Liberties with the Truth, Blatant Lies and Inaccuracies

Liberties with the Truth

While researching The Bridge of Deaths  I found that either through an over-confidence in their knowledge or in a calculating manner people can misinform or mislead. As naïve as that may sound it was after all the realm of books, archives and history

In the 1990s as I searched for information on Anthony Crossley  walking from one used book store to another in London. I heard;  "An Etonian with published poetry I never heard about? Impossible!"  "If I have not heard of him, he did not publish." Finally at the Royal Albert Hall Poetry Library I finally found one of Anthony Crossley's books Prophets, Gods and Witches, I could take notes but not photo copy anything. Imagine the fun I could have had with a digital camera? Here you go, he does exist!

I have learned that when a field is vast even the most expert would do well to be open-minded to the possibility that perhaps there is more out there. When I contacted The Smithsonian Air and Space Museum I had the privilege to connect with R.E.G. Davies he helped me on various occasions and after asking me several questions he had the G-AESY logged as traveling in a different direction, I became a minor correction footnote in his data base  So minor... you might not be able to find me, but I am there Catalina Egan May 9, 2000

Today via e-Bay and many others resources I find it hard to believe that any book would be that hard to find, of course we can always also find erroneous information.

 

Blatant Lies 

 

 

When I first read in  1997 David Irving's book; Churchill's War I felt it took serious liberties with the truth.  In 2006 when he landed in jail in Austria as a Holocaust denier and revisionist of history I understood the liberties were blatant lies.

Some of what I found;

This book took many liberties with Anthony Crossley and had blatant inaccuracies. The most notable was on page 144 second paragraph. Where he stated that Anthony Crossley "teetered on the brink of the Focus". In the book Mr. Irving's Assessment of THE FOCUS is that of a nefarious Zionist group. The problem with this is that Anthony Crossley was a well known advocate for the "Arab Cause" in Regards to Palestinian territories.

Book Description

David Irving presents a wealth of hitherto suppressed information that shows a shockingly unfamiliar portrait of the great statesman, Churchill. Readers will discover a power-hungry leader who prolonged the war to advance his own career. This is a fascinating, exhaustive investigation of Churchill's intrigues and deceptions before and during WWII. This is a savage debunking of Churchill by the world's most popular revisionist historian and author.


Inaccuracies


John Charmley has strong views that can be agreed upon or disputed in Chamberlain and the Lost Peace as to what might had been if England had not gotten involved in WW II. In modern day America we often wonder what the world would be like today if the war in Iraq had never taken place.

Those who strongly supported the war claimed that much good came out of it including The Arab Spring when that was popular.






What I found

On page 150 John Charmley explains how many of the various MPs who opposed the Munich Pact fared politically. In the book it is stated that Anthony C. Crossley lost his seat in 1945. My copy is a first edition, perhaps later editions have been revised with accuracy.

Book  Description

Most studies of World War II assume that it was, in some way, a triumph for Britain. John Charmley’s important new reappraisal of the immediate origins of the war is based on extensive new work in the Chamberlain papers. It starts from Chamberlain’s belief that even a victorious war would be a disaster—it would destroy the foundations of British power and hand over Europe to Russian domination. Reconstructing Chamberlain’s policy assumptions, Mr. Charmley argues that they were neither naïve nor foolish. While focusing on the prime minister’s personality, he also shows that Chamberlain’s views were shared by many other leading politicians and diplomats. Mr. Charmley thus resurrects a whole school of thought on foreign policy which was forgotten in the wake of Churchill’s triumph. Unlike Churchill, Chamberlain was not prepared to gamble an empire; but events produced, according to Mr. Charmley, indeed a “human tragedy.” Early British reviews of the book have called it “important,” “entertaining and absorbing,” “concise and spirited,” and “provocative.” The Guardian wrote: “Chamberlain hardly emerges a hero from these pages, but at least there is no excuse left for regarding him as no more than a wimp in a wing-collar.”