|
In this
issue:
|
#13
|
||||
|
Our Legal Battles against the Liars Enter New Phase LONDON - British author David Irving gives this up-to-date report on his global campaign against the traditional enemies of the truth. He is Þghting this guerrilla one-man war on several fronts. He has started a British High Court action against the widely-read broadsheet The Observer and Hungarian-born Gitta Sereny Honeyman for peddling lies about him in an article last year, published after his biography of Nazi propaganda minister Dr. Joseph Goebbels appeared. [In New York Mr Irving's publishers St Martins Press (SMP) and Doubleday Inc. cancelled plans to distribute the book after they came under attack from organisations concerned to see only their own version of WW2 history sold around the world. [Stammered a petriÞed SMP chairman Tom McCormack (who has dined with Irving's family in London and whose Þrm has often sought quotes from him for the dustjackets of other authors' books), "If we had known who Mr Irving was, we would never have bought the rights in his Goebbels biography."] Since then the assault on Mr Irving's name has grown increasingly ugly. The Observer and Sereny wrongly accused him of stealing the priceless Nazi glass plates with the Goebbels diaries from the former Soviet secret state archives in Moscow, of faking and manipulating documentary evidence, and even of saying "our Führer" (referring to Adolf Hitler) in public meetings. UNBLEMISHED In court proceedings Mr Irving has put in a Þrst list of 1,842 documents which he will cite; if the defendants opt for a mudslinging jamboree - recognising that they cannot defend or justify their actual lies - he will put in thousands more documents establishing his international reputation as a major historian of the Nazi era, a reputation unblemished before they and other hatemongers set to work on it. Many months behind the date ordered by the judge, the London newspaper and its writer have now put in their own Þrst list of documents. Says author Irving to action report, "I am restrained by the rules of court from revealing precisely what is in those documents until they are safely in the public domain, but I can say right now that they provide extraordinary evidence of what I have always maintained: that international organisations like the Anti-Defamation League of the B'nai Brith (ADL) have been conspiring since 1977 if not before to destroy me, recognising me as a major threat to their own interests." BOOKS DESTROYED The documents also show, says Mr Irving, that one British publisher after another, including Lord Weidenfeld and Harold Macmillan's Þrm, who were all successfully and proÞtably publishing his books, came under secret attack from "outsiders," who applied hidden pressures which these publishers, like McCormack's SMP and Doubleday in 1996, were too weak to resist. "On the very day after all the newspapers announced my scoop, that I had returned from Moscow with the long-lost diaries of Dr. Joseph Goebbels," says Mr Irving after studying the confidential documents so far released to the court, "my biggest London publisher panicked and issued a secret internal memorandum ordering the immediate destruction of all remaining copies of my famous biography Hitler's War ! Thousands of copies were burned; this robbed me of course of any further income from that book, and I was never told." In fact, the same people wrote him ingratiating letters about his future works. "When this modern-times Book Burning comes out in court," predicts the historian, "we shall Þnd out who gave the orders - and why." UNDER HITLER PORTRAIT David Irving is also suing Deborah Lipstadt, a professor of religion at Emory College, Atlanta, for libel, along with British Þrm Penguin Books who published her tract, Denying the Holocaust. Author and publisher are not Þnding it easy. Said one judge : "They are the architects of their own misfortune." Among Lipstadt's weirder lies:
He says that Lipstadt and Penguin are having to be hauled kicking and howling into the Law Courts in London; they have delayed, dawdled, and dragged their feet at every possible opportunity. He has now obtained an Order from a High Court judge forcing them to undergo the same revealing process of discovering documents. Their barrister, Victoria Sharp, told the judge that she expects the case to last six weeks, as she will be calling scores of Holocaust survivors. HEADACHES "I shall slap down that kind of extravaganza," says Mr Irving. "This trial is not about whether or not Jews were persecuted in WW2 (they were), but whether or not Lipstadt recklessly and maliciously peddled her lies about me, on orders from Yad Vashem and various other Holocaust educational trusts." One legal action is still causing Mr Irving headaches. Australian prime minister John Howard savagely libelled him in a radio broadcast from Melbourne in November 1996. Howard justified the ban on Mr Irving by alleging that the historian has criminal convictions in Britain, Germany, and Canada. He has not. Fighting to overturn the Howard government's exclusion order, Mr Irving asked West Australia attorney Ed Wall, within twelve hours of the broadcast, to throw the book at the prime minister. But every major Þrm of attorneys in Victoria that Ed Wall instructed, with Þnancial backing from Australian supporters, to start defamation proceedings, has subsequently weaseled out; one pleaded that they would lose their Jewish clients, another that they would lose their Jewish secretary. "It does not say much for Australian justice that a year later we are still waiting to get that Writ issued," says Mr Irving. "But we shall!" FRIENDS all over the United States have recently sent the British historian newspaper clippings about a current book by Hungarian-born John Lukács, The Hitler of History. This book libels Mr Irving in the same reckless and malicious way as did Lukács' compatriot Gitta Sereny. Mr Irving has formally warned Alfred Knopf Inc., the American publisher, that if the book is published within the jurisdiction of the British courts, he will institute proceedings. Knopf's general counsel, Elise Solomon, replied pleading that the lies are just Lukács "expressing his opinion"; Mr Irving has had to remind her that, under English law, there is no such defence for libel. 
General Remer is Dead FAMED GERMAN ARMY GENERAL Otto-Ernst Remer, who was forced into exile by Bonn in 1994, died in Spain aged 85 on October 4th. Born in Neubrandenburg on December 18, 1912, Remer played the key role in crushing the uprising against Adolf Hitler by disgruntled ofÞcers and disaffected aristocrats on July 20, 1944. Originally sent by the plotters to arrest propaganda minister Dr Goebbels, he learned that Hitler had survived the bomb blast, recognized His Master's Voice on the phone, and acted swiftly against the plotters. His troops put them to death by Þring squad in Berlin a few hours later. Described by baffled newspapermen as an unreconstructed Nazi, Remer remained loyal to the old cause. In 1950 he founded the Socialist Reich Party; in Mar. 1952 he was jailed for three months for slandering the July 1944 plotters as "traitors." The SRP was banned. He allowed his name to be used by German revisionists, publishing the Remer Dispatch 1991-94. Sentenced to two years' jail despite his medals for heroism, advancing years, and illness - he was wheelchair-bound and breathed with an oxygen pump - he took refuge in Spain. The Spanish government resisted repeated demands by German prosecutors for his extradition, saying that his "offences" did not exist as such under Spanish law. He is survived by his widow, Marie-Agust’n. Two More Auschwitz-deniers Discovered N
THE WAKE OF NEWS REPORTS that leading American
publisher Henry Holt is to publish Norman Finkelstein's annihilating
attack on Daniel Goldhagen's money-spinning book Hitler's Willing
Executioners, an instant global best-seller, the German news magazine
Der Spiegel printed on Nov. 17 this prominent interview with German-born
historian Ruth Bettina Birn, 45, who published in March this
year in the Cambridge University Historical Journal a savage critique
of Goldhagen's methods, widely repeated in the British press.*
Since then, reports the news magazine, "attempts have been made by psychological and legal means to stop the respected Nazi-expert, who is employed by the Canadian authorities prosecuting war crimes, from expressing her objections." Spiegel: Do you know Daniel Goldhagen personally? Birn: Yes, eleven years. When I became a Fellow in Boston after gaining my Ph.D. somebody introduced me to a young researcher planning to work in Germany. I referred him to the Ludwigsburg war crimes centre. He didn't even know the archives existed. Spiegel: Your review of his book, which was commissioned originally by the journal Holocaust and Genocide Studies, was dropped because of possible claims for libel damages. In Britain, Goldhagen's attorneys are threatening you with a libel writ. And now your employer tells you that there have been protests to him about plans to reprint of your critique. Do you feel intimidated? Birn: Of course, I feel threatened. Spiegel: Did Goldhagen ever make a proper academic response to your criticisms of his dubious treatment of sources? Birn: Not in the same journal, which would have been the proper way. I hear he has published a response elsewhere accusing me of "barefaced invention" and "hateful" rhetoric. Spiegel: To outsiders it seems Goldhagen is showing a weakness by this hate-Þlled polemics, just as with his venomous but ill-substantiated reaction to the critique by Norman Finkelstein. Why the rage? É Next March your paper is to be published in New York as a book together with Norman Finkelstein's article. The Jewish newspaper Forward in New York is already comparing it with the case of the Auschwitz-denier David Irving. Is this the start of an attempt to stop the book? Birn: Our publisher has mentioned once or twice that he is coming under certain hostile pressures. Spiegel: Do you see a strategy at work behind all this? Birn: There are two areas: Þrst, the unexampled campaign since 1995 to promote the Goldhagen book. A literary Þrst effort becomes a world sensation, and immediately the newspapers start hinting that there's a Harvard professorship waiting for the views his book propagates. Second, the attempts to stiße the criticisms voiced by me and Finkelstein. . . . You can't recant the Truth, and the pressure on my employer is not going to alter that. The question is, how are we going to deal with this kind of thing in future? If Goldhagen gets so hostile, even in his book, that cautious, respected researchers suddenly Þnd themselves cast as deniers and revisionists, it seems to me insulting and disgraceful. And if things go further down the political and legal tracks we see here, it poses a threat to any kind of scientiÞc criticism.
|
NOTICE FROM THE royalties statement of Mondadori, my Italian
publishers since 1963, that next to the still unpublished titles
of Hitler's War and Goebbels. Mastermind of the Third
Reich appear the ominous words contratto annulato - contract
cancelled. First I've heard of it. I now reply to two scandalous and weasely letters from my editor at Mondadori, dated April and May, which only reached me yesterday: My relationship as an author with Arnoldo Mondadori Editore (AME) goes back to my Þrst book, APOCALISSA A DRESDA, in 1963; you may not have known that. I do not intend to allow the personal prejudices of one editor to disturb that relationship permanentlyÉ It is now plain that an editor at AME secretly annulled Þrst my contract on Hitler's War and then the contract on Goebbels. Mastermind of the Third Reich, without telling me. The result has been that I have turned down offers from other Italian companies for those books, in the belief that the rights were no longer free. You will not be so naive as to imagine that I can now return to those companies and explain the mistake. For AME to pretend now that their "general interpretation of the historical facts [is] deeply prejudiced and profoundly misleading" ignores two facts: (a) after reading them, AME had already formally accepted and paid for both books; (b) both books have been reviewed in the highest terms, as you are aware, by British and American as well as German, French, Spanish, and other reviewers, none of whom shared your judgement.  T
IS UNBEARABLY HOT in Key West. The house is over-run with ants.
Sam D. tells of sitting in an Atlanta restaurant next to an unknown
teacher from the Decatur High School. She said she'd been hearing
about a David Irving, had obtained one of his videos, and shown
it to her class. It's a small, but often satisfying, world. Workout in the evening, then cycle along the Gulf to The Rusty Anchor, against a headwind (which has of course dropped entirely by time I ride back). Benté faxes to me Mrs Gisela G.'s address - she needs her investment back. I mail her a $2,000 cheque. It makes a bad hole in the DIFF finances. I set out for Miami in a rental car around one p.m. Distracted by an advertising hoarding, I slither into the back of a car at thirty miles per hour on Big Pine Key - the one in front of it has stopped without warning to turn left - but fortunately the one I hit is soft (a BMW) and suffers total damage. Mine, a simple American car, is absolutely unscathed. Although unhurt the BMW driver calls up police, ambulances, paramedics etc. on his cellular phone, so it is an hour before I am under weigh again. (Fined on the spot $70 for driving without attention: I suppose that is just). THE OBSERVER AND GITTA Sereny have appointed new solicitors to defend them in the libel action I am bringing. I send them this fax: The purported defence settled by Victoria Sharp, though brave (and wordy to a fault), is doomed to fail. I may know little about the law, but I do know something about History. That the converse is true in her case is evident from your clients' decision to blacken my reputation still further, no doubt in mitigation of the expected damages, rather than attempt a serious defence of the libels which they published about me. Historically, such a decision - unwise in my view - is fraught with dangers for the defence. I am still awaiting your clients' list of documents in discovery. They wrote and published the facts, no doubt they already had the evidence they needed before they put ink to paper? WORK OUT in the evening, then cycle on to Stock Island for supper, against a headwind yet again. Aaargh! Flat tyre on the way back, at the far end of North Roosevelt Boulevard; but I manage to put air into it three times at gas stations. Arrive back soaked in perspiration. I rise at 5:50 a.m., and phone Benté in London. My third daughter Paloma and grandson Adam are there, and I can hear sounds of mayhem in the background. An American university has been inquiring for some time about taking over my literary papers. I reply today: At present my papers are intact but in three or four different locations. (a) In about 1964 I started making my historical research Þles available to the Institut für Zeitgeschichte (IfZ), in Munich; these Þles contain my interview notes on Hitler's people, and correspondence with them. I have duplicates of much of the stuff in London. After the death of the IfZ archive chief Dr Anton Hoch, to whom they were entrusted, the IfZ's posture toward me became hostile and confrontational, and I ceased furnishing them with my Þles; I made plain to them that in view of the lack of Gegenseitigkeit (mutuality) in the relationship, I now expected them to return the Þles (for which no payment had been made, and for which no contractual agreement exists). They refused. (I found out from later researchers that without my permission the IfZ sloughed off part of my materials to the Deutsches Museum archives, e.g. my research into Hitler's atom bomb project). I estimate the IfZ has about 20 linear feet of my papers. (b) At the same time, I began retiring my Þles to the German Federal Archives in Koblenz; usually I made a microÞlm copy of the Þles Þrst. In about 1990 I delivered a Þnal truckload of boxes of papers to them. In July 1993 I was banned from those archives, as part of the ongoing global campaign against me, and in November 1993 I was banned from Germany. The Federal Archives has sadly recognised that it must now return the papers to me but are seeking to retain some of the best - e.g., my transcript of Rommel's shorthand diaries (1,000 pages), two copies of Himmler diaries in private American hands, Canaris papers, etc. On legal advice I am insisting on the return of the whole. (c) In London I have my entire personal papers going back to childhood. These include photograph collections, letters, diaries since 1960, telephone logs, tapes, videotapes, and personal 16mm Þlms. (d) A small collection of my research papers is in Germany with publishers, e.g. an original of Adolf Eichmann's memoirs in typescript, 500 pages, which was given to me in Buenos Aires in 1991. MY FRIEND Don B. has applied to a Federal Judge in Washington D.C. for a position in the judiciary. Interviewing him, the judge mentioned in some embarrassment that he had been sent anonymously, with a Detroit postmark, a hidden-camera picture showing him at my stand at the Chicago BookExpo fair. The picture is taken from inside a suitcase or some other device, just "so the judge could know who B. was hanging out with." The judge told B. he thought he should know the kind of methods being used against him . . . The package was mailed on the border between Ann Arbor and Michigan, and contained a load of confidential data on B. including his credit record, and materials on both of us downloaded from the Nizkor site. The judge, an ex-FBI officer, was unimpressed, since he knows my works well and thinks highly of them. It contained no threats, but was clearly an improper attempt to influence the system. When I tell her this, Benté says, "The traditional enemy!" Too true. She says that Jessica is invited to lunch tomorrow with twin children of the commander-in-chief, US Navy in Europe (his children go to the same nursery school). THE NEWSPAPERS report that Gerda Christian, Hitler's secretary, has died in Düsseldorf at 83. That leaves only Traudl Junge left of the four. The Miami Herald quotes from my Hitler's War about her, without identifying the book. I phone Daniel Farley, senior editor of Harcourt Brace publishers in San Diego, saying I do not want to pressure him, but have they received the goebbels book, which he asked to see? Yes indeed, he says, and they're having an editorial meeting next week. A quiet evening, drained by the heat. I must resume - and complete - work on Churchill's War as soon as possible. Torrential sub-tropical downpour most of the day, which traps me indoors. A stack of mail which includes an invitation to speak at Wolverhampton Grammar School. I reply: I'd be very happy to come and talk to your sixth formers. I would suggest a day in November. I am taking the liberty of enclosing my scurrilous private newsletter, which will stimulate your interest. TODAY TO APPEASE the international Jewish community The Miami Herald publishes a list of 1,756 names of people holding accounts in Swiss banks which have been dormant since World War II. I suppose that if the Swiss had published this list two years ago, there would have been an outcry about the "breach of bank confidentiality." Whatever. I and no doubt millions of others scan the list hopefully, like would-be lottery winners, for names that I know - perhaps even for an "Irving". After all, on his way as a Royal Navy gunnery officer serving in the cruiser force from Scapa Flow to Murmansk and Archangel in the gruelling Arctic winter of 1941-42, Daddy might have found time to drop off at his local branch of the Swiss Bank to leave a few hard-earned pounds as a nest egg for our future. No such luck. My eye does settle however on the name of Dr Vojtech Tuka, the Slovak politician; so the Swiss have evidently been ultra-honest about publishing all the names. His little fortune has been quietly building interest there all these years since the Czechs hanged him after the war as a fascist leader. I am puzzled not to see Goebbels, Göring, Himmler, or Hitler - were their peoples not assured by our wartime propaganda agencies that we had proof that they were stashing away their money into safe Swiss bank accounts in case things turned out badly for them? But no, not even a Schicklgruber. My faith in the rectitude of our wartime cause, indeed in human nature itself, takes another beating. Workout in the evening, and supper at the Rusty Anchor. Increased weights and distances. Fit again. Wanting some kind of decision on Goebbels, I again phone Harcourt Brace in San Diego, but Dan Farley's secretary says he's in New York. I send this fax to Benté around midday: Tomorrow please phone the Public Record Office, Kew and ask if they have an information sheet on the recent releases of Bletchley Park ("Ultra") intercept files, particularly about the killing of Jews on the eastern front. As I cycle over to the Rusty Anchor a spectacular thunderstorm begins. Lightning strikes all round, but my time is apparently not yet up. S Then it is time to return to London. I check into a cheap hotel on Miami Beach for the night, half a mile from the houseboat where Andrew Cunanan shot himself two weeks ago. Now boarded up. At the airport I pay $200 for excess baggage - all those books - and sweat pints repacking the trunk at the check-in desk to reduce the weights to within the statutory limits. Plane lands at Heathrow at nine a.m. Back at Duke Street flat at midday. Welcome home. Jessica and Mama both beautiful. |
||||
|
A Will to Make History
TWO CASES IN RECENT weeks have underlined how urgent it is that dedicated supporters of free speech, and of Real History, should make bequests in their lifetime (by executing testaments, by adding codicils, or by setting up a trust) to enable the battle to be carried on by others in their name after they are gone. There are a dozen courageous Þghters who have lost everything - their freedom, their livelihoods, and their professional reputations; their homes and even their families. Among them are:
Do not forget them and the dozens of other campaigners when drafting your Will. Tell them now that you have remembered! Give them this encouragement to Þght on! None of them has asked us to make this appeal, but there are real reasons for concern: Two of the better-placed supporters of what we call the international campaign for Real History indicated that they had made such bequests. They died earlier this year, believing that their wishes would be met. In each case their offspring - modern Germans - did not sympathise with their late fathers' wishes. The papers were concealed, and the vital endowments were lost. |
|||||
| "Gregory Douglas": GESTAPO CHIEF. The 1948 interrogation of Heinrich Müller Gregory Douglas's book Gestapo Chief, the 1948 Interrogation of Heinrich Müller is a carefully crafted historical novel the success of which depends on the reader's partial familiarity with historical events and total acceptance of unsubstantiated documents and assertions. The reader is urged to accept the "fact" that Müller, the notorious SS-Gruppenführer of the Geheime Staatspolizei survived the war and was successfully interviewed by agents of US intelligence agencies. In the alleged transcriptions of numerous interviews with Müller is material on topics including the Duke of Windsor, Roosevelt's knowledge of the impending Pearl Harbor attack, the assassination attempt on Hitler, and Hitler's miraculous survival and escape to Spain.
The strength of such a house of cards depends on the historical integrity of each of the stories seemingly elicited from Müller by interviewer. If doubt can be cast on the integrity of just one of the facts as related by Müller, the entire scenario will come tumbling down, revealing "Douglas's fraud.* Müller's story of the plan to fake Hitler's suicide to ensure his escape to Spain is interpolated by "Douglas" in his Historical Significance-Reflections of the Author. In this way, "Douglas" manages to substantiate his fabricated Müller statements by weaving a web a historical half-truths consisting of innuendo and unsubstantiated assertions, displaying an extreme dislike of Hugh-Trevor-Roper, author of the landmark narrative on the death of the Führer, The Last Days of Hitler. Whether Trevor-Roper, a British Intelligence ofÞcer, read or spoke no German was irrelevant to his work, as qualiÞed translators were employed by many of these Allied Intelligence OfÞcers conducting the interviews of prisoners. Nor can his well-documented mistake in accepting as genuine the notorious Hitler Diaries some thirty-seven years afterwards, in 1983, be used to impugn the scholarship of his book. Something more substantial is needed if the historian is to dismiss The Last Days of Hitler. "Douglas" attempts to provide this material by faulting both the evidence in Trevor-Roper's book and the methods used in securing it. More particularly, "Douglas" faults Trevor-Roper's claim to have conducted numerous interviews of witnesses from the Chancellery Bunker who were in fact in Russian custody. Any interested party need only look to Trevor-Roper's book to realize the error of "Douglas"'s statement. Trevor-Roper never made such a claim. His Notes on Sources is a scholarly listing of the "personal sources" of information used in his report. He never claimed to have interviewed Hitler's staff-members Otto Günsche, Heinz Linge or Hans Bauer. Statements attributed to them are rigorously noted as hearsay. Of particular concern to "Douglas" was Trevor-Roper's use of interviews with SS personnel to substantiate his expert determinations that Hitler had committed suicide and that his body was burned. Pointing out that the SS ofÞcers Linge and Günsche were in Russian captivity, "Douglas" however condemns the remaining two witnesses used by Trevor-Roper as fabrications. Asserting they were members of the SS and the RSD, "Douglas" allegedly veriÞes their existence by checking personnel records of the SS and the RSD held by the Berlin Document Center. Informing the reader that the names of Hermann Karnau and Erich Mansfeld, two of Trevor-Roper's witnesses, could not be found, "Douglas" asks the reader to consider those two witnesses a fraud. In addition, the reader is informed that the statements made by Günsche, Linge and Bauer after their release from the Russian incarceration conßict with Trevor-Roper's conclusions. If "Douglas" had troubled actually to read The Last Days of Hitler he would have realized that his research into the SS background of Karnau and Mansfeld was doomed to fail. In his Notes on Sources, Trevor-Roper does not state that Karnau was an SS member, only that he was a policeman and member of the RSD (Reichssicherheitsdienst). Thus, Karnau would not have appeared on the SS membership lists which "Douglas" searched. Mansfeld is another matter. Erich Mansfeld (alias Skripczyk - "Douglas" should have checked the spelling ) was reported by Trevor-Roper to have been a SS-Hauptscharführer and a member of the RSD. One would therefore presume that his name would appear on the SS enlisted men's list in BCD, but it apparently does not. Can we safely dismiss these two witnesses because no corroboration is found by "Douglas" for their testimonies? Perhaps "Douglas" should have investigated the Interrogation Records Prepared for the War Crimes Proceedings at Nürnberg 1945-1947. In this catalogue, prepared by the National Archives and Records Service in 1984, is a listing for Erich Mansfeld. His Intermediate Interrogation Report (IIR) is on MicroÞlm Roll 25. In this report, conducted in the Bremen Interrogation Center by a G-2 ofÞcer of the 29th Division on July 30, 1945, Mansfeld's apparent SS rank is explained: He was accepted into the RSD in June of 1944 with a rank of Kriminal Assistant and SS Hauptscharführer. Whether this was a provisional rank or not is not known. Other disputed characters of the Bunker Finale are also mentioned , including Karnau, Mengerhausen - a witness "Douglas" seems to have forgotten - and Hufbeck, mentioned on page 204 of The Last Days of Hitler as Hans Hofbeck. In addition, all post war documentaries on the question of Hitler's death point out that there is total agreement between the versions of Linge, Günsche and Bauer, after their release from Soviet captivity, and the Trevor-Roper conclusions. What of Karnau, the keeper of the Führer's dogs? The interrogation report notes that Hermann Karnau was in British Custody - which is precisely where Trevor-Roper interviewed him. Two independent sources resulting in almost total corroboration. Mansfeld's entire personal history is listed in the interrogation and can be further checked. So where's the uncertainty about Mansfeld and Karnau now? "Douglas"'s success rests on the ability to insert a kernel of doubt in a person's mind regarding these past historical events. We can lay to rest the myth of Adolf Hitler's survival. It remains a wonder that anyone takes this book seriously. * Note by ACTION REPORT: "Gregory Douglas" is the pseudonym of "Peter Stahl," alias "Burch," a convicted counterfeiter living in the United States under various names assigned to him by a witness protection programme. We have seen his police record, and we are not impressed by his clumsy forgeries of wartime documents. |
