Similar Posts

  • Letters

    Impressive Scholarship Having just finished reading my first issue of the Journal, I want to tell you that I am very impressed. In its overall scholarship, it is the equal of any serious academic journal. Both "R.P." and "M.B." make good points in their letters in the Jan.-Feb. Journal. issues such as the threat to…

  • Letters

    What a marvelous series this promises to be [An Ongoing Conversation About Libertarianism and Revisionism]. Six months ago I would not have given a “Holocaust Revisionist” any credibility whatsoever. Ad homonym attacks are common because they tend to be very effective (and require little intellectual or factual ammunition), and I had bought into the often-expressed…

  • Letters

    Old the 'Wrong Side' Win? In his recent Opening Statement to the London Court, David Irving said: “I shall not argue, and have never argued, that the wrong side won the [Second World] war, for example, or that the history of the war needs to be grossly rewritten.” I cannot go along with that. As…

  • A Note From The Editor

    Few discussions of the specific topic “Roosevelt and the Origins of World War II” pay much attention to events before 1 September 1939. At most some preliminary words are uttered about the development of Roosevelt's thoughts and policy in the 1930s: his increasing concern, once the New Deal became firmly ensconced and especially after he…

  • Letters

    Because CODOHWeb is publishing new revisionist scholarship, Smith’s Report is in the enviable position of being able to announce new revisionist work to its readers long before they will have heard of it from other quarters. The downside is that we do not have enough space in SR to print the exchanges that such articles…