BS: No poppies for me

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Nov 16 - 04:08 AM

"Jim Carroll - now declares himself as being - "The People's Voice" "
Where - another one to the growing list?
Leave it out Teribus and let this thread run its natural course.
Your flailing around has got you just about as far as all your other jingoistic endevours and hate-fests.
Go and find some other old soldiers to denigrate - you seem to do that best.
THat seems to be the sum total of the respect you have for those who died.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Roger the Skiffler
Date: 17 Nov 16 - 05:55 AM

A final post from me on this thread. The Peace Pledge Union report record sales of white poppies this year (over 100,000). I must say I haven't seen anyone else wearing them though.
RtS

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Nov 16 - 06:05 AM

You will see a lot on this clip showing the Veterans for Peace remembrance parade 2016, Roger.

Anyone know if that is Jim Radford singing about a minute and a half in? Looks like him and sounds like one of his songs.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Raggytash
Date: 17 Nov 16 - 09:52 AM

Jim, On yesterdays BBC News website there was an article about voices from WW1. In it one soldier recalled going back to his own lines after being shot. There he found two young men who he thought had been shot for not going "over the top" a summary execution. I'm a bit limited here so maybe you could find the article and post it. I have no illusions that he too will be named as a liar by some.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Nov 16 - 10:05 AM

I'll do my best Raggy - it's little more than a reference to a diary entry by the posters grandfather, who described special squads of men who were given the job of carrying out executions.
It's on one of the interminable "I Love World War One" threads
Get back to you
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Nov 16 - 10:38 AM

Here it is Rag.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-37975358

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Nov 16 - 11:30 AM

"On yesterdays BBC News website there was an article about voices from WW1. In it one soldier recalled going back to his own lines after being shot. There he found two young men who he thought had been shot for not going "over the top" a summary execution." - Raggytash

How dashed convenient for your side of the argument Raggy.

Do you believe it? Or is that a daft question?

Talking about questions relating to this tale I will take at face value. Have you asked yourself any? No of course you haven't.

"one soldier recalled going back to his own lines after being shot. There he found two young men who he THOUGHT had been shot for not going "over the top" a summary execution"

1: So as in every other example of these supposed "summary executions", nobody ever saw one actually being carried out, and nobody can give any names of anybody subjected to such executions. This example is no different.

2: What on earth could possibly have caused this wounded soldier to THINK that these men had been summarily executed for not going "over the top". He wasn't there, did they have signs on their chests proclaiming their "crime"? Were those who shot them standing beside them boasting about it?

3: Under the circumstances this soldier describes there is no possible way at all that he could possibly know how the two men lying on the ground died.

Raggy were you really born that gullible that you believe everything you hear? See? Read?

Just to clear these discussions from unconnected threads and remove the tedium for others on this forum I think I will put up a thread solely dealing with Summary Executions carried out by the British Army in World War One - you can only post to it if you have substantive proof that such executions took place giving name, date and place. My prediction will be that it will be the shortest and least posted to thread on this forum.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Nov 16 - 12:00 PM

Another mouthful of insults - nothing new
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Raggytash
Date: 17 Nov 16 - 03:28 PM

No of course you don't give any credit Terry. It doesn't fit with your blinkered version of the Bwitish Army.

The Bwitish Army would never do anything like that ............................ would they. Yours is jingoism of the worst kind, one that seeks to denigrate the very soldiers who fought a brutal, bloody war.

I am prepared to listen to a soldier with first hand experience of life the trenches during WW1 who decades after the event and I would suggest with the knowledge that the likes of you would not believe him still felt he had to tell the story.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Nov 16 - 09:22 PM

Ehmmm No Raggy - when someone stands up and accuses people of doing something wrong I happen to be one of those rare individuals who actually want the accusers to come up with some solid substantive evidence to back up their allegations - Right - you twats start coming up with substantive evidence or shut the fuck up.

By the way substantive evidence does not mean:

I heard that ........

Some bloke said to me that ...........

So and so was convinced that ...........

Substantive evidence means names, dates and places if you cannot give those then put yourself in the place of the accused - would you be prepared to be executed on the evidence that you currently bring to the table? If not then I humbly submit and request that you stop talking a complete and utter load of bollocks.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Nov 16 - 10:59 PM

ok... so if in the heat of battle an officer or nco cracked under stress and started summarily executing soldiers for cowardice
to make an example to motivate the others to fight on..

He'd have on the spot or asap afterwards made proper formal written records and filed and archived them for posterity...???

Where exactly in the mud and blood, and explosions atomizing all around, might those papers have been stored for safe keeping
until they were taken back to command...???

Even in the near certain event of his own death during that battle....

How deep was the water and mud... ???

oh yeah right... evidence...

and witnesses... when lines of men were dropping like flies or being vapourized unaware what might be happening mere yards behind...???


Teribus - you might be absolutely right.. and there is no evidence or witnesses because such war crimes never happened...

Though on balance of probabilities, can you produce convincing evidence it definitely never ever happened..

not even once or twice... or often... in all that utter fucked up traumatizing chaos and carnage


Armies might have been very good at turning blind eyes and keeping dirty secrets to protect their own...

Come on Teribus.. this is a folk music site... use your imagination and empathy to think a little more like a creative artist for a change...

Break out of your straight jacket and blinkers... it could be liberating... 🙄

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Nov 16 - 11:16 PM

..after all reputations were at stake.. can't have that nasty business turning up one day to embarrass the regiment
and the families of any officers involved... 😶 🙈 🙉 🙊

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 05:01 AM

"who actually want the accusers to come up with some solid substantive evidence to back up their allegations "
While at the same time never producing a shred of evidence for any of your own claims
Rare indeed
You have never proiduced proof of what you say and have described being asked to do so as "dancing to any tune you want to play -"
Meglomania rules OK
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 05:20 AM

Brigadier-General Frank Percy Crozier admitted he ordered the shooting of sentries who fell asleep while on duty. He also described the execution of Private James Crozier of the Royal Irish Rifles: "There are hooks on the post; we always do things thoroughly in the Rifles. He is hooked on like dead meat in a butcher's shop. His eyes are bandaged - not that it really matters, for he is already blind... A volley rings out - a nervous volley it is true, yet a volley. Before the fatal shots are fired I had called the battalion to attention. There is a pause, I wait. I see the medical officer examining the victim. He makes a sign, the subaltern strides forward, a single shot rings out. Life is now extinct... We march back to breakfast while the men of a certain company pay the last tribute at the graveside of an unfortunate comrade. This is war."
EXECUTIONS
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 05:42 AM

"By the way substantive evidence does not mean:

I heard that ........

Some bloke said to me that ...........

So and so was convinced that ..........."

...Which rules out everything ever written in history books. All second-hand information.   

In other words, come off it.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 05:51 AM

"By the way substantive evidence does not mean..."
And it rules out any reminiscence by every soldier who ever risked his life.
Lie down harry Patch - you made it all up"
The crassness of this is underlined by the fact that it comes from someone who never provides proof to his claims - not ever.
Bloody insane arrogance.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 06:42 AM

"so if in the heat of battle an officer or nco cracked under stress and started summarily executing soldiers for cowardice
to make an example to motivate the others to fight on.."

In such an instance pfr I would very much doubt if that Officer or NCO would outlive his first victim, surrounded as he would be by that man's friends all armed to the teeth. In a war, in a battle, getting shot at and killed by the enemy is one thing and totally to be expected, getting shot at at close quarters by your own side just would not be sanctioned, or condoned, or tolerated - individual self preservation clutches in.

During and after the First World War literally hundreds of thousands of letters and diaries were gifted to the Imperial War Museum. Soldiers, sailors and airmen of every rank imaginable wrote books about their experiences and even more were interviewed at length in the United Kingdom, in Canada and in Australia by those making documentaries on the conflict. Guess what pfr, out of all of that lot there is not one single mention of any summary executions ever having taken place. We know for certain that it happened in the French Army and also in the Italian Army there is documented evidence of that and names can be put to those executed in such a fashion - Now if it happened in the British, Commonwealth or Empire Armies how come nobody knows about it?

You say come on Teribus "Break out of your straight jacket and blinkers" - and do what pfr - invent history to suit contemporary fashion? - take part in inventing lies and give them credence while in the process blacken and besmirch the names and reputations of those long dead who can no longer defend themselves.

Now I will ask you again - on the "evidence" given so far if it was you who were about to die condemned by it do you think it sufficient? I most certainly do not.

"Brigadier-General Frank Percy Crozier admitted he ordered the shooting of sentries who fell asleep while on duty." - Jim Carroll

I would not put too much credence in whatever Frank Percy Crozier said, besides Jim it is on record that Frank Percy Crozier did request permission to order that and was told immediately by his Divisional Assistant Provost Martial that permission was denied and separate orders were sent to the APMs staff with Croziers Brigade that any such order given by Crozier was to be ignored. This has all been dragged up before by Carroll so it is nothing new.

All that having been said - a question for you Jim - How many sentries under Brigadier-General Frank Percy Crozier WERE ACTUALLY SHOT? Don't strain yourself too hard Jom - The answer to that question is - NONE

Crozier's books were controversial for their claims of doubtful factual accuracy. He was largely discredited and considered a nuisance by the contemporaries. - Source - Walker, Stephen (2007). Forgotten Soldiers: The Story of the Irishmen Executed by the British Army during the First World War. Gill & Macmillan Ltd. pp. 21–34. ISBN 9780717162215.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 06:50 AM

"I would not put too much credence in whatever Frank Percy Crozier said, "
Once again you refuse to provide as scrap of backup to your own claims and dismiss out of hand documented evidence put up
You're mad as a hatter - what are you on?
And once again the lack of conviction in what you claim is underlined by your insulting manner
Evidence drives arguments - not arrogant bullying
Try tranquilisers
DO YOU EVER INTEND PROVIDING EVIDENCE TO WHAT YOU SAY OR WILL THET FOREVER REMAIN "DANCING TO WHATEVER TUNE YOU WANT TO PLAY?
It's little wonder you are regarded the figure of ridicule you are
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 06:55 AM

"Which rules out everything ever written in history books. All second-hand information."

Good heavens Shaw, what mighty disdain you must have for your former colleagues who studied and taught History in the many schools you taught in.

Are you really that much of a prat that you think all history is based upon hearsay?

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 07:02 AM

Any moron can talk down to people, dismiss evidence out of hand and refuse to provide your own - which is about the only thing you have ever proved
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 07:07 AM

Brigadier-General Frank Percy Crozier admitted he ordered the shooting of sentries who fell asleep while on duty.

Neither a General nor any higher rank can order an execution. Only a Court Martial.

He also described the execution of Private James Crozier of the Royal Irish Rifles:

The description sounds perfectly authentic, but the execution could only have been ordered by a court martial.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 07:10 AM

"Are you really that much of a prat that you think all history is based upon hearsay?"
Are you really that much of a prat as to have never heard of Social history which combined documented evidence alongside that of people who were actually there?
All history is based on human experience - dismiss humanity and you have no basis for history.
Oral history is no more open to dispute and contradiction as is documented history, which, more often than not, is subject to current bias and is often agenda driven.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 07:22 AM

"Once again you refuse to provide as scrap of backup to your own claims and dismiss out of hand documented evidence put up" - Jim Carroll

What the fuck do you think this is you gormless Prat:

Crozier's books were controversial for their claims of doubtful factual accuracy. He was largely discredited and considered a nuisance by the contemporaries. - SOURCE - Walker, Stephen (2007). Forgotten Soldiers: The Story of the Irishmen Executed by the British Army during the First World War. Gill & Macmillan Ltd. pp. 21–34. ISBN 9780717162215.

By the way glad you brought up Harry Patch who by his own admission in the interview he gave the BBC said that he had never encountered anyone suffering from shell shock so could therefore have never seen any summary execution by any officer of anyone suffering from it - could he?

As to Officers turning guns on or threatening their own troops, the following iis cut'n'pasted from Harry Patch's interview:

Mutiny

'E' company were about a thousand strong. We had an officer we didn't like. He used to take us out route marches. We didn't like it. That afternoon he wanted the 'E' company on parade for bayonet practice. The war had been over for months. The sergeant major opened the door. Somebody threw a boot at him. He went back, reported it.

The officer came and they told him flat that they weren't going out on parade. Well, he went back to the company office and about thirty of the men followed him and they asked for him. He came out, he pulled his revolver out and he clicked the hammer back. Nobody said anything. We had all been on the range. I was on fatigue that morning so I wasn't on parade. Nobody said anything.

They all went back to their huts and they rounded up what ammunition they could and went back and they asked for the officer again. He was a captain, risen from the ranks. He came out and he clicked the hammer back on his revolver. He said, 'The first man who says he is not going on parade, I'll shoot him.' No sooner had he said that, when thirty bolts went back and somebody shouted, 'Now shoot you bugger if you like.' He threw the revolver down, disappeared. We were all run up for a mutiny.

We had a brigadier come over from the mainland to hear the officer's side of it. Then he said, 'I want to hear the men.' Twenty or thirty of the men went behind a screen and they told him. They said, 'We don't want bayonet practice. We've had the real bloody thing. Some of us are wounded by bayonets.' The outcome was that there were no parades except just to clear the camp, just fatigues. The officer was moved to a different command. We never saw him again. It's a damn good job we didn't.

Now those were men out of the line and in no danger. Do you honestly think that under fire they would meekly allow any Officer or NCO to shoot them without a murmur and then keep quiet about it? Utterly preposterous and totally unbelievable.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 07:36 AM

Jim Carroll - 18 Nov 16 - 07:10 AM

Now then Jim where and when did I deny the importance of "Social History" - Or is this just another of your baseless assumptions?

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 07:54 AM

Balance of probabilities....

It is entirely plausible that such minor localized coercive threats and mutines could have happened in the heat, mud, blood, entrails and excrement of combat..
within a small section of a trench or no man's land as men were pushed on into raging carnage of battle..

Who knows, who will ever know, what bad things happened at the heart of darkness of warfare if all participants and witnesses
in that condensed area were killed within a very short time of each other...????

Yes this is the stuff of dramatists, fiction, song and poetry writers..

but also just as likely as could be true lost undocumented human psychology and tragedy of war..

For example, how could there possibly exist accurate statistics of hated officers and ncos murdered by their own men under the smokescreen of combat...???

..or bitter personal rivalries and vendettas amongst individual troops themselves, settled in a similar quick brutish manner...?????

Some things, none of us will ever know.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 08:03 AM

PFR, yes but we are discussing whether summary executions were ever legal or permitted in the British Army.
They were not.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 08:35 AM

Keith - Yes.. I'd assumed we'd agreed on that fairly obvious technicality..

But.. it's so more interesting considering the traumatic terrifying chaotic scenarios were rule books are no longer foremost in the active participants' blood stained war crazed minds...

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 08:36 AM

No we are not - we are discussing whether they were carried out - the eye-witness evidence suggests they did - as does the Crozier autobiography.
"What the fuck do you think this is you gormless Prat:"
Don't to talk down to me, you arrogant moron
Unqualified dismissal by his contemporaries who considered him an embarrassment is not reliable evidence - he epitomised the arrogance of the "Great Leaders" of the time and this particular boast about his own attitude is more than borne out by eye-witness statements that you have dismissed as "soldiers lies".
His grasp on history may be shoddy, but unless he was a raving liar, we have to accept that this was his own experience and view
Do you have any real evidence that this was the case - and if you have, are you prepared to share it with us?
This is only the second time you have ever offered "evidence" - hastily gathered from Wiki - lazy, at the very least.
The last time you brought up something I had already provided which contradicted your case anyway
You are an arrogant strutting moron pedaling jingoistic nonsense.
You said you were going to open a new thread - instead you have hi-jacked an existing one in order to resurrect arguments that were sunk two years ago - and uyou have bow been joined by your obsessive extremist mate.
A total waste of everybody's time
Jim Carroll
.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 09:54 AM

punkfolkrocker - 18 Nov 16 - 07:54 AM

"Some things, none of us will ever know."

EXACTLY pfr - so have a word with your mates and pass on to them not to state that things definitely happened when we haven't got any evidence to support their scurrilous and totally unproven claims.

By the way lack of evidence indicates that the event never happened.

Unfortunately your pals and possibly yourself tend to believe fiction rather than fact.

Jim Carroll - 18 Nov 16 - 08:36 AM

"No we are not - we are discussing whether they were carried out - the eye-witness evidence suggests they did - as does the Crozier autobiography."

What eye-witness evidence? (I take it that you do know what an "eye-witness" is? Someone who actually was present and saw the act or event with their own eyes) You have provided no such evidence. Not one single instance that you have referred to has anyone ever claimed to have been an eye-witness to any such summary execution.

Where in the Crozier autobiography is the subject of summary execution during WWI covered?

Names of those who were subject to summary execution.
Names of those who were supposed to have carried out the alleged executions.
Names of those who must have witnessed these alleged summary executions.
Dates times and places these alleged summary executions.

You have provided none of the above Carroll - the primary reason for that is that no such evidence exists.

Frank Percy Crozier was a proven raving liar according to his fellow Officers, Stephen Walker and Charles Messenger.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 10:09 AM

"What eye-witness evidence?"
As I said - old ground which you have dismissed as soldiers' lies.
You are trying to talk down to people from your mental hole in the ground again - highly entertaining, but not helpful
And you are demanding confirmation that you are not willing to provide yourself
Do not be stupid - we do not need details of names and dates to know that millions of Jews were exterminated - why should we need them here
It is enough to know that an officer confessed to having carried out summary executions - have you any evidence to show he was lying?
No - of course you haven't - you seem to believe that you only have to say something to make it true
"according to his fellow Officers"
They would say that about someone who has blown their cover, wouldn't they, after having been party to sending a generation of young men to their deaths, wouldn't they?
WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE FOR ANY OF THIS UTTER BULLSHIT?
You arrogant, arrogant little man.
You might as well try to take yourself seriously, even if nobody else does - are you really unaware of the image of the streutting bully you project?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 10:39 AM

Jim, summary execution was not permitted.
Your general could not have done what he claimed.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Raggytash
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 10:40 AM

"we were all run up for mutiny" ............................................

I'm positive you told us that mutiny never happened in the British Army.

You must have meant that such occurances were hushed up, didn't pass into the history books and therefore never happened.

Quelle surprise.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 10:49 AM

"By the way lack of evidence indicates that the event never happened."

errrrmmm.. I vaguely remember passing a Law A level in 1977,
so even I know the blatant fallacy of your stated presumption....

You rightly fairly rest your case on the existing war diaries and letter of verifiable provenance;
but again, to state the obvious, what about all the personal written accounts that did not survive intact or become available for scrutiny...???

I'd say as a fair guess there were far more of them....

And on a more basic human level, let's consider the squalid dark guilty secrets of combat,
that battle weary and hardened loyal comrades swore pacts of secrecy never to reveal to their dying day....?????

Far more that happens exceeds that which is written down or openly confided in other friends and family,
let alone strangers, researchers and historians, or legal enquires...

I bet every one of us indulging in this thread harbours transgressive secrets we will never tell, and have pushed far into the recesses of our memories.....

All nothing compared to the understandably concealed memories of warriors...

My grandads never told me a word of their war experiences.. and the family respected that.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 10:54 AM

Seems like a new picture is emerging here
On the one hand we are told about a well led army on the other we have the raving madman liar like Brigadier-General Frank Percy Crozier and cold-blooded killers like Captain Bowen-Colthurst (the murderer of Skeffington Sheehy in Dublin in 1916) - not to mention an army made up of lying soldiers.
What exactly are we supposed to commemorate - it seems to be officers who are not fit to lead cattle, never mind a generation of young men to their deaths – and men who are incapable of distinguishing truth from fiction.
It seems that officers are not immune to being called liars if their stories don't measure up to Colonel Blimp's jingoism.
"Jim, summary execution was not permitted. Your general could not have done what he claimed."
Oh dear, Village idiot school out – is it that time already?
Thjis is what this argument is about - can't you work the answer to that one yourself Keith?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Raggytash
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 10:56 AM

Incidentally no-one was named by the soldier on the BBC website so there could be no cause for evidence of names etc. No-one was in court before a judge and jury.

Why should someone with first hand experience of life in the trenches make up such a story. He fought alongside other men, many of whom were killed maimed and simply told of one of his recollections before he too passed on.

Whether he was correct or not I would suggest he had far more experience of gunshot wounds and could possibly tell whether a shot had come from close quarters for from across no-mans land.

So my dilemma is do:- I trust his words or those of a rabid jingoist.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 12:36 PM

"old ground which you have dismissed as soldiers' lies."

Old soldiers who by their own admission never actually witnessed anything that even remotely resembled a summary execution.

If you are attempting to sell us a tale about a soldier "who was there" and saw one of his "mates" summarily executed, yet could not put a name to the victim, could not name the person who carried out the execution, could not tell where and when this execution took place and then after seeing one of his "mates" gunned down did not mention it to anyone - As I said utterly preposterous and totally unbelievable.

"we do not need details of names and dates to know that millions of Jews were exterminated - why should we need them here"

The names and details and dates of execution or death of those millions of Jews are known to exist, they are a matter of record and it is a totally unassailable fact that those Jews were murdered by the Nazis. You claiming that British soldiers were subject to summary execution is a completely different kettle of fish, there are no details, your "so-called witnesses" actually did not witness anything, there are no records of any kind that supports your assertion - and sorry old son your word on it does not guarantee it as fact.

WHICH "officer confessed to having carried out summary executions" - Please don't say Frank Percy Crozier - he may have given an illegal instruction that sentries found to be sleeping on duty are to be shot - THAT DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY MEAN THAT ANYBODY WAS SHOT - In fact none were

Raggytash - 18 Nov 16 - 10:40 AM

I'm positive you told us that mutiny never happened in the British Army.

You really are a glutton for punishment Raggy. Do you want me to embarrass you again? Throughout the course of the First World War the British, Commonwealth & Empire Armies never mutinied in the field or refused to attack the enemy. In Harry Patch's story:

"We had an officer we didn't like. He used to take us out route marches. We didn't like it. That afternoon he wanted the 'E' company on parade for bayonet practice. The war had been over for months."

Oh Raggy the soldier you heard on BBC:

""John Kirkham, who had had his arm shattered by a bullet and returned to his own lines, reported seeing "two unfortunate boys" who had been "terrified" and who he was convinced had been summarily shot for cowardice."

Tell me what John Kirkham had seen? The "two unfortunate boys" were already dead, he did not see them shot, which begs the rather obvious question, "How the fuck could he tell whether they were "terrified" or not prior to a death that he did not witness". Are you prats so gullible that you believe absolutely everything that you see, hear or read? Are you incapable of any critical thought process, or does it all just melt away when you hear something that panders to your idiotic beliefs.

"Whether he was correct or not I would suggest he had far more experience of gunshot wounds and could possibly tell whether a shot had come from close quarters for from across no-mans land."

Now let me get this right Raggy, you are now trying to tell us that a soldier undoubtedly in some quite considerable pain whose arm has been shattered by an enemy bullet walks back to get treatment but stops off to examine two dead bodies. You might be stupid enough to put that forward by way of explanation, I on the other hand am not stupid enough to swallow it.

pfr - "what about all the personal written accounts that did not survive intact or become available for scrutiny...???

I'd say as a fair guess there were far more of them...."

I dare say that there were - and neither you, nor I, nor anyone else has the knowledge or the right to state what they contained. So for you to then launch into secret pacts and sworn cover-ups is ludicrous, but there again you could be a compulsive conspiracy theorist.

"My grandads never told me a word of their war experiences.. and the family respected that."

But had either kept a diary or letters, when they died, that material would have been read before it was either kept or destroyed.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 01:01 PM

"Old soldiers who by their own admission never actually witnessed anything"
So they are liars - do we have that right?
Talk of summary executions were commonplace - the fact that they happened were confirmed by your Brigadeer General who boasted about it when there was no reason on earth for him to lie about it.
Tommy Kenny never witnessed an execution of any form, but he was around when they took place and reported on the aftermath.
He referred to them having happened.
Phillip Donnellans interviewees spoke of them and brought a roar of outrage from the establishment.
The extract from the diary I provided describes special squads that were sent out to arrest and execute deserters while the action was taking place.
There is plenty of evidence to suggest they happened - you have produced only outraged Colonel Blimpish denials
You want to call these people liars - where's your evidence?
How fucking dare you call old soldiers liars without proof - you establishment suck-hole.
I am not trying to "sell anything" - certainly not to you - your role here is to keep us entertained, not informed
Jim Carroll

"But had either kept a diary or letters,"
Letters were censored and diaries were forbidden - not without reason
Who wanted to know what was going on at the front.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 01:07 PM

And by the way
The names of the Jews who died certainly were not recorded - they were gathered together after the war by relatives - many of them were unknown because entire families were wiped out - not even the actual numbers are known
The only reason we have as many details as we do is because Germany lost the war - don't you know that winners are never guilty of committing atrocities?
What a stupid thing to claim - even for you!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 02:14 PM

No I'm not a conspiracy theorist.. but naturally a bit of a cynic...

You seriously believe that in a war of that magnitude, and length of time, with so many young men never knowing how long they might live...

That mates at the front never agreed to keep quiet about questionable combat action and deaths...

Come on, it's human nature... if not institutionalised military response

.. and allegedly still happening...


Of course, if only they'd had helmet cams and youtube 100 years ago...... 🙄

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 02:17 PM

Finished with this stupidity
There's s.f.a. here that hasn't been discussed over and over again - you failed to convince anybody then and you are making a greater bollocks of it now.
Tell you what.
You said you were going to open a new thread - you don't even have the imagination or the nouse to do even that - you've just slithered into a working thread and taken over - and I was stupid enough to fall for it.
Why don't you just go and do what you said you were going to do - head between knees, deep breath, and try to come to terms with the fact that you are not in the position to talk down to anybody - you have neither the intelligence nor the experience - you are just a jingoistic dimmo.
Go and open your thread, try to think of something new to say, be prepared to back it with some documented facts or maybe some reported experiences.
Then set them down in a respectful and articulate way - I'm a bit tired of trying to deal with someone who behaves like a spoiled a child with learning difficulties
Come up with something that isn't ripped out to The Hotspur or the racist 'Blackhawk Comics nad I might be prepared to discuss with you.
Failing that - go screw your fanatcal jingoistic self - I can get any of this shite by opening up the B.N.P. site.
Don't forget - head between knees - deep breaths....!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 06:53 PM

"the fact that they happened were confirmed by your Brigadeer General who boasted about it" - Jim Carroll

Confirmed where and when by Brigadier-General Frank Percy Crozier? The only execution he was involved in during the Great War was that of Pte James Crozier who was arrested, charged with desertion, tried by Court Martial, found guilty and sentenced to death, the warrant for his execution being signed by Haig - Hate to burst your bubble Carroll but there was damn all "Summary" about any of that.

"where's your evidence?" - more of a lack of evidence really, no bodies, no graves, no names, no dates, no places, no witnesses, in fact nothing at all to convince anybody that any such "Summary Executions" ever happened.

Your "special squads" nonsense is just that, such squads would have been massively outnumbered by men armed to the teeth - had they existed and acted as you seem to think they did they would not have lasted one minute - you simply do not just stand idly by while your friends are being murdered.

"There is plenty of evidence to suggest they happened"

Really? Then why can't you produce verified evidence of a single Summary Execution ever having taken place?

On the other matter:

1: The names of those to be delivered to the extermination camps were detailed for the transports. Those records exist

2: The names became numbers when they reached their destinations

3: The numbers were detailed prior to entry into the chambers

If nothing else in implementing their "Final Solution" the Germans were meticulous book-keepers, the information was used at the trials in Nuremberg.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 07:13 PM

I'd be content enough to settle for there's no convincing evidence it ever happened,
but on balance of probability it might have:
so cant be ruled out entirely so far through lack of definitive proof....


verdict.. sufficiently on the margin of plausibility..



There... done... one more hefty glass of rum.. then bedtime...

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 19 Nov 16 - 03:04 AM

No bodies, no graves, no names, no dates, no places, no witnesses, in fact nothing at all to convince anybody that any such "Summary Executions" ever happened, basically means pfr that the balance of probability falls on the side that no such "Summary Executions" were ever carried out, especially by "special squads of military policemen" roaming about during a battle killing British soldiers out of hand purely on the basis of what they saw fit on the spur of the moment.

Of the 3,080 men sentenced to death, 346 men were actually executed - of those 266 were shot for desertion and 18 for cowardice.

Of the men shot, 91 were already under a previous suspended sentence, and nine under two sentences. Of the 91, 40 were already under a suspended death sentence, 38 of them for desertion, and one man had already been "sentenced to death" twice for desertion.

Of 393 men sentenced to death for falling asleep on sentry duty in all theatres in World War I, only two were executed (sentries were usually posted in pairs to keep one another awake; these two, who served in Mesopotamia - Take Note Jim and Raggy (before you put your foot in it again trying to catch me out), Brigadier-General Frank Percy Crozier never served in Mesopotamia during the First World War.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Nov 16 - 04:00 AM

I really do not have an axe to grind here as I do not know enough about the issue but, from a logical point of view, PFR's suggestions seems reasonable to me. Yes, I know full well it was not allowed and I know full well there are no records of it. As to there being no bodies, dates etc. I can only say that there were too many remains that were unidentified to make that a categorical statement.

I must agree with Teribus' facts and figures as those are verifiable. However I do not think that anyone can categorically say it never happened. It is probable, under the scenario that PFR describes, that it may have happened but it would be very isolated. I should think that it also happened that someone from the ranks was likely to kill an officer and, in the full flight of battle, get away with it. I am certain that there were no 'special squads' but I also doubt very much that it never happened in the heat of the moment and was covered up later. It happens in life, it is known as murder and undoubtedly some get away with it. I am sure the same happened occasionally on the battlefield when tempers were up. And just as the numbers are insignificant today they are even more so in the midst of all that death.

Can we not agree that it may have happened illegally on occasion but rather than being endemic it was simply a handful amongst the millions of dead? Just for peace sake?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 19 Nov 16 - 06:38 AM

Number of points DtG

1: This whole thing started because it was claimed by some on this forum in WWI threads going back over two years now that Summary executions were carried out - Note that WERE carried out, no maybe, might have, could possibly have - definite statement summary executions WERE carried out.

2: In response to that Keith A, myself and others requested some sort of substantiation to back the accusation up - which I think is perfectly reasonable. I know I spent some considerable time checking through material and inquiring at the RMP Museum if there had ever been any such executions. My searches and inquiries resulted in no such instance of any summary executions being found.

3: By way of substantiation we got second-hand, hearsay accounts by people who we later found had actually witnessed nothing at all. We got stories of special squads of Military Police, Battlefield Police, none of whom, according to the RMP Museum ever executed anybody in the manner described on this forum. Isn't it odd that not one single name of any victim of such an act can be produced.

4: "As to there being no bodies, dates etc. I can only say that there were too many remains that were unidentified to make that a categorical statement." - WHAT? The claim is that these men were shot on the firing step of a trench in front of their comrades. The other claim is that they were shot as they wandered about BEHIND the British Lines. The remains that were unidentified and unidentifiable would be mainly in "No Mans Land", behind our lines in areas subjected to German artillery fire (Where cause of death and damage to the surrounding area would be unmistakable), or in enemy positions themselves killed in German counterattacks.

5: I find it rather strange and demonstrative of a particular bias that you say that it is wrong of me make a definite statement that it never happened, yet it would appear to be perfectly in order for your pals to state that it definitely did without one whit of evidence to substantiate the charge. What they are doing in laying these accusations and portraying them as being indisputable facts is blackening the reputations of people who are now no longer in a position to defend themselves. The funny thing is if those coming out with these statements about summary executions were charged with something and convicted on the strength of the scant and unreliable "evidence" they've produced to support the accusation that summary executions took place, they'd all be squealing like stuck pigs at the injustice of it all.

6: Could it possibly happen? It most certainly did in the French, Russian and Italian Armies and there is evidence to support that it did. The same cannot be said for the British, Commonwealth & Empire Armies, so the balance of probability is that it did not happen and to state categorically that it did is a barefaced lie. But there again those levelling the accusation and alleging that summary executions were common practice are people who have a track record of making idiotic and baseless, unsubstantiated accusations on this forum.

7: For "the sake of peace" I am not prepared to countenance or lend any sort of tacit credence to their outrageous lies.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Nov 16 - 07:56 AM

No probs. It was a suggestion. No one has to take it on board. FWIW I agree that summary executions could not have been common practice as there would have been far more of an outcry. Maybe you can agree that it may have happened in the heat of the moment on very rare occasions. Or not. It doesn't really matter to me. It would explain why there are a couple of accounts of it happening without making lies out of anyone's first hand experience though.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 19 Nov 16 - 11:46 AM

"It would explain why there are a couple of accounts of it happening without making lies out of anyone's first hand experience though."

Only thing is DtG on examination those accounts turned out to be hearsay and supposition, stories heard from others, as explained in those accounts, they weren't actually anyone's first hand experiences at all, and by the tellers own admission they never actually saw anything.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Raggytash
Date: 19 Nov 16 - 12:01 PM

Strange that you missed out the pertinent line in your response Tery.

The line that stated "we were all run up for mutiny"

I wonder why.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Nov 16 - 12:11 PM

There were mutinies, notably the one at Etaples, and these have been acknowledged in previous discussions here.
No-one has ever claimed there were none, but as Teribus correctly stated, "Throughout the course of the First World War the British, Commonwealth & Empire Armies never mutinied in the field or refused to attack the enemy. "

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Nov 16 - 12:23 PM

Fairy nuff.