No man's land protest

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 07:59 AM

It was a crime to resist invasion by tyrannical aggressors?

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 08:39 AM

"It was a crime to resist invasion by tyrannical aggressors?"
It was a crime to send millions of young men, little more than children, (some of them legally considered children), ill-trained, ill-armed, ill-led and ill informed, to die in the mud of Europe for a squabble over Empire - little more than a family spat between monarchs.
As for tyrannical aggressors, 'Gallant Little Belgium', one of the major excused for entering the conflict, had, a few years earlier, systematically slaughtered somewhere between 10 to 15 million of its Congolese subjects in pursuit of rubber - that was one of the "noble causes" over which World War One was fought.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 10:51 AM

Britain was treaty bound to defend Belgium.
Belgium was invades by a ruthless aggressor and suffered atrocities and massacres of its ordinary people and children.
They were headed our way.
We sent the army we had.
Yes it was hopelessly outnumbered and forced to fight a desperate fighting retreat, but the invaders were stopped.
It was after that retreat when all hopes of a short war were dashed and defeat a real possibility that there was the greatest surge of volunteers.

They understood the cause quite well.
It was not in vain.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 11:01 AM

The BBC in conjunction with the History Department of the Open University made a documentary series about the war.
Summing up in the final episode the presenter, Jeremy Paxman, made this statement to camera.

57 minutes in. Paxman to camera, "
Later generations would contend it had been a futile war. The war was terrible certainly, but hardly futile.
It stopped the German conquest of much of Europe, and perhaps even of villages like this.

Never before in the nation's History had a war required the commitment and the sacrifice of the whole population, and by and large, for 4 years, the British people kept faith with it."

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Musket
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 11:05 AM

The by and large bit included firing squads, white feathers and propaganda.

💤.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 11:12 AM

There were a trivial number of firing squads compared to the scale of the thing.
White feathers were nothing to do with government but came from ordinary people.
My grandfather was given one on his wedding day although a serving sailor.

What propaganda?
Belgium and France really were invaded, atrocities were committed and Britain was threatened.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 11:16 AM

"Britain was treaty bound to defend Belgium."
So Britain was treaty bound to defend a murderous imperial power capable of slaughtering 15 million of its subjects - and that why millons of British lads lost their lives - now there's a cause worth dying for - or were all those "gallant little Belgium" posters just a con to persuade them to join up - can't have it both ways - Belgium was either one of the all those lads were sent to die for, or it wasn't - what's it to be?
The "massacres" that took place in Belgium were deliberately exaggerated, and if they hadn't been, they were minuscule compared to what the Belgian regime had done in the Congo, yet the world didn't twitch an eyebrow.
Mark Twain wrote an account of what was happening in the Congo, and was castigated as a leftie crank for doing so.
"They understood the cause quite well."
You have been given counts of soldiers returning from the front disillusioned - you ignore them, describing those making such statements as liars
You have been given account of the cons and "white feather" blackmail that took place - you ignore it.
They understood and supported the war o fervently that the authorities were left with no alternative than to introduce enforced conscription - that's how well they understood the cause and were prepared to die for it.
It was an Imperial war over world domination - nothing more, glorifying it as anything else is flag-wagging jingoism.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 11:23 AM

Historians have access to the accounts of tens of thousands of soldiers.
Ones like yours were not typical.
The atrocities committed in Belgium and France were real.
The threat to us was real.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 11:28 AM

There is nevertheless a strong feeling of macho patriotism in this Year's Poppy Campaign. Refrain from buying a poppy if you dare.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 11:38 AM

my observation was that most people in the streets and supermarkets were not wearing one.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 11:38 AM

my observation was that most people in the streets and supermarkets were not wearing one.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,Blandiver (Astray)
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 11:42 AM

feel that this resolute cynicism, and doubt as to the sincerity of others' motives, do you little credit, Sean.

Sorry, Michael, just after nigh on 40 years of being bullied by the weep-along-or-else sentiments of this song (and others) it's hard not to be. I got in Folk because I wanted listen to Traditional Songs, not to be preached at by politicos, lefties & peaceniks, or be put in a position of having to quietly retire least I was found wanting by the more vocal members of folk's revisionist ernestocrasy.      

For the record, at heart I am an Anarchist who longs for a world of loving peace in which scientific reality & cultural diversity are the cause of human unity, and all is green, pleasant, a-political, pastoral and secular with the Advancement of the Individual being our primary cause. To that end I address my craft, but not to the extent that I don't recognise such dreams are, alas, some way off yet. God knoweth, they were even further off 100 years ago in that past that was well and truly another country.

I'll go there presently, sit quietly among the gravestones and listen to those songs I mentioned earlier on my Nokia C-3 : Peter Bellamy singing his setting of Kipling's My Boy Jack and Dick Gaughan singing Hamish Henderson's The 51st (Highland) Division's Farewell to Sicily, respectful to be part of that future the likes of Pte. William McBride fought and died for; respectful that his death was not in vain.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,Morris-ey
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 11:50 AM

Britain's involvement in The Great War was, at the time entirely justified, even inevitable.

It all too easy to sit in the comfort of one's armchair and wring one's hands about of what os right or wrong.

Consider though: if Britain had not gone to war how many here complaining would actually be here at all? Your existence is dependent on all the past that precedes it.

Anyway, the original issue is the changing of "The SONG".

Like it or not makes absolutely no difference.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,Blandiver (Astray)
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 12:04 PM

Maybe this should be the B-side? From digitrad.

WILLIE MCBRIDE'S REPLY
(Lyrics: Stephen L. Suffet (Copyright 1997)
Tune: "No Man's Land" by Eric Bogle

My dear friend Eric, this is Willie McBride,
Today I speak to you across the divide,
Of years and of distance of life and of death,
Please let me speak freely with my silent breath.

You might think me crazy, you might think me daft,
I could have stayed back in Erin, where there wasn't a draft,
But my parents they raised me to tell right from wrong,
So today I shall answer what you asked in your song.

Yes, they beat the drum slowly, they played the pipes lowly,
And the rifles fired o'er me as they lowered me down,
The band played "The Last Post" in chorus,
And the pipes played "The Flowers of the Forest."

Ask the people of Belgium or Alsace-Lorraine,
If my life was wasted, if I died in vain.
I think they will tell you when all's said and done,
They welcomed this boy with his tin hat and gun.

And call it ironic that I was cut down,
While in Dublin my kinfolk were fighting the Crown.
But in Dublin or Flanders the cause was the same:
To resist the oppressor, whatever his name.

Yes, they beat the drum slowly... etc.

It wasn't for King or for England I died,
It wasn't for glory or the Empire's pride.
The reason I went was both simple and clear:
To stand up for freedom did I volunteer.

It's easy for you to look back and sigh,
And pity the youth of those days long gone by,
For us who were there, we knew why we died,
And I'd do it again, says Willie McBride.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,Fred McCormick
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 12:18 PM

Morris-ey. You've lost me. Are you saying that every individual's existence is posited on all the events in world history which directly preceded it?

You may be right. However, the logic of this argument supposes that, if world war 1 had never happened, I would not now be sitting here keying this in. That's probably correct, because my mother would presumably have been born pre-1914 instead of post-1918. Ditto for my father, which means they might never have met and I would have been a completely different person.

But in what way would this justify world war one?

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 12:35 PM

I know - let's invent a time machine and go back and stop the war ever happening.

Oh hold on.. wait a sec.. not such a bright idea...

All those millions would never have died and Europe would be even more overcrowded than it already is...

.. and all them scrounging buggers would be wanting to come and flood over here to England..

Sod that, now we'll all have to vote UKIP for even daring to imagine the war never happened...


There you go - Proof - being daft is very easy... requires no hard effort at all.....

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 12:37 PM

"Those "historians" that you haven't read again
If you haven't read up the subject how the **** can you claim they are not typical?
And the atrocities committed by Belgium were equally as real and many millions time worse, and still not worth a comment - probably because the victims were the wrong colour - Gallant Little Belgium my arse.
The real atrocity is that a century later there are still Empire Loyalists lkje yourself who will still excuse rthe annihilation of a generation and would still do it again "For King and Country" - given half the chance
Rule Britannia - as ever eh?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 12:43 PM

The raving lefties are all on hyperdrive today!!

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 01:52 PM

Bonz - quite often the problem with being an anti war loony lefty* [*ah..quaint old dismissive insult - almost Trad]
is the even loonier lefties on your own side...

Unfortunately, I missed out on being a raving lefty because I wasn't into the acid house clubbing scene..

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 03:13 PM

Jim, I have been avidly interested in WWI since I was a boy and have read the History extensively.
My views are learned from historians.
I quoted many to make my case on the earlier threads.
You still have not found a single one who supports your version of History.
That is because there is not a single one.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 03:33 PM

The whole flippin' lot of you miss the point, though, albeit PFR only just.
What happened then happened then. This is about what's happening now. The rights and wrongs of the time are the mores of the time. we should have moved on and learned the lessons of that, but what in fact is happening is that a bunch of fogeys have been unable to get past it and are stuck in a mentally twisted time loop. Worse, they've dug in and won't recognise that in defending that Great Lie, they are perpetrtating a bigger one. When Kipling regretted his jingoistic imperial stance in Common Form, "If any question why we died, Tell them, because our fathers lied." he could be exused the benefit of ignorance. Not so now. Let us at least be honest with our children.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 03:46 PM

From wiki (with citation)
After his son's death, Kipling wrote, "If any question why we died/ Tell them, because our fathers lied." It is speculated that these words may reveal his feelings of guilt at his role in getting John a commission in the Irish Guards.[67] Others such as the English professor Tracey Bilsing contend that the line is referring to Kipling's disgust that British leaders failed to learn the lessons of the Boer War, and were not prepared for the struggle with Germany in 1914 with the "lie" of the "fathers" being that the British Army was prepared for any war before 1914 when it was not.[68]

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Edthefolkie
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 04:06 PM

May a raving leftie pop his unhelmeted head above the fire step?

I heard "No Man's Land" first sung live by Eric Bogle, and shortly afterwards on vinyl by June Tabor. Both of course excellent. This was nearly forty years ago. Unfortunately the song was then misheard, renamed and recorded by various performers, SOME of whom had previously made loads of money by bellowing rebel songs while wearing Aran sweaters. I don't have a problem with this but it does seem somewhat ironic.

I think now that the song is marginally overwritten, but that's just an opinion. Visiting a small war cemetery in northern France does tend to make one veer between anger and sorrow. I've managed to avoid the current Joss Stone/Jeff Beck/et al version so won't express an opinion, although the ravings about it in certain "newspapers" are beneath contempt.

I do protest about certain people on this thread implying that my wife and I are deluded militarists because we have bought poppies, including a couple of ceramic ones, in memory of the members of our families who didn't come back, or who came back damaged.

We spent the two minute silence yesterday in a hotel in Hartlepool with the TV on, looking out at the West Quay. At 11:02 someone fired a cannon from the "Trincomalee" and at the same time a dinghy race started. I thought "Good, I bet all the lads from Teeside who didn't come back would have approved of this".

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,henryp
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 05:17 PM

Kipling wrote a number of epitaphs, including the following;

Epitaphs of the War 1914-1918

A SON

My son was killed while laughing at some jest. I would I knew
What it was, and it might serve me in a time when jests are few.

AN ONLY SON

I have slain none except my Mother.
She (Blessing her slayer) died of grief for me.

COMMON FORM

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

Subject: Green Fields of France
From: GUEST,AC
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 05:30 PM

Jesus wept...! Who would've thought so many half wits were into folk music? There's a guy earlier today talking about the "Bogle version", which he apparently dislikes. There isn't a "Bogle version" sunshine: it's his song and that's how it goes. In the folk tradition (which I believe Eric Bogle subscribes to) minor edits and alterations to suit the tempo or style of a particular singer are acceptable, but to delete half the song to deliberately remove its core meaning and message is grossly insulting and offensive in the extreme.

When Joss Stone was tackled about her "butchery" of the song at the Albert Hall during rehearsals for the British Legion concert last Saturday (by another artist - a veteran who had been at the Normandy beaches on 6 June 1944 and knew what it was to be bombed and shot at and who was appalled by what he heard) she admitted that she had been responsible for rewriting the lyrics but claimed she had to shorten it to fit the time slot. This was a mealy-mouthed and pathetic excuse as she cannot be so dense as to have missed the significance of her re-write (can she...?). The RBL must also have been fully aware of (and must have endorsed) this censoring of the message in the song's lyrics. The guy who tackled Stone at the Albert Hall told her that if he was Eric Bogle then he would probably sue her. Bogle himself has taken a more emollient line but we should not. It's a bloody outrage and those responsible should be told so in no uncertain terms.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 05:57 PM

I rarely remember this, but for the year of my degree dissertation I lived and breathed H. Rider Haggard.
I still have boxes of books going mouldy somewhere in the house.
Amongst them is the published diaries.
Wherein he wrote about death of the son of his good friend Kipling.

[Of course, I can't remember the details or be arsed digging around in the damp downstairs back room].

Haggard may have used the word 'atomized' to describe the young man's death ?

I've just googled to see if I can find the diary entry.
No luck, but I did find this account if anyone is interested...

Kipling's son


BTW.. LATEST UPDATE..

I asked the wife if she had bothered listening to the youtube link
to Bogle's original full length version ?

She said "Yes, I liked it... you said he was Australian, he sounds Irish !!!"

"He was born in Scotland"

" errrrmm.. yes, he sounds Scottish"

"So which version of the song do you like most ?"

"Hers.. his is too long. I like both, but hers is best."

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 06:08 PM

"It's a bloody outrage"

No, GUEST,AC - coercive conscription to near certain squalid suffering and death
is a bloody outrage !!!

Percieved insensitive editing of a song by a young insufficiently educated singer,
is by comparison, just a slight annoyance...

All this exagerated protestation and hyperbole just makes people like you
look immature and silly.

It's embarrassing....

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,AC
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 06:55 PM

Read what I actually wrote PFR. The "editing" wasn't just insensitive: it was the deliberate and conscious removal of the core message in the song's lyrics and the main reason for its existence (read Bogle's account). Therefore it was a political act, not a simple rearrangement of a song for artistic purposes (or even merely to fit a time slot).

I suspect that you are a closed minded type and probably not worth the effort of trying to reason with. However, even the most ignorant reader of this discussion and observer of the facts must see that removing an explicitly anti-war message (not necessarily a pacifist message as many peace campaigners are prepared to fight if necessary - the artist I mentioned above wore the emblems of 'Veterans for Peace' and 'Ex-Services CND' alongside his campaign and service medals at the RBL concert) was a deliberate act intended to alter the meaning and impact of the song.

Joss Stone may be young, inexperienced and ill-educated as you say, but she read the original lyrics before she re-wrote them, and the people who commissioned and produced the record were also fully aware of what they were doing. Artists who make political statements (or who censor them) in their work have to take responsibility for that. Altering the political statement in someone else's song (without their permission or even consulting them) and turning it into the travesty we heard on Saturday night was an outrage and if you find this point "immature" or "embarrassing" then that says more about you than me.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,Mick Woods
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 07:02 PM

Yesterday a friend emailed Jim Radford a copy of Eric Bogle's response to Joss Stone's rendition of "No Man's Land" at the Royal Albert Hall. Jim is a friend of mine and a veteran of Normandy landings. He was invited to sing at the event. Here is Jim's reply

I thought it a worthwhile addition to the discussion here on mudcat
Here is Jim's reply to my friend:

"No - I had not seen Eric's response, but I share his obvious disdain and had in fact predicted it when I first Heard Joss Stone rehearsing her version at the Royal Albert Hall, on Friday. Like him, I do not usually criticise other peoples musical styles and preferences, but in this case I was so appalled by her mutilation of a powerful anti war song, that I sought her out to tell her so. It is perhaps unfair to blame the British Legion for the emasculation since she confessed that she was personally responsible for the arrangement and for deleting most of the verses. Her excuse was that she had to condense it to fit the time allowed for the recording, which of course does not explain why she wasted some of that time by repeating the first verse and chorus. I concluded my criticism by telling her that if I were Eric Bogle, I would probably sue her! (I note he is more tolerant)
I also talked to the gospel singers who were her backing group. Who, I discovered, had never heard Eric's words! So I sang these for them and suggested - that they learn those words and sing them so that people could hear and understand them -(" because it is a folk song and that is what you do with folk songs".) I am afraid I was in lecture mode and although I tried not to offend them I left them in no doubt that in spite of the guitar skills of the legendary Jeff Beck, I did not like the meaningless musical noise that was being substituted for Eric's passionate and effective anti war diatribe. From my conversations with others involved in the Festival of Remembrance, and especially the musicians, the general view was that the song had been butchered and I noted that most of the free single discs that had been left out for performers in their dressing rooms, remained uncollected".

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,Morris-ey
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 07:10 PM

AC - can you provide any link that supports your contention that Joss Stone "read the original lyrics before she re-wrote them"?

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,AC
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 07:24 PM

Morris-ey - don't be stupid mate. How can you re-write a song's lyrics without reading the original lyrics? As I said, Joss Stone has admitted that she was the one who re-wrote the words and deleted the majority of the original lyrics.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 07:27 PM

Jim Radford's complaint is perfectly reasonable and justafiable in the circumstances.
He is clearly unhappy and disdainful, but he expresses himself with dignity
and well measured criticism.

His performance was inspiring.

The likes of GUEST,AC and others however, present themselves as though they are caricatures,
the kind of anti war protesters and rabid lefties
that our right wing opponents delight in holding up as
the worst kind of example of PC gone mad.

They are too often a complete liability for whatever cause they are 'fighting for,
and self defeating for whatever their objective may be.

It really is unconforatable to know we are 'fighting' on the same side.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: michaelr
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 12:15 AM

There was no "re=write". Stone did not change Bogle's words, she simply omitted half of them, so stop calling it a "re-write".

So, has this outrage and subsequent protest swept across Britain, prompting the withdrawal of the recording, apology by the Legion, and shredding of all CDs produced?

"Tempest in a teacup" is the phrase that comes to mind.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 01:10 AM

Jim Radford's performance was, on many levels, an inspiration.

If the above-reported conversation actually took place (no reason to suspect it didn't, but there are such things as urban myths and sometimes caution is advisable), good on 'im for having the balls to speak his mind to the person who 're-wrote' and, in the process emasculated, a great anti-war song.

The sad thing, AFAIC, is that the lass can belt out Blues and Soul with the best of them, so why was she persuaded to allow herself to be involved in re-writing and performing a song that clearly falls way outside the scope of her talents (which are considerable)?

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,Eddie1 - Sans cookie as ever
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 02:25 AM

michaelr "There was no "re=write". Stone did not change Bogle's words, she simply omitted half of them, so stop calling it a "re-write"."

Give the original and this version another listen, Small changes I admit, but significant!

Eddie

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Musket
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 03:54 AM

The historian Fergul Keane wrote an interesting historical perspective today on The BBC News website about recruiting sergeants on a commission and peer pressure, the plight of teenage soldiers.

Strangely, he doesn't seem to concur with what Keith calls "every living historian." How strange??? 😆😆

You know, it must be awful to claim to have been fascinated by war all your life and find out it isn't the glorious patriotic goodness after all... All those toy soldiers set out on your dining room table eh Keith? You tell them they are fine upstanding men and hope they never find out they were made out of plastic in Hong Kong.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,raymond greenoaken
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 04:45 AM

This discussion has been quite enlightening for me. Until now, my brain would switch off after the first verse whenever I was in the vicinity of the song, so drearily soporific is the tune. And now I discover that the subsequent verses are every bit as trite and ill-made as the first. Need a rhyme for "nineteen"? Hmmm — I know: "sixteen!" Result!

As you were.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 04:47 AM

Not true Musket.
Keane is not a historian, and he said nothing that contradicts my case anyway.
His piece is about how underage teens were sometimes able to get past the recruiters.
Here it is.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29934965

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Teribus
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 05:43 AM

Jim Radford's performance at the Festival of Remembrance was immense.

Note to another thread - Jim Radford, 85 years old, delivery perfect, no crib sheet (I know he wrote the song and it told his own story - But I have encountered many singer/songwriters who cannot remember the lyrics of their own songs) and he could have performed that song just as effectively and as movingly if there had not been one note of accompaniment - Absolutely brilliant and wonderfully rare.

1: Having listened to Joss Stone/Jeff Beck rendition I fully agree with MartinRyan - "DO have a listen! It's the most wonderful example of appalling musical taste that I've heard for a long time."

2: "The British Legion is a publicity machine for militarism, and its primary function for 100 years has been to turn warfare into a state religion." - Jack Campin

Complete and utter codswallop. I take it that you didn't watch the Festival of Remembrance? You would therefore would not have heard this opening address given by a D-Day Veteran, Dennis Boardman of the Parachute Regiment:

"At this festival we honour the memory of those who have fallen and we commit to build a better future for our world. United we all who serve will care for those who suffer, comfort the lonely and support all those in need. Holding high this torch of remembrance we live on to strive for justice for all people."

Can't get much more militaristic than that, can you Jack??

3: "some of the military got a decided liking for doing that wholesale, pushing other people around for any reason and none, "because there's a war on", and cannot let it go. It's part of what's called militarism." - GUEST, Rahere

I'd love some examples of the military in this country ever getting to the stage you mention. As a former soldier? If there is a war on then things are, understandably, done differently than they would in peacetime.

4: "Much like claiming what they {Royal British Legion} are about isn't militaristic. I don't see any other group parading with flags and military bands - not even the BNP get away with that lot." - GUEST,Rahere

Flags/Banners/Bands? Never seen them? Unions have, or used to have them. The Salvation Army has them. The "Royal" in the Royal British Legion should have given you a clue - their Standards are presented to them and they represent locally those who have served in all arms of our forces - they have earned their right to march under colours - Again to any who saw the nearly 90 year old ex-paratrooper Dennis Boardman march out to deliver that opening address at the Festival of Remembrance I would say that he was proud of the honour and of doing justice to it on behalf of those who are not here - he marched assisted by a serving major in the Parachute Regiment and he was rightly proud of his service and so he should be - he earned that right and our respect.

Oh by the way Rahere - "recognise that military power being a continuation of government policy by other means" - If you are going to quote get it right. The quotation comes from Carl von Clausewitz and runs:

"War is not merely a political act but a real political instrument, a continuation of political intercourse, a carrying out of the same by other means."

Note "WAR" not "military power".

5: "Just an observation about Eric Bogle's claim that NML would have been too long for a single. He's obviously forgotten the Animals' version of House of The Rising Sun, which went on for around 6 minutes, and proved an enormous hit. Not being a pop fan I couldn't put a name to any other epic blockbusters, but I'd have thought there were plenty 55which broke the three minute sounds barrier by a similar margin." - GUEST,Fred McCormick

Oh yes there were Fred, one of the most notable IIRC was Don McLean's American Pie - which got airtime on radio stations because if they played it the DJ could nip out and take a cr*p, while it was played.

6: " "Britain was treaty bound to defend Belgium."
So Britain was treaty bound to defend a murderous imperial power capable of slaughtering 15 million of its subjects" - Jim Carroll

Keith was perfectly correct in stating that by treaty Great Britain was honour bound to defend the neutrality of Belgium - that is a simple matter of record {Treaty of London 1839}. But that treaty had more to do with what was perceived as being in the best national interests of Great Britain than in any consideration for Belgium - so defence of a murderous imperial power never entered into the equation.

7: Keith A of Hertford - 10th Nov 14 - 03:46 PM cut-n-pasted the following from wiki:

"After his son's death, Kipling wrote, "If any question why we died/ Tell them, because our fathers lied." It is speculated that these words may reveal his feelings of guilt at his role in getting John a commission in the Irish Guards.[67] Others such as the English professor Tracey Bilsing contend that the line is referring to Kipling's disgust that British leaders failed to learn the lessons of the Boer War, and were not prepared for the struggle with Germany in 1914 with the "lie" of the "fathers" being that the British Army was prepared for any war before 1914 when it was not.[68]"

I would side on the "self-guilt" explanation, as Bilsing was wrong in his statement that "British leaders failed to learn the lessons of the Boer War". The fact was that the British Army had learned well from the Boer War only too well, a war of fire and manouevre - the British Infantry and field artillery were the best trained troops in Europe - only trouble was that there was never enough of them (The British Army was never large by continental standards) and the war they were about to fight was of a type that no military power at the time had predicted or planned for. The British Army was prepared for war - it simply was not prepared for the war that unfolded in 1914.

8: "No, GUEST,AC - coercive conscription to near certain squalid suffering and death is a bloody outrage !!!" - GUEST,punkfolkrocker

Hate to burst your bubble PFR but conscription came in 1916, and when introduced it was not universal nor was it coercive. Of those who joined the British Army during the First World War 2.67 were Volunteers and 2.77 were Conscripts. As for the certain squalid suffering and death? On joining the forces, after basic training and receiving for many for the first time in their lives a balanced diet, exposure to fresh air and exercise, most put on around 14 kilos in weight and gained between 2.5 to 5 centimetres in height. They did not spend their entire time while deployed in France suffering in trenches (7 days in the front line: 56 days in the rear was the usual rotation) As for the certain death part of it ~1 in 10 got killed.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 05:53 AM

OK, with 11.00 11.11 coming up, anyone joining me in singing the correct version through the National silence?

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,Bignige
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 06:22 AM

Why Joss Stone, shes hardly the best singer around. She turned the whole thing into a screeching, X Factor, rant, complete with up and down hand motions, inability to hold a note without warbling like some demented banshee. Surly they could have picked a better singer than her.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 06:37 AM

Teribus,
Your point 3. We are not, as far as I know, actively at war at this moment: our forces have almost entirely drawn down from Afghanistan and are no longer engaged in Iraq, although that may be changing, much as it changed in Vietnam, when advisors found themselves doing rather more than that. Most particularly, we have not been in the kind of war which required a major economic reorientation since WWII. Your point does not therefore hold, it is the exact opposite, what was done then should not be dragged on into the very different society we have now.
Your point 4. Much like Joss Stone, you edited out what I said to suit your own ends, in striking out the Military bit in discussing "bands". That's the same tactic and every whit as dishonest. You continue by reproaching me for not quoting Clausewitz verbatim: it's because I was was posting, not him, and what I had to say indicated that the real world has moved on a lot since then. So kindly stop editing what posters say to suit your case, it's perverting, perverted and disrespectful. Power is the essence of politics, and it can be classified as military, civil, judicial and moral. We do certain things as members of our society because it is part of the moral conditions of the State to do so. If that doesn't rub, we may find we have to answer in Court. In more extreme cases yet, the Riot Sqaud is available, and beyond that, the ultimate justitiars, those who kill (MI being formerly Military Intelligence: 5 & 6 are merely the civilianised survivors of something like 20 Intelligence divisions). Realpolitik means that the tidiness of legal war doesn't always happen, pragmatically: where's the UN mandate for the so-called Islamic State? This is perhaps part of Gorbachev's difficulties, that Putin is a pragmatist and doesn't give a damn about his lawyers and judges. I'm not arguing that we should decline to that level, but do appreciate that power sometimes means you cannot keep your kid gloves clean, for example the entire WMD debate was a massive stupidity, all Blair really needed to do was denounce a political abuse of the ceasfire which ended Gulf War I: doing it that way over-egged the cake. Unless you are prepared to face that reality, you have no way of controlling the iron fist in the velvet glove: I'm not arging we don't need an armed force, what we need to do is ensure it is used poitively and none of this is.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,Blandiver (Astray)
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 06:44 AM

Just had The Fleetwood Homecoming Parade pass by our front door; brass band, soldiers in WW1 uniform; costume, banners, lots of people. Thrilling stuff. I'd go out for a neb if I wasn't still in my pyjamas. Maybe the past isn't such a very different country after all...

Read all about it: The Homecoming ~ A Community Parade

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,Mick Woods
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 06:59 AM

Jim was 86 in October and he still has the ability to perform hundreds of songs from memory - including some very long folk ballads. And yes the conversation DID take place - there are several people here on mudcat that know Jim and will vouch for his integrity.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Jack Campin
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 07:13 AM

I take it that you didn't watch the Festival of Remembrance? You would therefore would not have heard this opening address given by a D-Day Veteran, Dennis Boardman of the Parachute Regiment:

Why was a killer chosen to speak, rather than a rape or torture victim of the British military? It's not like it would have been difficult to find one.

"At this festival we honour the memory of those who have fallen and we commit to build a better future for our world. United we all who serve will care for those who suffer, comfort the lonely and support all those in need. Holding high this torch of remembrance we live on to strive for justice for all people."

Can't get much more militaristic than that, can you?

No you can't. It's platitudinous fluff that does nothing to challenge militarism, and hence reinforces it. He could have mentioned this:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/exclusive-devastating-dossier-on-abuse-by-uk-forces-in-iraq-goes-to-international-criminal-court-9053735.html

"Comforting the lonely" by machine-gunning piles of wounded men and starving and sexually assaulting prisoners before torturing them to death, and deforming their children by poisoning their whole country with depleted uranium. Yeah, right.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Johnny J
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 07:35 AM

War crime is inexcusable but it is a by product of all conflicts and its perpetrators are not exclusively to be found on any one side or even only within official military machines, i.e. national armies, forces etc. These atrocities can just as easily be committed(and are)by so called freedom fighters, resistance movements and the like.

I know little about Dennis Boardman and I doubt if you do either. However, to describe him as a mere "killer" in such a condemnatory fashion is quite despicable. There is no evidence to suggest that he was anything other than a brave and honorourable man who was serving his country.
There is, of course, a distinction in law between "killing" and murder, in any case, and the former may be regarded as justifiable on occasion. Besides, not all servicemen have even actually "killed" another human being but many of them have gone through hell just the same including many of both the fallen and survivors.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,Howard Jones
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 07:58 AM

Those who fought in the two world wars did so to oppose the spread of militarism, which would otherwise have overwhelmed Europe and much of the rest of the world. To call them "killers" is disgraceful. That you have the freedom to do so is because of them.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 08:07 AM

Mick Woods - thanks for the confirmation regarding Jim's conversation, I was cautious because these things are often invented or exaggerated on they Internet. Glad to hear it's fact. He's a hero.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 08:19 AM

I still say focus on the future. What kind of world do you want and how do you intend to get there? Yes, if you forget the lessons of the past you're bound to repeat them in the future, but learn the lessons of the past and don't wallow in it. It's a tendency in the folk world to live in the past, sure, and even more so in the Military, when the need to justify oneself to the beancounters is almost all in what you've done and not what you're doing, but even so, it's only a part of the real world and it's out of proportion. Instead of diminishing it increases: when I was young, it was just Remembrance Sunday, now it's 11th as well and it's getting to be weeks either side of it too. That's morose to the point of sickness. The dead gave their lives so you should live, not spend all your days moping. The women they left behind became the maiden aunts of my youth, and are now gone. Our generation lost 453 in Afghanistan, and 179 in Iraq, with 47 in the Gulf War. The order of magnitude is completely different, and whilst there is no moral difference between one and a million, the effect on the population is different in real terms.
And to come back to the core of the meme, to do this, they cheat and con. That does discredit their cause, in my opinion, which is a hard and terrible conclusion to come to. The dead deserve to be treated better than this, and the people who pulled it should be ashamed of themselves - but obviously aren't. Until this comes back into proportion, my respects to them will be my own, and not this. And that, I would venture, is how it should be, because then it will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Subject: RE: No man's land protest
From: Teribus
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 08:37 AM

SO far as I can see GUEST,Rahere you have not addressed a single point I have asked you to. So there are no examples of militaristic take overs in Britain - so none of the military have displayed any liking at all for wholesale, pushing around of other people. Why not just say so?

The responsibility for the vast majority of the stupidity relating to Iraq and WMD could be laid firmly at the door of chronically poor reporting in British MSM - had people actually read, or listened to, what politicians were actually saying in context instead of reading and believing what some damned idiot reporters though they had said then you would have seen that the reason the UK was part of the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was because Iraq had failed to comply with the Safwan Ceasefire Agreement terms and Conditions and as such any of the combatant powers could regard the ceasefire as being null and void and could resume hostilities to enforce Iraqi compliance. Now I twigged that - how come you didn't.

Dam,n me "Champin' Jack" has dug up yet another "devastating Dossier" possibly dodgier than the last one. I think that you will find that these charges failed to make any headway in the UK after the UK tax-payer had thrown millions into the investigations - I will give you a bit of advice Jack don't hold your breath on seeing queues of "British War criminals" lined up outside some building in the Hague.