Comments by "Mitch Young" (@mitchyoung93) on "David Irving - Can you trust ANYTHING he wrote?" video.

I dunno, from that first example it seems that you (and Evans?) are reading far more into the testimony of the cop than Irving did. The testimony itself in no way supports the idea that H___r wanted to the Lt. and his boys to ransack the shop. In fact it could be read to mean that H___r is saying something like "see, by removing the party badge you yourself admitted this wasn't a party action", but he also didn't want hotheads like this guy ruining the name of the party which is why he banned them. Unless there is further text to support the idea that the action would be 'revolutionary' with party ID but is mere criminality without (and would the authorities treat it any differently) the Irving take seems more plausible.
1