BS: Jingoism or Commemoration

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Greg F.
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 12:57 PM

Here, Teribus. Is that your only nom de plume?

He also goes by "Colonel Blimp".

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 12:24 PM

If we had another go at the Germans tomorrow, MoD could employ Teribus to do the same as Comical Ali, the Iraqi who was feeding the press with bullshit about how they were winning. "What about the gunfire over there right now?" Said BBC's John Simpson. "I can't hear any?" Said Comical Ali.

Here, Teribus. Is that your only nom de plume? Only I notice Max Hastings came out with similar bullshit when he was defending the executions in his history revision 101.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 10:20 AM

Apologies Jim I forgot to ask at the end of that last post.

How did your "Special Groups of Military Policemen" know where to position themselves in the line when they were tasked with forcing squaddies "over the top" at gunpoint instantly shooting any that didn't move quick enough? What was the time limit that defined "quick enough" and who set it? I mean it must have come down the chain of command - You obviously believe all this shit, yet you can tell us all very little about it, perhaps you need to refer to your notes, or round up some other distant relation to supply another load of unverifiable hearsay to fill in the details. Names, Regiments, places, dates would certainly be of some help. But we're not going to get any of that are we? You know it and so do I.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 10:07 AM

Very good Jim, now tell your pal Raggy that at no time in his three months in France did Harry Patch ever see an officer summarily shooting any British Soldier. His mention of it amounts to pure hearsay, he doesn't know and cannot vouch that it ever happened with any degree of certainty at all, you suggest he talked about it and heard the story from "someone" who may or may not have seen such an act as they too could have talked about it to someone else, etc, etc - Not really all that convincing is it - 100% supposition. So much for Harry Patch who just because he was the last WWI Veteran to die does not convey any crown of infallibility on his shoulders, I say that because scores of other soldiers (And I MEAN soldiers, not officers, not Generals) wrote their memoirs and autobiographies, lots of them covering the entire span of what to them was known as the Great War, not just three months and guess what Jim? - NOT ONE mentions anything about summary executions in the field - funny that isn't it with all that talking going on, like a said "The Indian Rope Trick" and "Urban Myths" everybody has heard of them and none are real or true.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 08:08 AM

"Do you and Raggy think he is lying in clearly stating the above fact?"
No I don'r but I believe that he could easily have talked to and fought beside people who knew about the executions first hand - do you consider this beyond the realms of possibility and that he was either lying or a gullible half-wit?
At no time did Patch claim to have witnessed shellshock why are you harping on him "witnessing it" - he makes it clear he didn't.

why are you suggesting he said something else - do you dislike and distrust veterans so much that you feel th need to twist their words

Once agabi, this is what he said -
"You were in that trench. That was your front line. You had to keep an eye on the German front line. You daren't leave. No. I suppose if you left, and some of them did, they were shot as cowards. That is another thing with shell shock – I never saw anyone with it, never experienced it – but it seemed you stood at the bottom of the ladder and you just could not move. Shellshock took all the nervous power out of you.
An officer would come down and very often shoot them as a coward. That man was no more a coward than you or I. He just could not move. That's shell shock. Towards the end of war they recognised it as an illness. The early part of the war – they didn't. If you were there you were shot. And that was it. And there's a good many men who were shot for cowardice and they are asking now … that verdict be taken away. They were not cowards."

Still not find any official denials of these executions? - must be all your own work then
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 07:22 AM

The question was for Raggy Jim - He's a big boy and shouldn't need you to jump to his rescue.

Harry Patch never suffered from Shell Shock and he never saw anyone who did suffer from shell shock - Source Harry Patch himself in his own words.   I believe Harry when he says that I do not believe that he is lying - Do you and Raggy think he is lying in clearly stating the above fact?

Now if Harry is telling the truth there - then it becomes impossible by his own statements that he could have "witnessed" the summary execution of a soldier suffering from shell shock by an officer in a trench. He might have heard stories about it but if Harry Patch is telling the truth then he could not possibly have witnessed it.

By the way Jim can you dream up anything else that the British Goverment hasn't done that they haven't denied thereby proving beyond any doubt in your mind that they must therefore have done it?

Please indicate where anyone has formally accused the British Army of summary executions of their own soldiers THEN you might get an official response but I don't think that the Government is too fussed about what is discussed on a forum such as this or in the content of your tapes. Hey how about you, raggy, gnome and the Musktwats starting an action group, write a letter to the MOD copied to the Judge Advocate General and the Lord Chief Justice formally accusing the British Army of summarily executing British Soldiers then sit back and await the response. You could use your tapes and notes and produce them as "evidence".

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 06:31 AM

"state what actually happened all those years ago to soldiers suffering from shell shock when he himself clearly states that he never saw anyone suffering from shell shock or experienced the condition himself?"
It is perfectly obvious from his statement that he served with those who had witnessed and possibly experienced the results of shell shock - didn't soldiers talk to each other?
Why d you continue to denigrate veteran war heroes as gullible fools and liars - is the reputation of politicians and the military that important to you?
Where is the denials that these executions happened apart from your own?
- more than happy to drag you back to this at any time
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 06:10 AM

PS Raggy:

I hate to keep dragging your attention back to this but how on earth could the last surviving soldier of WWI state what actually happened all those years ago to soldiers suffering from shell shock when he himself clearly states that he never saw anyone suffering from shell shock or experienced the condition himself?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 06:04 AM

Loved this bit of nonsense from Raggy:

"I can think of two good reasons why reports of summary executions cannot be found. From the soldiers view they wouldn't want the next-of-kin to be presented with the "fact" that their son/brother/father/husband was a "coward". From the Army's viewpoint they wouldn't want it to be acknowledged officially that they responded in that manner. They certainly wouldn't write it in their official reports thus YOU can't find an example of such."

Ah so your best friend gets shot out of hand right in front of your eyes and you and all his other mates just stand there and do nothing - the first thing in your mind as the highest priority is We can't tell his Mum she will be upset!!!! - f**kin' laughable. If you yourselves did not immediately kill the officer who shot your mate, you would have shouted about the incident to any beggar with a pair of ears to listen, the one thing you most certainly would not do is keep quiet about it.

On to the second of your reasons - Just a little bit of information for you - neither an Officer or an NCO can so much as strike a Private Soldier because that is an offence under military law so please, please,please explain to me exactly how it came about that all of a sudden Officers would be permitted to shoot troops under their command, and if such behaviour was indeed sanctioned by the Army Council and High Command why would the Army have any qualms about such instances appearing in official reports - have you any idea what is meant by logic, reason and commonsense? I ask as you appear to be sadly lacking in all three.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 05:06 AM

"306 British Soldiers were executed for desertion - the word according to Jim Carroll"
Nope - the word according to The Guardian,   date and quote given - please pay attention and read what is put up.
"Urban Myth"
How do you know - where has it ever been denied?
You claim that no summary executions took place - who sez so - only you so far, the authorities have never dienied it when the statement was made publicly - since when were you appointed as a spokesman for the British military establishment (you certainly strut around as if you were)
Yo fellers make a great fuss about the Commemoration, even to the extent that on;ly you Christians take part, yet when any of the veterans step out of line and tells it as irt was (first hand) you're happy to flush what he has to say down the pan - what king of two-faced twerps are you people??   
You've had the facts of the executions - respond to what #has been said by these people who have been remembered recently and who you choose to dismiss as liars
I ask for any evidence that the British authorities have denied it - you offer none and insist on speaking on their behalf
"Tell me Jim why is it that you can never get Donnellan's name right?"
Tell me - why do you always resort to misspellings and typos whenever you run out of ideas - why are you people so ***** predictable?
You waffle on about press accounts of numbers, typos etc. - but offer s.f.a in return.
By what authority do you dismiss out of hand what WW1 veterans have to say when even the establishment can't be arsed to do so.
Are you frustrated that you never made it in the military, as you once claimed to have done, and only made it as far as cooking bad fry-ups in a galley - I think they call it a Walter Mitty Complex!
Think we're done here - don't you?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Mr Red
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 04:58 AM

History is written by the victors. The dead can't speak.

And just to muddy the waters, very often you find the really brave don't tell you. They know they were lucky and foolhardy as well, and did it for necessity not ideology. And they deal with PTSD in their own way - silence.

age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn. Neither should we!

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 04:52 AM

THE only person *((??!!!%&$£)(***!!!!~@!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 04:51 AM

Teribus, you only person you are convincing is yourself (and the professor of course)

As for Harry Patch, who you are convinced is lying, I am not too surprised he didn't mention names. Ye gods I couldn't recall the names of most of my schoolmates from 45 years ago. Half a dozen perhaps if I put my mind to it.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Mr Red
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 04:39 AM

You can't be jingoistic with your head bowed.

Cue arguments over how bowed you should be...............

Just saying!

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 04:36 AM

And apparently so have you Raggy:

"However many years later the last surviving soldier of WW1 decides that perhaps we SHOULD know what actually happened all those years ago." - Raggytash

Ehmmm I hate to keep dragging your attention back to this Raggy but how on earth could the last surviving soldier of WWI state what actually happened all those years ago to soldiers suffering from shell shock when he himself clearly states that he never saw anyone suffering from shell shock or experienced the condition himself? Just asking, and to date you have not given any explanation as to how that could be - I on the other hand have - he did not "witness" it he heard stories - nobody knows where these stories originated from - but just along the front lines in the French section summary executions were being carried out.

Harry Patch was quite good with both names and knicknames of those he served with - yet he didn't come up with any names for people he had "seen" officers shoot, come to think of it he couldn't name any of the officers either, and believe me Raggy, everybody who serves knows the names of their NCOs and Officers.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 04:21 AM

Oh Jim, just one other point, do any of those men who were summarily executed, either by Special groups of Military Police - current flavour of the month or by their own officers right there in front of their mates have any names in all of these stories you have been told? Indian Rope Trick, Urban Myths and Chinese Whispers - all rumour, hearsay, pure invention and lies and you Jim Carroll have swallowed the lot.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 04:17 AM

I can think of two good reasons why reports of summary executions cannot be found. From the soldiers view they wouldn't want the next-of-kin to be presented with the "fact" that their son/brother/father/husband was a "coward". From the Army's viewpoint they wouldn't want it to be acknowledged officially that they responded in that manner. They certainly wouldn't write it in their official reports thus YOU can't find an example of such.

However many years later the last surviving soldier of WW1 decides that perhaps we SHOULD know what actually happened all those years ago.

I know I am not going to change your mind, or that of the professor. You are both too involved in maintaining support for your "masters"

I am more inclined to believe it did occur.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 03:49 AM

Inventing people who criticise him now.

This gets better.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 03:37 AM

Jim, have you ever seen the Indian Rope trick performed by a street entertainer? Hundreds, thousands possibly millions have heard stories about it and know of the trick - yet nobody has ever seen it performed.

Jim, have you ever heard of a thing called an "Urban Myth", hundreds, thousands possibly millions have heard them and believe them - yet none of them are true.

Do I think Harry Patch was lying? What about? Never having seen anybody suffering from Shell Shock? Or about having witnessed Officers summarily executing men frozen to inaction because of shell shock? Now as Harry Patch was only in France for three months at a time when it was the British Army that was on the offensive (late summer 1917) I would say that it was highly likely that Harry Patch never saw anyone suffering from shell shock and that he himself never suffered from it. Now if he telling the truth about that how could he possibly have witnessed the summary execution by an officer of a man suffering from shell shock - it is a contradiction, so what could account for it? The link so smugly supplied by Raggy is to the BBC History website, Harry Patch came back from the First World War and kept steadfastly silent about his experiences for 80 years, he then gave an interview to the BBC as a 100+ year old man. Who thinks that the article linked to is the complete article? It would be utterly remarkable if it was, everything is edited prior to publication, now how do we know what was left out? How do we know where the gaps were? It is undisputed that the French Army carried out summary executions on the western front, could they have been the stories that British troops heard about?

Ever since you and the Musktwats introduced alleged summary executions I have looked long and hard for any substantive evidence of them ever happening in the British Army - I have found NONE

I find it incredibly difficult to believe that you talked to and recorded a man who you say was a WWI veteran over the course of three days and not once in all that time did he mention what theatre of war he served in or what regiment or corps he served in. Most common experience in talking to veterans of that period the first thing they will tell you is what branch of the armed forces they served in (Army, Navy or Air Force), where it was they served and saw action, and for ex-Army men they will ALWAYS tell you what regiment or corps they served with. Your man didn't and you made no attempt whatsoever to find out. If that is your approach to gathering "history" then any work you have produced can only be viewed as being highly speculative and unreliable.

Your inattention to detail is staggering Jim:

306 British Soldiers were executed for desertion - the word according to Jim Carroll

Here is a summary, all documented, all recorded of the Courts Martial undertaken during the First World War:

The outcomes of Courts Martial

In all, 5,952 officers and 298,310 other ranks were court-martialled. This amounts to just over 3% of the total of men who joined the army. Of those tried, 89% were convicted; 8% acquitted; the rest were either convicted without the conviction being confirmed or with it being subsequently quashed. Of those convicted, 30% were for absence without leave; 15% for drunkenness;***14% for desertion (although only 3% were actually in the field at the time***); 11% for insubordination; 11% for loss of army property, and the remaining 19% for various other crimes. The main punishments applied were : 3 months detention in a military compound - 24%; Field Punishment Number 1 - 22%; Fines - 12%; 6 months detention - 10%; reduction in rank - 10%; Field Punishment Number 2 - 8%.

3.080 men (1.1% of those convicted) were sentenced to death. Of these, 89% were reprieved and the sentence converted to a different one. 346 men were executed. Their crimes included desertion - 266; murder - 37; cowardice in the face of the enemy - 18; quitting their post - 7; striking or showing violence to their superiors - 6; disobedience - 5; mutiny - 3; sleeping at post - 2; casting away arms - 2. Of the 346, 91 were already under a suspended sentence from an earlier conviction (40 of these a suspended death sentence)."

YOUR 306 does not represent those executed for desertion they include all of the above minus those charged with and found guilty of murder. The Court Martial process and proceedings for every single one of those courts martial are available for you to read, study and examine.

***14% for desertion (although only 3% were actually in the field at the time*** the 266 executions were for desertion in the field. Those who deserted whilst in training, on leave, or on duty in the UK were not subject to the death penalty and none were executed in the UK.

Tell me Jim why is it that you can never get Donnellan's name right?

Are you seriously trying to equate a 105 minute long DOCUMENTARY broadcast in 1980 on the British Army covering some 150 years which was quite correctly lambasted and criticised for the biased and poor nature of its content to the extent that it was screened only once and the BBC banned any overseas transmission to a fragment of a BBC Drama that is 100% FICTION as evidence that summary executions took place!!! Utterly ridiculous.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Nov 15 - 03:15 AM

Bloody hell Teribus. You are getting so confused that even Keith A of Hertford has gone quiet in case what he assumes is his credibility gets woven into your confusion.

That's the problem with cutting and pasting from anything you find on the Internet. You can always find some bollocks that backs your point, however absurd and silly.

Reminds me of the account of an officer in WW2 whose men were afraid his ineptness and callous attitude would get them all killed. On the approach to Madaloni he was the only casualty in their section. A note from a general held by The IWM notes that everybody felt it expedient to gloss over the fact he was killed by a single bullet in his back.

Not nice this war game. Glorifying it with pomp and circumstance leaves a bitter taste both ways.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 08:21 PM

"Not exactly true is it Jim - such summary executions would have been impossible to keep quiet"
Ermm - they weren't - they were common knowledge among the soldiery and talked about on a regular basis
That they weren't reported publicly was totally due to fact that the government took total control of the press.
"Once more you are running on rumour,"
Nope - i have pointed out that TALK OF the executions was so well known that they could be used in a BBC drama, WITHOUT ONE WORD OF PROTEST - NOT ONE
When Philip Donellan made his filed documentary, 'Gone For a Soldier' for television, the Beeb was inundated with protests which lasted for weeks - questions were asked in Parliament.
Yet here, a summary execution was carried out without a single word of protest - that's how F**in stupid you can get.
I asked you to provide a denial that they happened - they have been mentioned often enough
You provide none so we can only assume that you and your pet monkey are mounting a defence of them off your own bat.
I have provided two statements - one form a veteran, another from the grandson of a veteran - that they took place - you are totally unable to provide examples of them being denied - in fact YOU ARE MAKING IT UP ON BEHALF OF THE ESTABLISHMENT - WHO THE **** DO YOU THINK YOU ARE TO SPEAK ON THEIR BEHALF?
"NO-ONE who deserted in the UK was ever shot for desertion"
306 British soldiers were shot for desertion "In many cases, soldiers were clearly suffering from shellshock but officers showed no compassion for fear that their comrades would have disobeyed orders and refused to go "over the top" (Guardian 16 August 2006)
The fact that it may be true that none may have been actually executed in Britain is totally immaterial - the play was a work of fiction and never pretended to be anything else - but the fact that SUMMARY EXECUTIONS WERE CARRIED OUT IN THE PLAY WITHOUT A SINGLE LETTER OF PROTEST - NOT EVEN FROM COLONEL BLIMPS LIKE YOU PAIR indicates that it was fairly widely accepted.
I ask again - where are your official denials that they took place - reports of them have been made publicly - even by that "liar" Harry Patch - Britain's last WW1 veteran.
You really have made this up off your own bat - haven't you?
Pair of clowns, or what??
Jiom Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 04:27 PM

Jim Carroll - 16 Nov 15 - 03:07 PM

You pair have now denied the fact of summary executions several times - without proof"

Not exactly true is it Jim - such summary executions would have been impossible to keep quiet - you have no proof whatsoever that any such executions ever took place - instead what you have is rumour and hearsay.

Very pleased to see that you that you agree that Harry Patch could not have possibly seen what Raggy thinks he saw.

"It was well known enough to have been part of the oral history of the trenches to have been used in a BBC television play entitled The Village - had it been untrue, the Beeb would have inundated with protests, especiall around the time of the Centenary - it wasn't"

Ah historical fact established by the BBC's Drama Unit. How f**kin' idiotic can you get!! Once more you are running on rumour, stories and hearsay - my giddy Aunt I sincerely hope that no-one ever finds themselves on trial with you sitting as part of the jury. You appear to accept any unsubstantiated fairytale story as long as it fits in with your own biased and bigoted preconceptions and stereotypes. Write to the Imperial War Museum, write to the Royal Military Police Museum in Chichester they will tell you that:

1: NO-ONE who deserted in the UK was ever shot for desertion
2: Military Policemen form no part in the actual execution of any prisoner - men from the condemned man's regiment form the firing squad, they are commanded by a Junior Officer from their regiment
3: The court martial documents of every single man who was sentenced to death are available online - I advise you to read them
4: There are no accounts anywhere of any Summary executions carried out by the British Army anywhere during the First World War and believe me I have looked long and hard for them. As Keith A has stated summary executions were carried out by the French Army on the Western Front and by the Italian Army - but none by the British.

"Do you have any examples of these executions being denied anywhere"

Ehmmm Jim if something never happened just how the f**k do you go about denying that it happened. By the way, just who on earth would be around and be arsed enough to complain to the BBC about some artistic licence being used in a costume drama on television? It would appear only you made the mistake of thinking it was a factual representation.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 03:32 PM

Just as an aside Teribus. I will not comment on anything Jim says, he's a big boy he doesn't need me to back him up...........













............unlike the triple alliance

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 03:22 PM

There is another huge difference Teribus.

You and Keith have already set out your stalls on many occasions.

I, for one, would be astonished if either of you took on board anything that didn't fit into your predetermined remit.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 03:15 PM

GUEST,Raggytash - 16 Nov 15 - 02:40 PM

One major difference Teribus.

We only have your long remembered second hand information.

So tell me Raggy what makes Jim Carroll's second hand information that much more believable?

Oh and Raggy you don't just have to take my word for it listen to the "The Great War", a 26-episode documentary series from 1964 on the First World War. The documentary was a co-production involving the resources of the Imperial War Museum, the British Broadcasting Corporation, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation."

There is a special DVD called "Voices From The Western Front" you and your fellow travelers should watch and listen to it - you might just learn something from those who were there.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 03:07 PM

You pair have now denied the fact of summary executions several times - without proof
You have had an account from the grandson of an eyewitness you say it didn't happen
You have had the account of a veteran of world war one who says it happened, even if he didn't witness it - you say it didn't happen.
It was well known enough to have been part of the oral history of the trenches to have been used in a BBC television play entitled The Village - had it been untrue, the Beeb would have inundated with protests, especiall around the time of the Centenary - it wasn't
Do you have any examples of these executions being denied anywhere, or are your denials just on your own initiative - if so, when did you become spokesmen for the establishment?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 03:05 PM

I am not suggesting for one second that Harry Patch was lying. You, along with Keith, seem to be saying he was.

I know who I am more inclined to trust even though I never met the man.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 02:54 PM

Oh Raggy shell shock did most certainly exist - but tell me was Harry Patch lying when he very clearly stated on the subject of Shell Shock:

"You were in that trench. That was your front line. You had to keep an eye on the German front line. You daren't leave. No. I suppose if you left, and some of them did, they were shot as cowards. That is another thing with shell shock – I never saw anyone with it, never experienced it.

Now that was the quote taken directly from the very link that you yourself supplied. Now if Harry Patch was telling the truth, i.e. NOT LYING - how on earth could he have ever seen an officer summarily execute someone suffering from Shell Shock - simple enough and a reasonable enough question - please provide an explanation as you obviously believe that Harry Patch saw what he by his own admission could not possibly have witnessed.

Please don't deflect Raggy the original version had Military Policemen lined up behind our lads in the trenches forcing them over the top at gunpoint - NEVER HAPPENED. Added to this fairytale was the tale of Military Policemen shooting those who didn't move fast enough (I wonder who decided what was quick enough?) and shot anybody returning to our lines - NEVER HAPPENED. But fear not Jim Carroll shifted the goalposts on this and Military Police changed to SPECIAL GROUPS OF MILITARY POLICEMEN waiting to find out how they knew where to go to to be effective in the exercise of this "special duty" - that explanation should prove amusing.

How I do enjoy watching you lot floundering about in all this mud and confusion of your own making and only succeeding in tying yourselves in knots.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Greg F.
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 02:42 PM

Col. Blimp & Profesor: Vass you dere, Charlie?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 02:40 PM

One major difference Teribus.

We only have your long remembered second hand information. Always a bit suspect as I'm sure you realise, albeit no doubt with the best of intentions.

However you and Keith have completely dismissed the testimony of a man who was there. A much revered man. Who, without him being able to answer your accusations, you have both named as a liar.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 02:35 PM

"hat master of complete and utter bollocks Jim Carroll 16 Nov 15 - 11:17 AM"
Must be bollocks if you can dismiss it without even responding to anything said.
You really are an arrogant berk to think anybody takes ay notice of your unqualified dismissals
Are you aware that you always respond in this way when you have no answer.
You really are a creature of habit.
"Harry Patch"
he said he never saw or experienced it, but he almost certainly fought with and spoke to people who did as his statment on it makes crystal clear.
Are you really going to continue trying to make out that last veteran of World War One a liar to peddle your establishment line?
Patche's statement is perfectly in line with the link you have been given describing on-the-spot executions for not going over the top qickly enough - makes mors sense that swallowing the ffici8alk version -as you pair have
Jim Carroll
This is what he said.
"Shell shock
You were in that trench. That was your front line. You had to keep an eye on the German front line. You daren't leave. No. I suppose if you left, and some of them did, they were shot as cowards. That is another thing with shell shock – I never saw anyone with it, never experienced it – but it seemed you stood at the bottom of the ladder and you just could not move. Shellshock took all the nervous power out of you.
An officer would come down and very often shoot them as a coward. That man was no more a coward than you or I. He just could not move. That's shell shock. Towards the end of war they recognised it as an illness. The early part of the war – they didn't. If you were there you were shot. And that was it. And there's a good many men who were shot for cowardice and they are asking now … that verdict be taken away. They were not cowards."

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 02:29 PM

"There were no summary executions in the British Army of WW1."

In stating that Keith A is 100% correct.

Just over 3,000 men were sentenced to death by British Courts Martial during the First World War, the court records can all be read online. Roughly one in ten were actually carried out the sentences in nine out of ten cases was commuted to life sentences.

"There are numerous eye witness accounts of them taking place and the link I provided last time tells of a special group of military policemen there to carry them out when soldiers were reckoned not to have responded quickly enough to orders to go over the top - the writer describes it having been witnessed by to his grandfather#

What numerous eye witness accounts? You haven't been able to come up with any that have been substantiated -a load of hearsay and complete and utter twaddle.

Ah so the goal posts have been moved and it was a "Special group of military policemen" now is it Carroll?? Tell me Jim just out of interest how did the powers of the day know where to position this Special group of military policemen", how did they know the section of line or even in what trench those "reluctant" squaddies would be lurking? Applying logic, commonsense and a healthy dash of reasoning it all presents itself as being a bit fanciful and haphazard doesn't it.

"(more "lies" I suppose)" - Most certainly.

Knowing what I do know about soldiers if any "special group of military policemen" started shooting soldiers the members of that "special group" would all be dead in seconds - killed by the rest of the soldiers in that regiment.

The account that Tommy Kenny gave us was of soldiers being sentenced to death, locked away awaiting execution, then, if there was a push on, being taken out and put in the front line.
If they survived they were then placed back in prison and eventually executed.

Tommy burst into tears (all on tape) when he described how he got to know people in the trenches, fought beside them, then later read the notice that they had been executed"

Now all of that is complete and utter twaddle Jim - As previously stated only 1-in-10 sentenced to death were ever executed. Under Service Regulations a man under a charge or under punishment is forbidden to bear arms (Oddly enough it was that little rule that saved my paternal grandfather's life), the only exception to this regulation was shown in the film "Breaker Morant" when the Boers attacked the garrison he was being held in. The rational is that in such a situation prisoners are released and armed in order to defend themselves, under no circumstances would prisoners be left in confinement and left to the mercies of the enemy should the enemy attack succeed.

Lets face it - we have virtually no information of how the ordinary Tommy felt about the war and his experiences.
The officers were the only ones allowed to keep diaries, and the men who defied orders and wrote things down would have been insane to the point of being suicidal had they wrote about how they felt.
It took nearly a century to make available some of those forbidden writings and those few that are, obviously, censored."

More twaddle, while YOU and members of the general public have no access to the diaries and letters of common soldiers the Imperial War Museum has held absolute mountains of such records for decades and that material has been read and studied by historians studying the period. Where on earth did you get the line about officers being the only ones allowed to keep diaries? Anybody could keep a diary - NOBODY was allowed to keep or take a diary into front line positions - for what should be f**king glaringly obvious reasons. Ah but there again you haven't the foggiest notion how the "front line" worked in your BBC comedy/drama little world soldiers were sent into the front line and stayed there for years - they didn't.

"We only have the word of people like tabloid journalist Max Hastings, who cut out his career in Hitler supporter's Daily Mail to tell us that the soldiers knew why they were fighting and that they supported the cause - hardly a reliable source!"

Well damn me Carroll you could not have got this bit more wrong had you tried.

1: I believe that the first paper Max Hastings ever worked for was the Evening Standard - he became an occasional columnist for the Daily Mail much, much later on.

2: It was the very first Viscount Rothermere who was the appeaser and Hitler supporter, he was also one of the strongest advocates for British rearmament in the 1930s, he died in 1940, Max Hastings wasn't born until 1945 and he did not work for the Daily Mail until after 2007 - so I fail to see the connection or the inference you are trying to make.

3: Now as you are such a believer in what the soldiers of the time said and the stories they told how about this:

- My Paternal Grandfather certainly knew why he volunteered and fought in the British Army in the First World War

- My Maternal Grandfather certainly knew why he volunteered and fought in the British Army in the First World War

- My next door neighbour certainly knew why he volunteered and fought in the British Army in the First World War

- All of the "old comrade" friends of the above who I talked to as a child all knew why they had joined up and fought in the British Forces during the First World War

- Watch the 1964 documentary "The Great War" and all those interviewed knew why they had joined up and fought in the British Forces during the First World War

Now then Jim were they all lying?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 01:19 PM

Let me get this right then Teribus AND Keith.


Harry Patch was lying and shell shock didn't exist.


Hmmmmmm








Still waiting for an apology Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 12:54 PM

"All those banging on about Harry Patch - please explain how on earth Harry Patch could have possibly seen shell-shocked soldiers being summarily executed by their officers in the trenches when by his own admission he never in the three months he spent in France never saw a soldier suffering from shell shock? Or is that little anomaly I await your answers, they should be rather interesting, and all will be pure 100% bollocks because logic and commonsense would tell even a complete and utter idiot that if you have never seen or encountered a soldier suffering from shell shock then it is impossible that you could have EVER seen one being shot."

Should read:

All those banging on about Harry Patch - please explain how on earth Harry Patch could have possibly seen shell-shocked soldiers being summarily executed by their officers in the trenches when by his own admission he never in the three months he spent in France never saw a soldier suffering from shell shock? Or is that little anomaly just to quietly and conveniently ignored. I await your answers, they should be rather interesting, and all will be pure 100% bollocks because logic and commonsense would tell even a complete and utter idiot that if you have never seen or encountered a soldier suffering from shell shock then it is impossible that you could have EVER seen one being shot.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 12:51 PM

So we have:

1: GUEST 16 Nov 15 - 09:20 AM
2: Raggytash 16 Nov 15 - 10:11 AM
3: Raggytash, pointlessly repetitive at 16 Nov 15 - 10:27 AM
4: That master of complete and utter bollocks Jim Carroll 16 Nov 15 - 11:17 AM
5: And finally GUEST 16 Nov 15 - 12:00 PM

All proving to anyone who has the vaguest inkling of the history of the period, and any knowledge of the British Army of the period that those named above haven't got the foggiest notion about the subject they are wittering on about.

All those banging on about Harry Patch - please explain how on earth Harry Patch could have possibly seen shell-shocked soldiers being summarily executed by their officers in the trenches when by his own admission he never in the three months he spent in France never saw a soldier suffering from shell shock? Or is that little anomaly I await your answers, they should be rather interesting, and all will be pure 100% bollocks because logic and commonsense would tell even a complete and utter idiot that if you have never seen or encountered a soldier suffering from shell shock then it is impossible that you could have EVER seen one being shot.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 12:00 PM

No summary executions?

Pedantic to say the least. A British court martial is still to this day of concern due to the inbuilt presumption of guilt and often biased military mindset in the judgement phase.

(Source - Amnesty International.)

Considering executions in WW1 were set up as a deterrent, the word summary is rather appropriate. Not that officers make good judgement over the lies of soldiers. If they did, they wouldn't try to win by sending waves of men over the top once they found it didn't fucking work...

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 11:17 AM

"There were no summary executions in the British Army of WW1."
There were no recorded accounts of summary executions - don't you mean.
There are numerous eye witness accounts of them taking place and the link I provided last time tells of a special group of military policemen there to carry them out when soldiers were reckoned not to have responded quickly enough to orders to go over the top - the writer describes it having been witnessed by to his grandfather (more "lies" I suppose - you fellers seem to get your kicks calling soldiers "liars" when they don't come up with the right answer.
The account that Tommy Kenny gave us was of soldiers being sentenced to death, locked away awaiting execution, then, if there was a push on, being taken out and put in the front line.
If they survived they were then placed back in prison and eventually executed.
Tommy burst into tears (all on tape) when he described how he got to know people in the trenches, fought beside them, then later read the notice that they had been executed - sheer ****** barbarism which sums up that obscene war perfectly.
Lets face it - we have virtually no information of how the ordinary Tommy felt about the war and his experiences.
The officers were the only ones allowed to keep diaries, and the men who defied orders and wrote things down would have been insane to the point of being suicidal had they wrote about how they felt.
It took nearly a century to make available some of those forbidden writingsand those few that are, obviously, censored.
We only have the word of people like tabloid journalist Max Hastings, who cut out his career in Hitler supporter's Daily Mail to tell us that the soldiers knew why they were fighting and that they supported the cause - hardly a reliable source!
Hurrah for the Blackshirts

Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Raggytash
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 10:27 AM

So old Harry was lying. We'll have to rewrite that bit of his story. Sad really that the last survivor of WW1 was such a liar.

Still not had an apology.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 10:17 AM

There were no summary executions in the British Army of WW1.
That is why you will find no account of one.
Why did Harry believe in them when he never saw one? Who knows?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Raggytash
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 10:11 AM

So he was lying. funny a lot of people do that in your book don't they.


Still waiting for an apology by the way.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 09:59 AM

He was certainly wrong about it, but he never claimed to have witnessed such a thing.
There were no summary executions in the British Army.
There were in the Italian and French armies.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 09:20 AM

So is Harry Patch lying when he said "An officer would come down and very often shoot them as a coward"

A simple yes or no will suffice.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 08:56 AM

Ah Raggy another poor soul who cannot read:

Fifth Paragraph you say - is this:
"You got tots of rum.There were many a man who didn't like rum, didn't drink it. It used to warm you up. Life in the trenches, well…can you imagine now, going out from this room along the corridor and there is a trench dug across the lawn. Six feet deep and three feet wide. There is water and mud in the bottom. You sit on a trench at the side to sleep, don't matter whether it is wet, fine, hot or cold. Four days you are there and you got to stick it. That was the conditions."

Fifth Sub-section which is what I think you were referring so smugly to is this:

"Shell shock
You were in that trench. That was your front line. You had to keep an eye on the German front line. You daren't leave. No. I suppose if you left, and some of them did, they were shot as cowards. That is another thing with shell shock – I never saw anyone with it, never experienced it – but it seemed you stood at the bottom of the ladder and you just could not move. Shellshock took all the nervous power out of you.

An officer would come down and very often shoot them as a coward. That man was no more a coward than you or I. He just could not move. That's shell shock. Towards the end of war they recognised it as an illness. The early part of the war – they didn't. If you were there you were shot. And that was it. And there's a good many men who were shot for cowardice and they are asking now … that verdict be taken away. They were not cowards.

So Harry Patch, who, by his own admission never saw anyone with shellshock how on earth could he have possibly seen anyone shot because they suffered from it? A simple question I know Raggy but one I just thought I had to ask as what Harry seems to be doing is contradicting himself.

Now Jim Carroll's Tommy Kenny and the Musktwats when they were posting were very specific they alleged that British soldiers were shot by the Military Police or "REDTOPS" as Musktwat called them – here Harry Patch states British Officers shot shellshock victims that he himself never saw. Amounts somewhat to a great deal less than overwhelming proof doesn't it.

Nice try – carry on digging.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 08:54 AM

"Another ploy was "a land fit for heroes to live in"
That should have been "a war to end all wars" of course
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Greg F.
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 08:51 AM

Now boys, I think Colonel Blimp established his rather- err- idiosyncratic? and specious view of the First World War and war in general a long time ago, ably aided by The Professor.

What's the point of beating your heads against a brick wall?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 08:47 AM

"Did Tommy Kenny regale you with stories of MPs shooting British soldiers who refused to go over the top and for returning to their trenches"
Nope - that was somebody else altogether in recollections of his grandfather - look the ***** thing up - you were given a link that was taken from the net.
The fact that it is inconvenient to your case does not make it a lie - it was told to the writer by his grandfather - another veteran who you choose to call a liar - you are adding to your score here by leaps and bounds - were there any World War One soldiers who told the truth, other the the ones who back your jingoism.
"A war to end all wars" was one of the ploys to get lads to joint up - it doesn't matter a toss which General believed it - certainly some of that lads did - you said so yourself, though not in so many words
"They died in order that you could be born and brought up and live in peace, security and liberty"
Another ploy was "a land fit for heroes to live in"
"The election was fought not so much on the peace issue and what to do with Germany, although those themes played a role. More important was the voters' evaluation of Lloyd George in terms of what he had accomplished so far and what he promised for the future. His supporters emphasised that he had won the Great War. Against his strong record in social legislation, he himself called for making "a country fit for heroes to live in""
SOME OF THE OTHER LIES
"Your "Home before Christmas" was shown and clearly demonstrated as being a myth"
No it wasn't - it was what many of the men went to the trenches believing - covered adequately in Paxman's programmes.
Doesn't matter a toss that those who spread it didn't believe it - that was the message circulated.
" The word of one single man who YOU have not even been able to establish whether or not he even ever served as a soldier does not count."
Again - not true - I attended his funeral and met some of those who knew him - he was the grandfather of a close friend - are you claiming that his family and friends invented his war-record?
Your jingoism gets more and more squalid
Harry Patch went on to say he had been conned and the war was not worth the sacrifice - you conveniently missed out the important bit.
Jim Carroll


.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 08:15 AM

Harry Patch

Teribus please read paragraph 5 and then come back and tell me that Harry Patch was lying.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 08:03 AM

Talking down to people??

You said I had failed to find any record of a soldier named Tommy Kenny in answer to a post of mine where I had quite clearly stated that I had found not only one soldier named Tommy Kenny but six - clear example of Jim Carroll's inability to read and understand the English language and complete and utter lack of any powers of reasoning or logic.

"The army didn't need military policemen to force men to fight against their will - what king of stupid argument is that.
They had laws and the threat of imprisonment and the firing squad if, once enlisted or recruited, they refused to fight."

OK then Jim, when you first introduced us all to Tommy Kenny you did tell us all about Tommy telling you about MPs forcing British soldiers over the top at gunpoint? Did Tommy Kenny regale you with stories of MPs shooting British soldiers who refused to go over the top and for returning to their trenches? If he did he was lying because no such incidents EVER HAPPENED during the entire course of the First World War - if you think what I have said there is incorrect then please provide us with evidence that refutes what I have said - Please note: The word of one single man who YOU have not even been able to establish whether or not he even ever served as a soldier does not count. At the time of all the WWI threads none of your fellow travelers were able to come up with any other examples of this practice so how come YOUR Tommy was the only one to witness it? That sort of thing would have been impossible to keep quiet. Oh and here is another piece of information for you to consider, during the course of WWI the Military Foot Police and the Military Mounted Police never once shot a British soldier - not even those condemned to die by firing squad - soldiers from the condemned man's regiment had to form the firing squad. Standard and uniform issue of arms for the Military Police? A side arm, a service revolver.

"Tommy's story is identical to many accounts of World War One

Yet none of you who believe the myth about men being forced over the top at gunpoint can verify Tommy's story

" - young men not able to find work, dissatisfied with their lives tricked into joining up by the promise of a regular job and the romance of travel and a uniform to attract the girls - as old as warfare itself - utterly crass."

What on earth are you wittering on about? Is that seriously your argument? A bunch of tired old stereotypical cliches? Rather runs against the facts doesn't it with regard to the first two years of the First World War. Such as over 1,200,000 men rushing to join the British Army between August 1914 and December 1914 in overwhelming droves of VOLUNTEERS so great that the British Army of the day couldn't cope with the rush. By the time the War was over 2.6 million British men who had volunteered to join the armed forces and a further 2.7 million had been conscripted. EVERY other soldier who participated from Ireland, from Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Newfoundland, India, South Africa, etc, etc - where conscription did not exist were ALL VOLUNTEERS.

"Please don't try to throw dust in my eyes with your supposed military knowledge"

For the purposes of this exchange Carroll it can clearly be seen who knows what they are talking about and who does not - you old son are absolutely clueless when it comes to this subject.

"THe lads who fought and died were, by and largely tricked into doing so with false promises of a better world and other enticements - there are enough examples of ex-soldiers saying so - Harry Patch being one of them."

Really?? Any documented examples of this? I don't think I will get any from you or your fellow travelers.

Your "Home before Christmas" was shown and clearly demonstrated as being a myth as far as the British Government and the British people were concerned.

The "country fit for heroes to live in"?? Never stated at any time during the war - so hardly a false promise - the line came from a speech delivered by David Lloyd George at Wolverhampton, Nov. 23, 1918 and subsequently quoted in The Times, Nov. 25, 1918. (Source: The Oxford Dictionary of Modern Quotations" by Tony Augarde.)

Oh and Jim, and apologies to Eric Bogle, but not one single man who joined the British Armed Forces during the First World War, not one single General and not one single politician ever seriously believed for one single second that they were "fighting the war to end all war". Again here is David Lloyd George using the phrase:

"This war, like the next war, is a war to end war."

Harry Patch was one of the ones who said all that was he Carroll??

Well here is what Harry Patch did say about all that Jim:

Background - Harry Patch grew up in Coombe Down, near Bath. He left school at 15 and trained as a plumber. He was 16 when war broke out and reached 18 just as conscription was being introduced. Unlike many of the young men who smilingly signed up for death and dismemberment, he had no illusions.

What Harry DID say - "I knew what to expect. My mother had three sons. My oldest brother suffered from asthma. He didn't pass. My middle brother was a regular soldier. Royal Engineers. Serving in Africa. He was called home and wounded at Mons. I knew what it was going to be like: dirty, filthy, insanitary."

Those the words a man being told lies and coaxed with false promises and inducements?? Don't think so Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 06:02 AM

The only person moving goalposts is the professor as well you know.

Trying the defend the undefendable really doesn't suit you Teribus.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Nov 15 - 05:56 AM

WTF are you on about Teribums? I said I do not find the festival objectionable but I do find the inclusion of christian prayers for non-christians objectionable. I have never said anything else. Just who is moving what goalposts?

neither of you ever say anything germane to any subject under discussion anyway.

If you believe that we are not worth talking to, who are the idiots that keep responding to us?