Why is David Irving so unnerving to the history establishment? He possesses no university degree and was refused for service by the RAF. His father and brother were both officers. He is a popularizer of history with a knack for digging out awkward information. His books sell as do his lectures. His specialty, WW II, has made him a target. He served a year in prison in Austria for violating a law against holocaust denial. He lost an ill fated civil suite in London he brought upon himself for systematically softening the Nazi holocaust in his writings.
Is David Irving an "historian" or simply a popularizer of history? He has a knack for self promotion. This book is his attempt to trump his adversaries. He declares himself a political prisoner of the 21st century. He claims to be a victim of a sophisticated network of "thought police". His failed civil suit will be the subject of a Hollywood movie in early 2017. Is Irving really a worthy adversary? All of this seems like piling on an author lacking the stature to begin with. His audiences will find it all further proof of punishing anyone who to fails to conform.
Some of his books are historically worthy, Jutland and Dresden, in particular. Don't be surprised if the movie creates blowback favoring a minor self promoter.
