a bit like saying Mudcat has views on WW1, gay marriage, Israeli atrocities or putting guns in the hands of twisted rednecks.

zzzzzz

Somebody said "in The Guardian" as opposed to "The Guardian said" would make the difference. Steve is right to pull Keith up for this.

That's why newspapers have editorials, so you can see the view of the editor / owners.

In any case, and considering Keith is insisting on "historians," such an article cannot pass his own clauses, as it is not the place of a historian speaking as a historian to use such subjective terms as "largely fraudulent."

A historian would analyse and weigh up contrary evi...

Fuck it. Keith! What do historians do? Any fucking idea?