"Max Hastings is regarded as an eminent historian" [Keith]

That might have been acceptable if you had, in your turn not dismissed all those giving a different opinion as "not a qualified historian" as you have persistently done on that and every other thread.
Hist on your own petard somewhat, I'd say.

MAX HASTING IS A DAILY MAIL JOURNALIST AND YOU HAVE JUST LIED (AGAIN) WHEN YOU WROTE "I have never put up any daily mail journalist as an expert on anything."

I repeat, Max Hasting is a Daily Mail journalist - he has no qualifications as a historian." - Christmas

A few of points with regard to the above:

1: Sir Max Hastings IS regarded as being an eminent (albeit unqualified) historian, evidenced by the awards and reviews his work has received from eminent qualified historians and by the fact that those same eminent qualified historians invited him to become a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society.

2: I do not believe that Keith did dismiss "all those giving a different opinion as "not a qualified historian"[sic]". I believe that on the "Potato Blight" Thread he dismissed quite correctly some of those you put up as "qualified historians" (Tim Pat Coogan and John Mitchel being but two of them - neither of course are considered by "qualified historians" as being either eminent or "qualified").

3: Sir Max Hastings is NOT a Daily Mail journalist - before leaping to contradict that statement I would direct you to look up the difference between being a journalist and a columnist.

As for this from Musket

"Max Hastings is regarded as a bit of a cunt by one professor.

Kind of blows a hole in your priggish crap, doesn't it?"

Kind of demonstrates your total lack of perspective, while at the same time making a complete and utter c**t of yourself Ian (LIOL & Bar).