How do you know they were all better men than me? Have you the evidence or is it all made up shit?

(See how you like it.)

Most were not better men than me. Some may have been, had they had the opportunity to live a long and fruitful life. The generals put a stop to that.

They were men. Some were saints, some were sinners but by today's standards they were naive. The not so naive ones were either conscientious objectors or managed to get into reserved occupations. To say they were better than someone on the basis they are dead really is about as gormless as you can get.

I keep looking for signs that you can get out of the hole you have dug yourself, but you keep digging. I know you are not stupid. So why insist on this awful blinkered sanitised revision of history? We are supposed to learn from the past, not get justified by a version of it.....

Oh, contributing editor is the Sunday word for hack. Journalist is a word that can be used, but only in the same way as a pretty airhead stars in a Hollywood B movie and can call herself an actor in the same way as a RSC actor can.... Ditto historian.

Historians research history. Hacks trawl history for snippets to justify the position they are paid to give. As he is being paid by the likes of Paul Dacre for a view, I rest my case.

Here's a view from a real historian. (He presents Time Team and that gets repeated on The History Channel!)

Ahem....

BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM