"The fact thay you couldn't find Tommy Kenny in your "researches" is immaterial"

WTF!!!! - Can you actually READ Mr Carroll??? What part of this do you NOT UNDERSTAND???

"(I on the other hand did the research and found that in the entire First World War only six men with the name Thomas Kenny served in the British Army, the most likely candidate won the Military Medal - I also did the research and found that in the course of that war there was not one instance of anything even remotely resembling your Tommy Kenny's story ever having occurred)

Just in case you still don't understand that Mr Carroll - couldn't find Tommy Kenny - I FOUND ALL SIX OF THEM AND READ THEIR RECORDED WAR RECORDS - YOU PRAT

You on the other hand talked to a man in interview for three days and you checked and corroborated absolutely nothing. Of course you could prove me wrong by going back to your notes and interview tapes and tell us all:

1: What year your man joined the army
2: What regiment he served in
3: What theatre of war he served in
4: What action in fought in where members of the MFP or MMP lined up behind British soldiers to force them "over the top"
5: What action he fought in where he saw MFP or MMP shooting British soldiers for refusing to advance or for returning to their trenches

I can say with absolute certainty that you will provide none of those details because so eager were you to get all this "working class hero" bullshit down you forgot the one most important thing about researching and recording history - you forgot to check up and get corroboration and supporting background and information to validate what you had been told.

"You and your fellow jingoists have done this with every statement by veterans critical of the war raised in discussion - you prefer the offiucial establishment version rather than the words of those whoo actually fought."

Care to offer me any explanation as to how and why it was that the Tommy Kenny that you and your little group interviewed over a period of three days was the only person to have witnessed these things? Care to even examine how such acts could be carried out using reason and logic? You have never studied military history or battlefield archaeology, you simply have no grasp about what you are prattling on about.

A: How many Military Policemen would you need to force a regiment of infantry men over the top at gunpoint- let alone an entire Division? Reasonably and logically you as the military policemen would have to be better armed than the soldiers of that infantry regiment and you would have to have parity in numbers or superiority in numbers otherwise once you started shooting soldiers the soldiers would turn their guns on you. Tell me Jim, how many men served in the war as military policemen (IIRC they started in 1914 with a few hundred and finished in 1918 with around 25,000 covering an army that was 440,000 strong in 1914 and around 5,300,000 strong in 1918). You are completely hopeless when it comes to detail, perspective, logic or reason - you start out with your view and your preconceptions then go hell for leather to prove them irrespective of what substantive evidence tells you, if it doesn't fit your theory you ignore it.

B: The battlefield archaeology bit comes in here Jim - any idea how a system of trenches is laid out? How many different sorts of trenches there were and what their functions were - or do you think that Captain Blackadder's cosy little dug-out was what frontline trench warfare was all about? THE frontline trench if you look at all the pictures form the first world war just simply would not be big enough to allow space for those about to mount the attack and a line of men behind them ready to shoot them if they didn't go - that is just simple physical fact.

Your old man's tale never happened I say that because I have examined the allegation that it did, I have looked at it logically, I have applied reason to it, I have looked for anything at all that could even be remotely considered by way of corroboration and have found absolutely nothing to support this "Urban Myth" that you seem so sold on.