BS: Armistice Day (debate)

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Dec 13 - 05:43 AM

So even now you think you know more than the historians!
Please don't stop.
And you accuse me of trying to make you look a twat!

Poets?
Rupert Brooke?
John Mcrea?

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Greg F.
Date: 19 Dec 13 - 08:33 AM

The list includes ALL the military historians with an interest or specialism in WW1

All? Horseshit.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Dec 13 - 09:05 AM

Same old lie from the same old fool.
Who did I leave out Greg?
You can not name any.
You can not name one.
You are full of "horseshit" Greg.

How many times do I have to slap you down?

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Greg F.
Date: 19 Dec 13 - 09:42 AM

So, you actually believe that the ten persons you name are "ALL the military historians with an interest or specialism in WW1" on the face of the globe? I repeat: absolute horseshit.

You know, Keith, for sheer bloody-mindedness, pig-headedness and ignorance you remind me of Ian Paisley - one of the great "Christian"[sic] persecuters of all time.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Dec 13 - 09:50 AM

Do you know any others who have published on the subject in the last 20 years?
No you do not.
There are none.

Next time you post the same old lie, why not just make up some names?
If you are going to lie, make it a real whopper!

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Greg F.
Date: 19 Dec 13 - 10:33 AM

Do you know any others who have published on the subject in the last 20 years?

I'm curious: Why only in the last twenty years?

And yes, I do. I once again refer you to the Catalogue of the British Library. Do a search on "World War I" and check the publication dates. You'll find hundreds.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 19 Dec 13 - 12:02 PM

Poets?

Err. Baldrick?

Oh, Rupert Brooke. He wrote one about you, didn't he?

If I should lie, think only this of me.
There is a corner of a Hertford keyboard that is forever self satisfied and smug.



Eeh, tha' does look a reight twat me old duck.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Dec 13 - 01:07 PM

I can't help but be self-satisfied and smug.
Sorry, but all your gang declaring that historians are wrong and you all are cleverer than them!
Priceless.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 20 Dec 13 - 03:09 AM

Ergo you are right



Or should that be ego?

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Dec 13 - 03:45 AM

Right first time.
Unusual for you Musket.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 20 Dec 13 - 09:24 AM

Just to be specific. I was right second time.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Dec 13 - 01:49 AM

Again declaring that historians are wrong and you all are cleverer than them!
Priceless.

Is there one historian who agrees with you?
No.
Is there one who disagrees with me?
No.
But you keep on making a fools of yourselves.
That does make me satisfied.
That does make me smug.
Sorry.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 21 Dec 13 - 01:59 AM

I would suggest they have better things to do than "agree with" Keith A Hole of Hertford.

Just a hunch.

After all, should "they" have even heard of you, "they" would have written you off as someone who reads and believes rather than reads, critiques and forms an opinion that is then articulated as a version of history.

It's harder for we historians than you buggers think......

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 21 Dec 13 - 05:33 AM

And now for those still keeping down with us, a second instalment of Voltaire.

"It is dangerous to be right on matters in which the established authorities are wrong."

Still, at least Keith A Hole of Hertford can sleep soundly at night eh?





Next time everybody stands freezing at a a War Memorial on a cold November morning, look around you. How many are there to commemorate the wasted life and how many are celebrating kicking the shit out of the Hun? Keeps the mind busy and whiles away the time whilst the God section waffles on.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Dec 13 - 05:36 AM

Excellent point well made.
Thank you.

Is there one historian whose findings support your views?
No.
Is there one whose findings contradict my views?
No.
But you keep on making fools of yourselves.
That does make me satisfied.
That does make me smug.
Sorry.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 21 Dec 13 - 10:22 AM

You'd be just as insufferable if you were right.

Pride cometh before a fall. You can spin history but there are too many war graves standing in neat defiance, to eradicate the truth.







Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom (love the pathos) Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Dec 13 - 10:30 AM

Who cares what you say or think.
It is based only on your superstitious belief in how things should be and must be, in defiance of all the actual evidence.

Belief without evidence.
Exactly what you ridicule others for.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 21 Dec 13 - 12:40 PM

There's a reason why I dismiss superstition when weighing evidence.

The more I read of oafs such as Keith A Hole of Hertford, the more I see why I do.

Superstitious belief eh? Don't judge rational people by your own standards. If you must treat opinion based on credentials , I'm surprised you claim to pick and choose what you believe in your bible. Or did a historian choose them for you? Far easier to be literal like pete you know. Try reading "Worlds in Collision." Right up your street.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Dec 13 - 02:57 PM

The more I read of oafs such as Keith A Hole of Hertford, the more I see why I do.
Oafs like me who read and learn from History, instead of making it up out of an empty head like you do.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Dec 13 - 01:46 AM

This book is published by Oxford University Press. (Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship and education...)
A large preview is online.

Page 4.
"The central tenet of this book is that ordinary British and Irish people in 1914 did not back the war because they were deluded, brainwashed or naively duped into an idiotic bloodbath as the subsequent myth would have it.
Rather, their support was often carefully considered, well-informed, reasoned, and only made once all other options were exhausted. By 4 August people supported the war, but only because they felt it was the right thing to do in the circumstances. They then proceeded to positively immerse themselves in the war effort, and collaborate in its prosecution, but not necessarily in an overtly enthusiastic and jingoistic manner."

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Dec 13 - 01:48 AM

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=lVK0SSmvD5wC&pg=PA125&lpg=PA125&dq=invasion+preparation+1914&source=bl&ots=qPt2tdhG9V&sig=JIZ

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Grishka
Date: 23 Dec 13 - 04:47 AM

By 4 August people supported the war, but only because they felt it was the right thing to do in the circumstances.

In other words: now that their governments had maneuvered them into disaster (or had gambled with their lives, or had been "sleepwalking", as C. Clark put it), they saw no other option than to fight it through. See above.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 23 Dec 13 - 04:55 AM

Excellent article in this week's The Week. Whilst exploring the Xmas Day football activities, it gives an excellent insight into how in subsequent years snipers were brought in who were not normally in those sections to keep the men hating the opposition.

A nice section about propaganda and exaggeration to ensure volunteers.

In fact, hardly a word about the recent revision attempts by many to see the war as just, well led and fruitful.

Boom fucking Boom



Oxford Press eh? And your point?

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Dec 13 - 05:02 AM

(Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship and education...)

"did not back the war because they were deluded, brainwashed or naively duped into an idiotic bloodbath as the subsequent myth would have it.
Rather, their support was often carefully considered, well-informed, reasoned, and only made once all other options were exhausted"

Stop believing the old, discredited "myth."
How can you imagine you know more about it than the historians?!

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Greg F.
Date: 23 Dec 13 - 10:14 AM

Now the pig really IS getting annoyed.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 23 Dec 13 - 11:12 AM

Just wondered about why waving Oxford University Press is supposed to add to the credibility? It isn't one thing nor another. It exists to raise funds by publishing. It publishes fiction and non fiction. In fact, it published Thomas Carlisle's unfortunate books on eugenics. It also printed a number of publications I cite in my own papers over the years. Broad spectrum then.

Am I supposed to be impressed? Perhaps if the binding of a first edition hardback shows the hand crafting skill of the binder I might he. But the content? No reason to say you can't read it and draw your own conclusions.

I have read some of the books you cite and in certain areas draw different conclusions to the author. That's part of reading, you ignoramus.

Anyway, googling can be fraught with fun. Musket is a bit of silly bugger stuff. Ian is what I use on line in non professional waffle, my real name is what I use professionally and privately and just to make it fun, I have a stage name too, although I don't get to use it much these days, and as the royalty cheques get ever smaller, the name list for the bank account gets ever less used.

And that's just me... Add that many people do likewise, and black can indeed be white, hence how funny it is when you grasp at straws claiming it must be true cos I read it!

I also find it amusing when you and your mate Akenhateon keep calling me Ian for reasons that make the name rather superfluous. (I use the first name in homage to a mate from Worksop who enjoys a pint and a song, bless him.)

Did you know that when an editor, Max Hastings used to write using an alias? All the rage you know.... I wonder if...   Naw, too easy.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Dec 13 - 11:44 AM

I have read some of the books you cite and in certain areas draw different conclusions to the author.
The authors base their conclusion on their extensive research.
Yours is based on ignorance and preconception, so worthless.

Who cares what your conclusion is compared to the historians?
Apart from gormless Greg.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Greg F.
Date: 23 Dec 13 - 12:22 PM

And now the annoyed pig is getting nasty.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Dec 13 - 02:43 PM

Musket, you previously made an issue of who the publisher was.
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship and education...

Is there one historian whose findings support your views?
No.
Is there one whose findings contradict my views?
No.
But you keep on making fools of yourselves.
That does make me satisfied.
That does make me smug.
Sorry.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Greg F.
Date: 23 Dec 13 - 03:39 PM

Is there one [historian] whose findings contradict my views?

Absolutely correct, fuckwit. There is not one, there are hundreds. Possibly thousands.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 23 Dec 13 - 04:30 PM

Still haven't worked out why he keeps rattling on about the publisher.

Soft cunt

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: bobad
Date: 23 Dec 13 - 05:22 PM

Keith's wiping the floor with you guys and I'm enjoying the spectacle - keep it up please - fine entertainment for the holidays.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Dec 13 - 01:24 AM

there are hundreds. Possibly thousands.

Of course there are Greg dear.
And you could name them all if you wanted to, couldn't you?

No-one is laughing at you.
Everyone believes you.
There might even be millions, or billions, or trillions, .......

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 24 Dec 13 - 01:56 AM

"fuckwit" sez Greg

"Soft cunt" sez Musket.

Could there be any clearer instances of the inevitable descent to abuse on the part of poor pathetic losers when attempts at rational argument have manifestly failed?

Saddoes both!

Still -- Wish them [& all] a Merry Xmas just the same...

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 24 Dec 13 - 02:22 AM

Michael. I racked my brains to come up with soft cunt. Please don't dismiss my erudite donnish wit.

Keith A Hole of Hertford clearly is wiping the floor with dissenters. If he weren't doing so, I wouldn't find it quite so ironically entertaining. In Victorian times, people paid good money to stare at the human exhibits. Mudcat offers good value.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 24 Dec 13 - 03:18 AM

Dear me, no, Ian.

So how about some erudite donnish wit right back to you?

On second thoughts, no: as may have been observed, I make it a principle never to indulge in erudite donnish wit around and about these parts!.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 24 Dec 13 - 04:21 AM

Confession time. I confuse erudite Donnish wit with knob gags.

Always been a failing of mine.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 25 Dec 13 - 02:38 AM

Christmas Day, guys - time to declare a truce, get an old football out and have a kick-about, shake hands, show each other photos of your families, share a fag and a drop o' rum.

If Tommies and Jerries in the trenches could manage it, I'm sure you lot can too! (Or was it just a figment of the propagandists' imaginations?).   :-)

Merry Christmas! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 25 Dec 13 - 02:17 PM

It must have happened mate. I read it in The Week!

Mrs Musket got me a copy of Wipers Times. (Stocking filler. I had accidentally noticed it and she said it was for her Uncle. So glad it's mine, I was feeling rather jealous.

Best not let Keith read the forward and introduction. He is so enjoying being clever, I'd hate to piss on his chips.

Merry Xmas to everybody! Especially the few who are only here today because their granddads survived the carnage.

By the way. According to the late Tony Capstick, their full back was a big dirty bastard and their winger was a little Austrian Corporal with a moustache who picked up the ball on the spike of his helmet and ran off with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: bobad
Date: 25 Dec 13 - 04:22 PM

"Saddoes"......nice word, I had to look it up....aptly fitting.....or should that be fittingly apt?

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 26 Dec 13 - 07:05 AM

Reality can be very sad. Whereas propaganda can be so jolly what?

The entertainment gets better. Keith has poor gullible Bobad believing his tosh now. Absolutely delicious that he sees it as fun in the other direction.

For me, Keith has found an excellent way of demonstrating how propaganda works in practice. Mind you, I hope he feels appropriately embarrassed when Bobad realises he has been sold a pup. (You can look that up too if you must.)

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Dec 13 - 05:43 PM

Not my "tosh."
Everything I said can be substantiated with quotes from eminent, acclaimed historians.
Nothing you have said can be.
But as you say," historians should know better," like what you do.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 26 Dec 13 - 06:35 PM

Thinks he's Ernie Wise now. Still, it's Xmas I suppose.



Bring me sunshine..........

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Joe_F
Date: 27 Dec 13 - 07:57 PM

If any question why we died,
Tell them, because our fathers lied.
          -- Kipling

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 28 Dec 13 - 02:33 AM

Very poignant.

At the risk of misquoting old Rudyard;

If any question why millions died
Keith will say that we all lied.





Let's see. I'm a liar for questioning revision of history. I'm a liar for noting atrocities by groups claiming to be Christian. I'm a liar for pointing out the unfortunate use of a word that paints every Muslim as a terrorist. I'm a liar for pointing out why we spend so much money on public health.

Oh. I'm a liar for reprinting a post by Keith that he should be ashamed of.

Zzzzz

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Dec 13 - 03:16 AM

You do not know what a lie is Musket.
None of those examples are lies.
Thinking that you know more than the historians makes you a fool, not a liar.
Likewise your ignorance of the word Islamist. It does not describe all Muslims, fool.
It is only a lie to note Christian atrocities if you make them up, which you did.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Dec 13 - 03:31 AM

You DID state that the November HPA report was "preliminary."
That was unquestionably a lie.
You DID state that it was "superseded" by another.
That was unquestionably a lie.
You are a liar and must expect all you statements to be challenged.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 28 Dec 13 - 04:05 AM

Nice to see you are reading what I put. With regard to the field of commissioning health services, you can even quote me. If you search you might even quote me from publications on the issue.

Although on other issues I am as amateur as you. Except I don't take snippets out of context and cry when educated people laugh at them.

In the past 24 hours you have inferred that seven mudcat members are liars. Getting silly aren't we?

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Dec 13 - 05:51 AM

In the past 24 hours you have inferred that seven mudcat members are liars

You have just made that up.
It is you alone, but maybe seven times.
You are quite a prolific liar.

Subject: RE: BS: Armistice Day (debate)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 28 Dec 13 - 08:25 AM

Just for you and checking back , I was lying. Yes.

36 hours not 24.

My bad.