is foolish and needed correcting. LOL OK, Whose History? Every country has it's own "historical" account of how events took place. And, every one of them is constructed to fit their own narrative. For every History book, there is another History book that tells a different story. As you grow older, you'll learn these things.

@nerome619 Год назад

Evans did not lie or distort the information in the documents.

@Brslld Год назад

Yup. Would rather look at the primary source itself than read books. This is why I laugh at those who read Irving or any historian ever at face value. Unfortunately even the "free thinkers" in this comment section does the same as many people.

@madzistropudzitto3229 10 месяцев назад

@@Brslldthe point is primary sources can be incredibly unreliable and biased

@jimmycakes7158 Год назад

When it comes to Iriving and his enemies I've noticed what they do is find "trivial" (not to say unimportant) examples to undermine him and make him look suspect. They don't do this to other historians, such as Stephen Ambrose - in his book key people are said to have died during the war when they in fact went on to live on to old age. It shows that mistakes do happen and if you really want to make someone look unreliable you can. I think what Evans has done here is taken a few small examples to try and undermine Irving's larger argument without actually finding something substantial enough to utterly demolish the argument. In a court of law it's hard to defend yourself if some of your work does have mistakes in it (inevitably all historians make mistakes), a jury will look at that and say "if he's screwed up there then we can't trust anything else he says." Doesn't mean Irving shouldn't have properly vetted himself to give the best defence possible he messed up.

@koko2bware Год назад

Exactly! Every Historian has made some mistakes in his works. Just by digging up a few trivial examples here and there and (based entirely on that) to undermine his entire lifetime work clearly exposes their dishonest and malicious intent!

@scottmc4818 Год назад

absolutely agree Evans latched on to the most trivial nonsense to use as argument which shows the quality of the man.

@mg777-g4c 2 месяца назад

Irving completely fabricating a story to support his agenda (6:30) isn't "trivial" - goes to his credibility and character and means that everything he writes, especially wrt to the Holocaust, needs to be treated with scepticism.

@vitman2409 11 месяцев назад

Everything I know about David Irving, I know from those who wants to slander him and who says he's a nutcase. And that goes for all of us. That should say enough.

@treytrapani9813 8 месяцев назад

You're free to buy one of his books. If all you know about him is just from people who criticize him that's your own fault.

@Hans013 4 года назад

oh boy This gonna be spicy

@jamestheotherone742 4 года назад

@De Profundis Yeah I've had that happen to me as well while making defenses of minorities or making perfectly reasonable arguements but using the wrong "keywords". The AIs still don't understand context.

@VACatholic 4 года назад

@De Profundis it's hilarious that you say that "deniars get to claim they're being censored", as if they're not actively being censored. Pretty hilarious that's the problem. Not the censorship.

@parabot2 4 года назад

@@VACatholic Aerial photographs where taken by the Allied Air Forces during World War II over the camps , first exposed in 1978 by Dino Brugioni and Robert Poirer, two aerial photo-analysts who worked for the CIA. Not a Single thing Claimed is Shown Piles of Bodies , None stop Flames , None stop billowing Smoke , Crushing machines , Pyres, Massive Pits . Nothing 4 April 1944 26 June 25 August 8 September 29 November 21 December 14 January 1945 Now Explain why Nothing is Shown as claimed in a single Recon photograph over the camps ? Funny that would nt you say massive claims yet nothing is shown in Offical Allied Recon Phots that would prove the claims . LOLZ

@VACatholic 4 года назад

@@parabot2 I agree with you. Deniars are also being censored.

@parabot2 4 года назад

@@VACatholic You can't Deny something that never happened .

@dermotosullivan3065 3 года назад

So now I need to know whether I can trust the work of Richard Evans.

@black-uh1df 3 года назад

You can trust it a lot more than Irving and his cult followers

@davelowe1977 3 года назад

Research the £75k bribe he took to smear Irving before you make up your mind.

@black-uh1df 3 года назад

@@davelowe1977 That "bribe" Wasn't a bribe. Lipstat, being the defence, hired Evans as an expert witness. For 2 years before the case went to court he combed through all of irving's work to see if what she said was leginiment. Turns out, Irving cultist, *it was* British liable law was stacked against the defendant from the onset, Irving was the prosecutor. And Irving *l o s t* And don't give me the 'it was a kangaroo court' c-ap. It was a leginiment court ruling, that is, if you've ever bothered to read the court transcripts. But you won't cause it de-legitimizes your 'messiah' Irving.

@kennyshortcake999 3 года назад

@@black-uh1df Irving does not have cult followers as far as I know.

@kennyshortcake999 3 года назад

@@davelowe1977 Interesting. Never heard of that. I do know Lipstadt was advised by her lawyers to say nothing during the court hearing and her ‘expert witnesses’ cost her side a lot of money which of course, Irving had to ultimately pay. Evans books are well worth reading in my opinion.

@empireoflies7268 Год назад

Can't criticize or question our "masters"

@triola3983 Год назад

Our masters are children with cancer?

@user-bf5gi9ou6o Год назад

Dude what does that have to do with anything mentioned in the video

@user-bf5gi9ou6o Год назад

@bobbyd6040 I mean the video clearly illustrates that this guy tried to present hitler as a protector of the jews

@Nolant. Год назад

@@bobbyd6040denying history isn’t questioning it

@StevenRhistory 4 года назад

He doesn’t deny, he questions methods, locations and the knowledge and roles of those involved. And reading Goebells diary and understanding the knowledge that Himmler had and was in control of is astounding. I’ll make one other point, Irving uses the archives, I’d bet the majority of that collection on your shelves relies on secondary, or even third hand sources or worse. And you claim that he is biased and what you’re not? You’re one the most biased channels I’ve ever seen. And you don’t mention in his trial how much the witnesses were paid to give run. Irving didn’t get a fair trial and he didn’t have the huge financial backing that the opposition did. Also do you all realize the mass number of people who died in camps from typhus and disease, and the starvation which was rampant across Germany thanks to the allied bombing. People will rarely mention the war crimes that was the allied bombing campaign. Similar deaths occurred in Stalingrad typhus was terrible. Edit: Also due to censorship I’d recommend copying any replies you post to these videos so you can just reupload them

@gandhiindia1685 4 года назад

Yeah how comes gassing little kids and old people as you have no room.to house them or food to feed them is seen as like really really bad yet dropping bombs on mostly women and children and old people is seen as ok. They are both bad yet people hate germans more.

@gandhiindia1685 4 года назад

@2manynegativewaves congratulations

@StevenRhistory 4 года назад

2manynegativewaves typical won’t or can’t refute the points given and then resort to name calling. Good job

@gonzalopelaez5649 4 года назад

The germans started a war, bombed other places urban like london but when the allies do the same it's all wrong bc... Why?

@gandhiindia1685 4 года назад

@@gonzalopelaez5649 not on the same scale

@FreemonSandlewould 4 года назад

David Irving is simply the best. Anyone who says otherwise you should just turn your back on and walk. Once you realize the sewage that has been used to fill your mind in grammar school you will be angry.

@oni2662 3 года назад

He is the best, the best liar

@snowflakemelter1172 Год назад

Dunce.

@maxm_01 Год назад

I definitely stand with Irving on WW2, no other historian has come even close to the amount of research he’s done. I just bought “Hitlers War” by the great Irving himself. Looking forward to it.

@MessiaensBussy 11 месяцев назад

You should also pick up “Lying About Hitler” by Richard J Evans.

@MessiaensBussy 10 месяцев назад

@EnochWasRight How are wooden doors inconsistent with the idea of a gas chamber?

@thatisme3thatisme38 3 года назад

You have convinced me to unsubscribe with this video. Pity. Thought that you did your own research and didn't rely on others to make the conclusions for you.

@matthewstone1362 3 года назад

How many archives has Mr Evans visited? Germany? USSR? America? Or does Mr Evans "research" from his contemporaries books?

@TheHandsomeman 3 года назад

Can you trust anything, Richard Evans wrote?

@TheHandsomeman 3 года назад

@Pep I hate nae, sayers.

@TheHandsomeman 3 года назад

@Pep "I don't trust what you have just wrote"?

@BULL.173 3 года назад

I'm not a fan of Evans at all. But curtailing freedom of speech and expression is 100% unacceptable. If we empower the government to create ad hoc laws against of any opinion, whether popular or unpopular, makes us no better than Nazis.

@terrorbird8957 2 года назад

The guy literally recommends a book by Richard Evans for you to read. The book it literally details and gives evidence. This isn't just Richard's opinion, he gose though literal historical documents.

@spockofdune8657 Год назад

clearly not

@kevindiaz-lane4404 2 года назад

In light of world events in 2022, the amount of PERSECUTION David has endured says much about his writings. I, personally have tremendous respect for David based on what I've read and the interviews I've heard.

@MrDarudin 2 года назад

Persecution. He endured. He lost a fucking libel suit he brought forward. When in court he actually could not argue his own case and ended up admitting his own lies.

@MrDarudin 2 года назад

@Werner Pfeifenberger In his trial. He admitted to using the Leuchter report which he knew was a fabrication by a holocaust denier.

@aker1993 2 года назад

@Werner Pfeifenberger then evidence that you say cite all the sources that David Irving was right?

@MrDarudin 2 года назад

@Werner Pfeifenberger No. Not just like any history books. Whilst Irving does use primary sources he often adds wild interpretations to them so he can distort the truth

@MrDarudin 2 года назад

@Werner Pfeifenberger See video above. The exact reason being, he noticed that his pseudoscience had a market in the neo nazi scene. Most of his literature was bought by pseudohistorians.

@sheldonshoahberg8211 2 года назад

You use secondary hearsay. Is Evans a fluent German speaker and what is his credibility when "deboonking" Mr Irving?

@abegohr2576 3 года назад

Richard Evans saying that “ not one paragraph not one sentence...” of Irving is true, is being an absolute liar that knows that nobody will check or say that this is false because it’s a taboo. Intellectual dishonesty.

@kennyshortcake999 3 года назад

Evans, although excellent at what he does, is a rather hysterical WWII historian. Irving, fluent German speaker, is not. Far from it. Irving, like or loathe him, is factual, accurate and for me, Britain’s finest WWII historian.

@mattmunroe9901 3 года назад

@@kennyshortcake999 “Factual” - it has been proven many times that he omits information because it doesn’t fit the story he is trying to tell. “Accurate” - despite his knowledge of the German language is very prone to mistranslating original texts to fit his story. He has also had an obsession with Hitler, that borders on hero worship, since he was a young boy.

@kennyshortcake999 3 года назад

Evans’ hysteria about David Irving, Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich in all its glory.

@mattmunroe9901 3 года назад

@@kennyshortcake999 Irving’s hysteria about Hitler...anything he’s ever written...wait...what are we doing here? Not sure what point you’re trying to make.

@kennyshortcake999 3 года назад

@@mattmunroe9901 ...and you know all this how exactly?

@dannycartes6701 3 года назад

David irving is the most bonified historian in the world. hands down. I don't care what fake historian says. All Irving vids are now taken off utube as the truth is a major threat

@GabrielV65 3 года назад

He had RU-vid channel?

@MaxwellAerialPhotography 3 года назад

Hahahaha. Yes such a credible historian that he is proven liar who has never been taken seriously in academia, a barely 10 minutes of research can prove almost all of his favourite talking points demonstrably and pathetically wrong.

@mgway4661 3 года назад

Sorry your Nazi propagandist was taken down 😂

@jakeseymour2484 3 года назад

The mans a proven, deliberate liar

@tt14life90 3 года назад

Absolutely! Irving is Truth!

@WilhelmVonBaz 3 года назад

Lets not forget, the testimony was in German; translations may vary.

@admontblanc 2 месяца назад

True, but then again, Irving is fluent in German, and Evans can barely speak a sentence of it.

@hansmeyer403 3 месяца назад

Irving reads and fluently speaks German, worked and lived in Germany, interviewed Zeitzeugen, and thinks, speaks, and writes outside the box. Can you match that?