Only two weeks after you print my denial of being a "mild fascist" (which would seem a contradiction in terms) there it is again -- in your reviewer Martin Walker's otherwise competent review of my study of the Hungarian uprising. "Mr. Irving," writes Walker, "describes himself [sic!] as 'a mild Fascist."'

Will Mr. Walker give his source for this untruth or kindly retract it? I have enough trouble living down the things I have said, without having to defend myself against those I haven't.

Yours sincerely,

(David Irving)

The Letters Editor,
The Guardian,
119, Farringdon Road,
EC1.

London, April 13th., 1981

Dear Editor,

The attached letter [above] was for publication. Its publication is necessary to correct a particularly nasty libel in the review by Martin Walker (Books, April 1). As you will see, he wrote, "Mr. Irving describes himself as a 'mild fascist."'

I have never done so, and in his reply to me (also attached) he reveals his only source as a newspaper item 22 years ago (!). That item was written by a journalist who has since been convicted of a criminal offence of a particularly nasty nature which will not endear him to a libel jury; nor, I think, will a libel jury be impressed by the views of Mr. Walker, who has I believe professed himself in a book to be in favour of "a chocolate coloured Britain."

Your newspaper was aware of the untruth, as you have published a denial by me only two weeks previously. Please now publish my letter of April 2nd., as this will spare us all a lot of unpleasantness.

Yours sincerely,

(David Irving)

The Editor,
The Guardian,
119 Farringdon Road,
EC1

©Focal Point 1998    write to David Irving