BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 04:58 PM

"It looks like the Scots have mostly stopped giving a shit. "

Giving a shit about what Jack? The memory of those who died in order that you are free to write such crap? Just how despicable a free-loader can you become?

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jack Campin
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 10:02 AM

Back to poppies?

I've seen surprisingly few of them this year, in Edinburgh and Midlothian. A few more in the Borders but still a very small minority of the population. It looks like the Scots have mostly stopped giving a shit. Which is great news.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 09:48 AM

Ye gods and little fishes, talk about running round like a headless chicken. Even trying to involve the IRA rather than accept that fascists existed in the British government during WW11.

The bottom of the barrel must be visible now.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 09:40 AM

Britain never regarded the Soviet Union as anything other than a friend and ally once the war started

Really Jim?
A British force was sent to fight the Russian invasion of Finland in 1939, but were too late.
In 1939-1940 the British leadership was sympathetic to Finland in her war against the USSR (the Winter War), yet could not afford to alienate the Soviets while an attack from Germany was imminent. The USSR however supplied fuel oil to the Germans which was used for Hitler's Luftwaffe in the Blitz against the United Kingdom. Because of the Soviet non-aggression pact with Germany, Hitler's troops were able to overrun most of Western Europe in the summer of 1940.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 09:32 AM

"But, unlike these hypothetical collaborators, the IRA actually wanted a German invasion and was in a position for a period to physically assist one. That is the central problem that many still refuse to face up to."
Brian Hanley lectures in Irish history at NUI Maynooth.

http://www.historyireland.com/20th-century-contemporary-history/oh-heres-to-adolph-hitler-the-ira-and-the-nazis/

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 09:21 AM

"The British Communist Party opposed war against Hitler in 1939, because Communist Russia was in league with the Nazis."
The British Communist Part opposed the war because, having seen how the allies responded to the rise of Fascism, they believed that it was a replay of World War war - a fight for world domination and territory - a simplistic view, but one that is fully recorded in documents of the time - including those collected and published by MI5.
Britain never regarded the Soviet Union as anything other than a friend and ally once the war started - "Good Old Uncle Joe" was a common slogan in Britain.
Communists were fighting fascists and being bombed by German planes three years before the rest of the world got up off its arse and attempted to stop Hitler
It was the British establishment whop befriended the Nazis until they had no other alternative.
"THE MAN WHO SAVED US FROM THE WAR"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 08:45 AM

"I introduced the "communist" aspect merely to demonstrate the bigoted bias perpetually advanced by the likes of yourself and Jim Carroll"

Not 100% on this Teribus but I don't recall ever mentioning communism, at all.

However I suspect you and the professor are desperately trying to avoid acknowledging that support for facism existed throughout the war years in the senior echelons of the party you both seemingly support.

Not a comfortable feeling I would think.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 08:29 AM

When the Communists invaded Poland, they massacred many thousands of Poles.

The number of victims is estimated at about 22,000.[1] The victims were executed in the Katyn Forest in Russia, the Kalinin and Kharkiv prisons, and elsewhere. Of the total killed, about 8,000 were officers taken prisoner during the 1939 Soviet invasion of Poland, another 6,000 were police officers, and the rest were arrested Polish intelligentsia that the Soviets deemed to be "intelligence agents, gendarmes, landowners, saboteurs, factory owners, lawyers, officials and priests"

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 08:25 AM

The British Communist Party opposed war against Hitler in 1939, because Communist Russia was in league with the Nazis.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 06:09 AM

The Communists were among the first to fight European fascism while Britain was appeasing it.
Communists organised the fight against the rise of European fascism in Spain and were politically discriminated for doing so.
Opposition to German militarism began shortly after World War one - led by communists such as Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht - it was following their murder in 1919 that Fascism gained a toe-hold in Germany - the allies did nothing to prevent the rise and the return to militarism.
The newly revived Luftwaffe used the Guernica and Madrid as practice runs for the forthcoming war - the allies continued to apease Hitler - right up to the eve of the war.
British wartime fascism left its legacy in the Tort party - they bitterly opposed the setting up of the National Heath system and what improvements the post war Labour Govenment introduced in the 1940s were gradually torn down by a series of Tory governments.
The nearest Britain has ever got to a fascist leader was Thatcher - who befriended a mass-murderer, prevented him from being tried for his crimes against humanity and declared there was "no society" in favour the 'dog-eat-dog' Britain she had created.
She was honest enough too admit that Pinochet's style of government, with its mass murder, torture and rape, was her idea of democracy.
That was The Right Group's legacy to Britain - 'democratic' fascism
Dave
Just because we've agreed (some of us) not to dominate threads with personal arguments doesn't bar us from discussing these topics - temperance and reasoned argument doesn't mean total capitulation.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 05:16 AM

GUEST,Raggytash - 14 Nov 15 - 04:59 AM:

I introduced the "communist" aspect merely to demonstrate the bigoted bias perpetually advanced by the likes of yourself and Jim Carroll - as previously stated your f**kers woulødn't know a fact if it jumped up and bit you.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 05:12 AM

So let me see how this bird is flying:

When shown that the most "influential" and best placed member of the Cliveden Set changed his mind about Hitler being "good" for Germany those who were pounding on about the Cliveden Set now want to to quietly let slip away from the discussion.

Gentlemen you have given us nothing apart from two rather ineffectual cliques who when push came to shove did absolutely nothing.

The world and it's dog knew with 100% certainty that by the end of May 1943 that Germany and the Axis powers were going to lose the war.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 05:00 AM

Jim, may I remind you that keeping arguments going against those who just want a platform for their jingoism is futile. You have made your point and people have already made their minds up on who is right or wrong. Leave them to it.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 04:59 AM

You are trying once again professor to move the goalposts. The discussion is about the right wing especially the Cliveden Set. If you want to discuss the communist approach open another thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 04:55 AM

The British Communist Party was strongly opposed to taking any military action against Hitler, who was an ally of Stalin in 1939.

They invaded Poland together.

The British government with the support of the people, though still devastated by the human cost of the previous war and still bankrupt from it, and though weakened by left inspired disarmament, declared war on Hitler knowing the cost would again be terrible for Britain.

Lucky for the world that they did.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 04:42 AM

So no comments about Halifax's actions in the run up to and post-Munich then? Why not because it doesn't accord with your pre-set and biased views?

The Right Group influenced what Carroll? The Right Group were in a position to influence what Carroll? They were a complete and utter irrelevance and apparently known about and under surveillance the whole time.

By the way what about the other side of the coin up until Hitler attacked the Soviets, the actions and behaviour of the Trades Union movement and the British Communist Party during the period when Stalin and Hitler were "best mates". Disruption of production and industrial disputes geared at harming Britain's war effort?

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 04:31 AM

"What the Cliveden set and other misguided individuals said and did BEFORE the war was not reflected in what happened after war had been declared"

Do you really think the Leopard changed it's spots. Really?

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 04:30 AM

"Oh and GUEST to Jim Carroll Fact is a different and far distant planet, he would not know one if it jumped up and bit him. "
You have been given what happened - chose to sneer at it if you wish - it remains a documented fact.
Defending British fascism because it was inefficient - new one on me!!
Your cut-'n-paste is totally meaningless - the Right Group continued to meet and plot, they planned to put in place an interim government, they had the backing of industrialists, businessmen and other influential people - none were exposed or removed from office - they remained a part of the British establishment.
Had the Tories won the post war election, they would have had a say in the rebuilding of Britain - luckily.......!!
FACT   
Bluff and bluster changes nothing
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 04:21 AM

"They remained, waiting in the wings to form a Government in the hope that Hitler won the war and none of them were removed from office for their fascist activities"

Did they now?

Your Speaker of the House - left office in 1943
Halifax packed off to Washington as Ambassador in 1941

Talking of Halifax and his pro-Nazi stance can any of you explain this period in Halifax's love affair with Hitler and the Nazis:

"In March 1938, Hitler annexed Austria and Czechoslovakia was clearly next on the agenda, with neither Britain nor France having the military capacity to support Czechoslovakia. Halifax remained in London at the key moments of the Munich crisis of September 1938, where Chamberlain's personal intervention was dramatic. It was during the Munich crisis that Halifax began to take a stronger line than Chamberlain against further concessions to Germany. It appears that a frank conversation with his pugnacious Permanent Secretary, Sir Alexander Cadogan, brought Halifax to the sharp realisation that the road to appeasement had taken Britain into a series of concessions that were unwise, and that were unlikely to secure the necessary pacification of Germany. From this point on – as Andrew Roberts, in particular, argues – Halifax set his face firmly towards a policy of deterrence based on increased rearmament, including the reintroduction of conscription; strengthening of alliances and economic support to Eastern Europe; and a firmer line towards Germany, Italy and Japan in the hope that increased British resolution would increase the risks of a combination of all three (it is of note that, when war did begin, neither Japan nor Italy was prepared to join in until the pendulum had swung much further in Germany's favour).

The eventual Munich agreement, while apparently popular around the world and humiliating to many in the British government, was short of Hitler's desires (and of Chamberlain's proposed concessions) and increased Hitler's determination to return to destroy Czechoslovakia in the spring. In the following months, as Hitler's lack of commitment to the Munich agreement became clearer, Halifax worked steadily to assemble a stronger British position, pushing Chamberlain to take economic steps to underpin British interests in Eastern Europe and prevent additional military supplies (e.g. tungsten) from reaching Germany. In particular, it was Halifax's immediate granting of a guarantee to Poland on 31 March 1939 – triggered by alarming intelligence of German preparations – that set a firm trigger for war should Germany ignore this signal that, in Halifax's words, there would be "no more Munichs".

Definitely reads as though this particular member of the Cliveden Set was working flat out to ensure that Hitler won the war doesn't it.

Oh and GUEST to Jim Carroll Fact is a different and far distant planet, he would not know one if it jumped up and bit him. No wonder you support him as the same could be said for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 03:25 AM

"in short they did not,"
In short - yes they did, but some of them were forced to keep their heads down to avoid prison.
The Right Club continued to exist and meet throughout the war and even before the the war ended Ramsey was back in Parliament calling for Antisemitic legislation to be put in place - you have been given the evidence for that having happened.
They remained, waiting in the wings to form a Government in the hope that Hitler won the war and none of them were removed from office for their fascist activities - they brought their fascism back
k to The House of Lords, back to Parliament.
The fact that they did not to it publicly is neither here nor there - they remained a threat to democracy and to the British people who had made the sacrifices they had fighting the fascism they espoused.
"Misguided" - someone who gets lost in the middle of London is misguided - these people supported sending six million human beings to be exterminated - and they continued to hold the views that caused that brought about that holocaust - some in responsible and powerful positions.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 03:11 AM

Any evidence that views of the set changed, Teribus?

Any references that go beyond keeping their heads down?

Thought not.

You really know how to defend the indefensible, don't you? Never mind, you have no credibility, judging by the way even Jim Carrol can swat your bullshit as if it were an inconsequential fly.

Still, your views are fairly widespread so it is important to hear them here rather than have to go on Dailymail.com or conservative.org.uk. Normal people don't tend to know what imbeciles are programmed to spout.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Nov 15 - 02:56 AM

To Raggy, Carroll and Gnome, Carroll's contention was that DURING the war British politicians supported antisemitic views and pro-nazi policies - in short they did not, at least not in public and certainly not in parliament. What the Cliveden set and other misguided individuals said and did BEFORE the war was not reflected in what happened after war had been declared.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 03:21 PM

One of the problems some people have with a forum like this is that they may forget just what they have typed just a short while ago.

So Teribus you typed:"So having waded through the link supplied by Jim Carroll, I find it not in the least surprising that your question wasn't answered directly MGM. It would appear that the number of politicians = ONE and that he was arrested and imprisoned then released in 1944 when he was deemed harmless and more of a threat to himself than to anyone else. Like most of Jim Carroll's dearly held beliefs it simply amounts to Made Up Shit"

I provided a link that gave clear indication it was a group of senior politicians including a Speaker of the House of Commons, a Foreign Secretary and a Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.

In my book that is NOT "made up shit" Perhaps you view it differently.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 12:51 PM

"THAT WAS HOW INFLUENTIAL the Cliveden Set was".
So what - they were there, they were members of the British establishment and they were vicious Antisemitic fascists who supported Hitler and what the Nazis were doing to the Jews - all of which you have denied as "made-up shit" (something else walked away from by you) and are now claiming didn't matter because they didn't succeed.
Problem with you people is you can see nothing wrong with the British establishment, even its fascism - if it's British, it's all right by you!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 12:06 PM

Ah the Teribus set. Too impotent to have actually achieved anything so while away their dotage trying to rewrite a history or two








Or three

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 12:05 PM

Ah, so they did exist then? Which I believe was the main point.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 11:01 AM

Ah, the Cliveden set - so influential were they that in 1939 they managed to manoeuvre things and influence policies that Great Britain entered the war as Nazi Germany's staunchest ally? - Naw Raggy the boot was on the other foot wasn't it - In 1939 WE declared War on Nazi Germany - THAT WAS HOW INFLUENTIAL the Cliveden Set was.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 08:35 AM

SOME MORE
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 08:18 AM

As the article points out, despite having supposedly to have ceased activity during the war, it continued to operate and meet.
Its support extended far beyond its membership and its supporters issued statements saying they were preparing an interim Government Ramsay, despite his Nazi sympathies, Ramsay was returned to parliament.
"Capt. Ramsay was also interned for several years, until September 1944 when, in a "breathtaking act of chutzpah" (Saikia's words yet again), the first thing he did upon his release—the war was not yet over—was to resume his seat in Parliament. He then called for a motion to reinstate the 1275 Statute of Jewry, a pernicious piece of medieval anti-Semitic legislation first introduced during the reign of Edward I that, among other things, required Jews to wear a yellow badge and that also outlawed usury. Ramsay died an unapologetic fascist."
Far from "made up shit" methinks appeasement to British Nazism - not the first time for your team.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 07:57 AM

Ahem, Teribus you didn't mention the Cliveden Set. One speaker of the House of Commons, one Foreign Secretary, one Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to say nothing of Nancy Astor herself.

Cliveden Set


Again a nice try though.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 07:40 AM

So having waded through the link supplied by Jim Carroll, I find it not in the least surprising that your question wasn't answered directly MGM. It would appear that the number of politicians = ONE and that he was arrested and imprisoned then released in 1944 when he was deemed harmless and more of a threat to himself than to anyone else.

Like most of Jim Carroll's dearly held beliefs it simply amounts to Made Up Shit

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 07:11 AM

Been there, done that at great length Mike – thought you were privy to that and didn't see your request.
We discussed this at length in the past – Keith dismissed it as harmless eccentricity" at the time and passe3d of the songs as comparable to the Dad's Army theme.
A wartime organisation of politicians, businessmen, industrialists and members of the House of Lords was set up tp prepare for power when Hitler won.
It was extremely Anti-Semitic and produced Anti- Jewish songs supporting what was happening in Germany.
One of the founders and leading members was the then Duke of Wellington, who died cursing "The Yids" from his deathbed.
THE RIGHT CLUB
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 06:09 AM

I take it you have heard of the Cliveden Set Michael?

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 05:59 AM

You have posted a couple of times since, Jim, so one knows you have been on the thread. But you still have not identified, as I requested (explicitly excluding 18b detainees), a single one of those 'many' actively antisemitic, muttering pro-Nazi quasi-Quislings, whom you asserted back at 0347 to have existed among our politicians thruout WWii.

Identify some, or withdraw such a defamatory allegation, please.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 05:23 AM

"widely believed without proof."
Quite - but not without foundation
Interesting that someone considers criticism of the aristocracy as "Nazi propaganda" though
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Derrick
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 05:19 AM

I've heard the Nancy Astor story many times,it's the first time it's been blamed on the Nazis.
She was very much a "Marmite" person you loved or hated her.
In Plymouth where she was an MP and prominent in local affairs there are people to this day who love her or hate her.
There are many stories of how she treated those who opposed her and how she favoured her chosen causes.
The D Day Dodgers claim is one of those urban myths,widely believed without proof.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 04:48 AM

IF it was written as a result of Nazi Propaganda (the evidence for which I'm sure you provide) it is strange that Lady Astor was not mentioned in the original lyrics written by Harry Pynn in November 1944.

Stranger still if you consider that Astor was seen by some as "Hitlers woman in Britain"

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 04:35 AM

There is no evidence whatever of where the D day Dodger story came from - certainly not that it originated as Nazi propaganda, and it was a story widely believed by British Servicemen at the time - just reading an account of growing up in forties and fifties Glasgow, where it is described as being sung at veterans' funerals there.
You appearing to suggest that many thousands of British servicemen were gullible enough to have fallen for Nazi propaganda (that you have yet to give evidence for).
As I say, whatever it's origins, it certainly is an accurate depiction of how 'the lower orders' were regarded by 'our betters'.
Little surprise that you should continue to sing the praises of 'The Butcher of the Somme' - nothing changes.
Whatever the truth of the matter about Haig, he certainly was regarded as the Butcher of the Somme by many millions of people (though not you)
This, from a Times review of a book on the history of the war, published some years ago:
"He is the most pilloried military leader in British history, caricatured as a butcher and a bungler who sent hundreds of thousands of men over the top to their deaths. Now a new biography pins a further damning indictment on Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig. Late in the final year of the First World War, it argues, he was pushing for a peace that would have left Germany as the real winner of the war".
Take your pick - you have chosen yours, and why not?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 04:27 AM

Yes Rag, a song I sometimes perform.
The Germans claimed Astor made the remark in Parliament, and so the rumour started, but it was a lie.

The story of a girl called Somme,
thread.cfm?threadid=158533&messages=6

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 04:22 AM

Nazi propaganda eh,


taken up by the troops

We are the D Day Dodgers way out in Italy
we're always on the veno, we're always on the spree
Eighth Army scroungers and our tanks
we live in Rome and fight the Yanks
we are the D Day Dodgers, way out in Italy

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 04:13 AM

Haig was revered through a propaganda campaign to deflect attention from veterans with missing limbs begging in the street.

There was no such campaign.

He was called the butcher of The Somme by those hanging on his meat hooks.

No he was not.
Did you read the story of the widow who proudly called her daughter Somme?

but it certainly reflected the attitude that the troops fighting in Italy were wine-swigging, womanising wasters enjoying "a soft touch".
There is no reason at all to doubt that these events took place

Yes there is, and there was no such attitude.
The lie about Astor came from Nazi propaganda. Sad to see that you are still disseminating Nazi lies Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 04:00 AM

You seem to consider "possibilities" yet ignore "probability". And if I may say, Guest, you seem to be doing the opposite. You simply cannot exclude the possibility that it could have happened. I am not saying it did and fully understand your points but to dismiss anything out of hand because it is not likely is a dangerous path to tread.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 03:57 AM

...to clarify my doubts. Your use of the word 'politicians' suggests those actively involved in politics. Obviously I exclude from my query the likes of the Mosleys, Jeff Hamm, other ex-members of BUF & such, who were interned under provisions of Emergency Regulation 18b. to prevent their being so actively involved.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 03:53 AM

'many right wing politicians, who, while the war was in full spate, were taking part in Antisemitic activities and preparing for the day when "Herr Hitler would win".'
.,,.,.

Name some of these 'many', please, Jim.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 03:49 AM

Correction - Lady Astor - of course
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 03:47 AM

Wartime rumours tend to carry with them grains of truth, just as the behaviour of the great and the good tend to get swept under the carpet.
I grew up with the story of the conversation between two politicians during World War Two who were overheard describing the reports of the extermination of the Jews in Germany as "Lies invented by whingeing Yids"
I have heard the story repeated many times from many sources, yet there is no recorded evidence of it having been said.
I have little doubt it was said; it was certainly the opinion of many right wing politicians, who, while the war was in full spate, were taking part in Antisemitic activities and preparing for the day when "Herr Hitler would win".
Similarly with Lady Asquith's "D-Day dodgers" remark - no documented evidence of it ever having been made, but it certainly reflected the attitude that the troops fighting in Italy were wine-swigging, womanising wasters enjoying "a soft touch".
There is no reason at all to doubt that these events took place - put into context, it would have been inconvenient for us proles to learn how 'our betters' regarded us.
The Haig rumour carries with it the same grains of truth - he was presented as a war hero, yet his 'heroism' was based on his ability to send young men to their deaths efficiently, nothing more.
There was little strategy connected with World War One, just the sending over the top of enough young men to fight each other until one side or the other gave up - not a matter of leadership or heroism (except on the part of those who went over the top, of course).
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 03:42 AM

Haig was revered by those he led, if you doubt that then look at and read the accounts of his funeral, explain the house purchased for him by public subscription, explain the award of £100,000 and his elevation to the peerage voted for by Parliament by way of thanks.

Haig retired from active service shortly after the war and devoted the remainder of his life to looking after the welfare of those who served under him and in that regard did a damned sight more for "his" veterans than David Lloyd George or any other bloody politician or Government ever did. The charities that he was responsible for setting up look after and house ex-servicemen and their dependents to this day. That should not really be necessary as that really should be the Government's job, as it is always the Government of the day that deliberately puts our servicemen and women in harms way.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 03:19 AM

"Lesser men with guilty consciences "

Lesser because they were less callous? Guilty because they didn't order men over the top to certain death in the absence of a competent military plan?

Haig was revered through a propaganda campaign to deflect attention from veterans with missing limbs begging in the street. From the gaps in every town, village, family and community.

He was called the butcher of The Somme by those hanging on his meat hooks.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Nov 15 - 03:16 AM

@Dave the Gnome:

"Have you never heard that a rich man will always want more? Do you really believe that earning £7m would stop a rich landowner from kicking a poor family out on the street to earn an extra £100 a week in rent? I am not saying that Haig was such a man, but to rule out the possibility that he wanted more money is, at best, naive and, at worst, dishonest."

The type of rich man you describe above is the sort that started out with nothing and acquired wealth. The sort of person who values money above all else. Haig's chosen career was as a soldier - so that simply does not fit, it does not gel or make any sense.

Haig was not a rich landowner, his family distilled whisky and made a very good living out of it. Had Haig been interested in money he would have gone to the family business and expanded and diversified it. The fact that he did not, the fact that he remained a soldier, tends to indicate that Haig had little or no interest in acquiring wealth.

You seem to consider "possibilities" yet ignore "probability". Lots of things are "possible" most of those things however can be ruled out when "probabilty" is taken into account. A man in NEED of money might risk his social standing and his reputation by "ripping off" a charity (That is both "possible" and "probable") much less "probable" is a man with wealth, position, reputation, recently honoured by the nation ever doing so.

If such a rumour was ever in circulation, and so far only Raggytash has ever heard it, then I would say that Allan Conn's explanation of what gave rise to it is the most likely. I would also have thought that the rumour would have been strongest in and around Edinburgh and the borders as people would have to have known about the house being built to comment on it.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 12 Nov 15 - 06:46 PM

As I understand it Rag asked if there was any truth in certain rumours he'd heard when young. Why would we suggest he hadn't heard it somewhere? He isn't suggesting it is true as much as asking if anyone else had heard the same and asking if there is any substance to it. Surely we should take it that someone had said this to him at one time even if there was nothing behind it? Why would he make it up?

I noticed the clip from this book rag on Haig and Kitchener. Haig's home Bemersyde is not far from where I live. This book suggests that a private subscription was raised after the war to purchase this for him. Perhaps someone in the past mixed up this private subsciption with the slightly later Haig Fund for veterans and mistakenly thought the Haig Fund was for his private use? Certainly a possibility!

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=7jj34GGDFB8C&pg=PT17&lpg=PT17&dq=haig+fund+c