BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy

Subject: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 08:21 AM

At the risk of starting another war I link this 2 year old piece from The Guardian.

I wish I had seen it before. When some of the previous flame wars were occurring. It explains far better than I can why I believe the current fashion to re-write wars is wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 08:47 AM

Certainly thought provoking.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 09:01 AM

You're in good company: @Abu_Sayfillaah

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 09:08 AM

the current fashion to re-write wars is wrong.

What fashion?
Do you mean history?

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 09:13 AM

Why not discuss the content of the article.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 09:18 AM

Yo, Professor: how about you keep your ignorance of WW I to yourself this time around? Or are you going to ruin this discussion too?

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 09:22 AM

Guest. Exactly who is it that is in good company?

Keith. I am not even going there. This thread is not about you.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Charmion
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 09:31 AM

The thought that article provokes in this veteran is "Build a bridge, buddy, and get over yourself."

Remembrance Day has always been political, whether we like it or not, because it is a sop thrown to the public by governments that spend not only our money but also our lives in pursuit of policies that may or may not do us any good. The proof of that pudding is in the eating, and in many cases we don't get a taste until long after the bills are paid.

As we get older and edge into the third (or fourth, or even fifth) acts of our lives, we have to come to terms with the fact that those younger than us, who are in the thick of the Big Drama of their lives, make up the bulk of the population, and they don't think like us and their consequent actions sometimes strike us as awkward or inappropriate.

I am sixty-one years old and a veteran of the Cold War. My husband is fifty-eight and still serving, with a rack of medals from NATO and UN deployments. Both of us are the children of Second World War veterans, brought up in post-war British garrison culture. We both find today's version of Remembrance Day kinda strange; for example, it jolts me to hear applause from the crowd as the veterans' contingent marches by the National War Memorial, and the practice of depositing poppies on the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier strikes me as both sentimental and untidy.

But the applause seems natural to people in the crowd because they see themselves as members of an audience, whereas I think of them as participants in the ceremony, like the congregation in church. The poppies on the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier are put there by people who think it a gracious gesture, like the bouquets I saw thrust between the bars of the fence around the U.S. Embassy on 12 September 2001, or the teddy bears deposited at the site of an incident in which a child has died. It's not something I would do because it strikes me as undignified.

But it's not about me. Back in the 70s, when you could fire a shotgun across Confederation Square on Remembrance Day and not harm a soul, that wasn't about me, either, although I was freezing my feet on the concrete, or about my Dad, on parade among the naval veterans. Now, when a total stranger wants to buy my husband a coffee in Tim's (much to his embarrassment), that's not about him; he's just the soldier who is physically present when some random nice guy feels the prick of obligation and chooses that way of acting on it. He graciously accepts because to do otherwise would make the random nice guy feel bad.

We happen to be in a time of "better food for us, an' schools, an' fires, an' all" -- a period when civilians are feeling a prick of shame at what some military personnel have endured and how rough their lives can become as a result. It would be nice if that shame could be translated into effective support services for those disabled by PTSD, but I'm not holding my breath.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 09:49 AM

Looks like it is not just Harry Leslie Smith's view either - Scroll down to comments.

Well said, Charmion. I would not, however, say the original point was solely about remembrance day though. I find the phrase Mr Smith uses - I will no longer allow my obligation as a veteran to remember those who died in the great wars to be co-opted by current or former politicians to justify our folly in Iraq, our morally dubious war on terror and our elimination of one's right to privacy. very significant. Maybe it is just me but the politicians and press selling war as something noble and right just seems wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Charmion
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 11:03 AM

DtG, the politicians and the press *always* peddle the current war as The Great Cause Of Our Time -- that's obvious from most cursory review of editorial cartoons, fund-raising posters, or any other type of ephemera you would care to mention going all the way back to the Napoleonic Wars.

Yes, it's morally dubious. In 1939, the enemy was Hitler and the confluct in view was indeed the Great Cause Of Its Time, and ever since, every Western government preparing to send its armed forces into harm's way has called up that spectre to justify its intentions. "In 1939, should we have stood idly by and let Hitler get away with it? Saddam has weapons of mass destruction! He gassed the Kurds!" And away we go ... or not; Canada sat that one out.

If the government could not paint the conflict in the colours of nobility and right, nobody would sign up to go, and we couldn't have that.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 11:04 AM

Huh?
I merely asked what you meant by, "the current fashion to re-write wars is wrong."

I was not aware it was a fashion issue.
I thought it history, which is evidence based not "fashion."

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Rapparee
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 11:08 AM

Anything can seem noble and right if you're not the one being shot at.

As someone who has been shot at (and by people to whom I hadn't even been properly introduced!) I will remember the long list of those I knew who have paid, in one way or another, the final price: my youngest brother, Ted; Bob, my oldest friend; Doug, a high school chum; Larry, whose mother was my Cub Scout den mother and with whom I also attended high school and, like Doug, one with who I marched off to war...my father, my uncles on both sides, my grandmothers whose sons were taken off to fight, and the list goes on and on and on.

But I see no need to wear a poppy (although I will if I am given one) or an American flag pin, or much of anything else. Those who know me know and those that don't can either introduce themselves and be friends or can go...nevermind.

I believe it was one Decoration/Memorial Day weekend when someone from Utah stopped at my house and asked why I didn't have a flag out. Rather than giving him the response such a question deserved, I politely replied that I appreciate being reminded -- and placed the flags what had been on my father's and father-in-laws coffins and the (very small) box containing my own medals in the front window. He left mumbling apologies and quite, I hope, embarrassed.

War, which should be the very, very last resort, is far too important to be left to politicians. And as Robert E. Lee said, "It is well that war is so terrible, or we should grow too fond of it." And if war is needed, then it should be declared and everyone in the country involved. No more "resolution of Congress" or half-arsed actions such as that -- IF it is necessary for any nation to commit their troops, then it is necessary to commit the nation as a whole...and the leaders should be forced to visit the "bad winds" of military hospitals and front-line medical units...and the graves registration sections that are "up front."

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: gnu
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 12:58 PM

Very well said Charmion and Rap.

My uncle taught me that "Lest we forget." was not to remember the fallen SPECIFICALLY but, more so, was simply to remember "Let's not do that again."

RIP and thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 01:24 PM

You beat me to it, gnu! The powers that be are trying their best to make sure young people never even know about it, let alone forget. Luckily the young are far more savvy than us, our parents and our grandparents. They have the benefit of global knowledge and can make up their own minds who to believe.

In the words Mr Daltry sings. We won't get fooled again.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: mg
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 01:44 PM

I think we will be fooled again, and we will be horribly unprepared. Nevertheless, I will wear a poppy.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Charmion
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 02:49 PM

My dear Gnome, I hope you're aware that quite a few of the powers that be are young themselves -- check out our new Prime Minister! -- and have many hard lessons yet to learn. I disagree that they are savvier than we old gits; they were brought up on a steady diet of Tie A Yellow Ribbon 'Round the Old Oak Tree and PR photos of toddlers in the arms of soldier parents, always wearing Dad's (or Mum's) beret as they grin for the camera. If I never see that photo again, it will be too soon.

History teaches that every generation has to dree its own weird, and the wheel gets reinvented over and over; same shit, different day. Mr Obama swore with a whole heart to get America out of Afghanistan and to close Gitmo, and we know how that went. In 2006, Mr Harper swore that the Canadians would bring rule of law to Kandahar, but in 2011 we were glad to call it quits in that province after laying 19 kilometers of roadbed. In 2010, we deployed an air wing to the Med to join the NATO bombing mission in Libya in the hope of achieving "regime change" and witnessed the result; then, only four years later, the same gummint sends another air detachment off to bomb Syria. Amnesia, anyone?

Ah, crap. The kitchen floor needs washing, and I need to "changer les idees".

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 03:32 PM

hope you're aware that quite a few of the powers that be are young themselves -- check out our new Prime Minister!

Young in years and young at heart are two different things and anyone who is, or wishes to be, prime minister is disqualified from being young at heart :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Black belt caterpillar wrestler
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 03:58 PM

The simple fact that there was no special mention made of the 200th anniversary of Nelson's death at the battle of Trafalgar on 21th October makes me think that WW1 is relatively getting too much attention.
I can remember my great-grandmother, who met people who fought in the Napoleonic wars.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 04:08 PM

Sorry Caterpillar you're 10 years out.

The 200th anniversary of Trafalgar was in 2005 when British and French vessels "re-enacted" the battle.

The ship I used to be crew on took part as HMS Victory

Oh course being 2005 there were no "winners" or "losers"

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 04:47 PM

Charmion, may I congratulate you on two powerful posts.

That is exactly how I feel about modern society.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Joe Offer
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 04:53 PM

The line from the article that struck me is this: The most fortunate in our society have turned the solemnity of remembrance for fallen soldiers in ancient wars into a justification for our most recent armed conflicts.

I was about to be drafted in 1970, and I couldn't bring myself to find any justification for the war in Vietnam. To keep out of that war, I enlisted for four years instead of the two-year draft, but then was released after three years of service. I got a guarantee of German training and assignment to Germany, and I ended up doing intelligence work in Berlin. I did good work, and I think it was worthwhile. I figure the more we know about our enemy, the less likely we are to end up in warfare.

So, I did my time, but I intentionally avoided the war. I can't say I have any particular pride in having served in the Army, but I think I did a good service for my country and learned a lot in the process.

Sometimes I'll wear a pin or a poppy to show I'm a veteran, but I'm conflicted about it.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 05:22 PM

BTW Charmion - I am sure you are right about the young being no more savvy than anyone else. I worded that incorrectly. The emphasis should have been that they are better informed than anyone else has been so should be more savvy. To quote another song, you may say that I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one. At least I hope not :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Paul Burke
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 05:43 PM

If I can find one, I intend to wear a white feather during the poppy season, in commemoration (not celebration) of those many who joined the forces against their better judgement (whether as volunteers or conscripts) because of fear of social or legal consequences. And of course of those many who remained in the army for fear of legal consequences.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Joe Offer
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 06:14 PM

When people tell me, "Thank you for your service," I think I'd prefer the sentiments that Paul Burke expressed. I'm certainly one who joined the Army against my better judgment.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 09:32 PM

I'll stick a quid in the poppy man's collection tin but he can keep the bloody poppy and sell it to somebody else. I hate the poppy-wearing pressure, I hate the auto-poppy brigade on the telly that we see weeks in advance and I hate the military pomp surrounding each Remembrance Day.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: mg
Date: 05 Nov 15 - 10:16 PM

We as
Re supposed to lay a lot of attention to wwl. That is why we have the holiday.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Kampervan
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 12:02 AM

I totally agree with many of the people posting above who have reservations about wearing a poppy, especially in light of the way that it has almost become 'unpatriotic' to be seen without one at this time of year.

It seems that, despite the ever increasing interest in remembrance day, we (or our leaders) are incapable of actually learning any lessons.

But despite this, one way or another, we must honour the memory of those who died, and the best way of doing that is to demonstrate that we have learned from their sacrifices and put more emphasis on avoiding adding to the ranks of those damaged by war.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 04:37 AM

dave,
The powers that be are trying their best to make sure young people never even know about it, let alone forget.

"The Department for Education and the Department for Communities and Local Government are also jointly funding a project which will provide the opportunity for two pupils and one teacher from every state funded secondary school in England to participate in battlefield tours of the western front from spring 2014 to March 2019. This will be a high quality educational project which will strengthen participants' knowledge and understanding of the First World War as well as giving them the opportunity to develop related projects in their communities. "

WW1 is included in the Secondary Schools History curriculum, and can also be taught in Primary Schools.

Poppies and Remembrance have traditionally been about acknowledging the sacrifices of WW1 and WW2.
What are the lessons "we (or our leaders) are incapable of actually learning?" about those conflicts?

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Raggytash
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 04:41 AM

Anyone anything to say about the article in the OP?

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 05:57 AM

Kelso school in the Scottish Borders have annual trips to the WWI battlefields - as do many other schools. Both my kids went on the trips. As Keith suggests WWI is generally one of the main subjects on the history curriculum so the trips tie in with the course. The parents normally go to watch them head off and the kids are lined up as if in a pals battalion as they head off on the bus. Diaries are kept and then when they return they write essays, poems and songs about their experiences. My 16 year old daughter brought me back a CD of WWI songs etc. many of them are quite moved by the whole experience so no I wouldn't agree, certainly not here, than the powers that be hide the war from young people!

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Stu
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 06:07 AM

"What are the lessons "we (or our leaders) are incapable of actually learning?" about those conflicts?"

If you have to ask the question I doubt you would understand the answer.

I'll wear a poppy for my family who served and died, and also those who served and shared their experiences with me and taught me about war what those in power obviously don't care about or even seek to comprehend.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 09:18 AM

Here is a link from the Scotsman several years back. Every secondary school in Scotland was offered a gvt grant of £2000 to assist in the cost of school trips to WWI battlefields

http://www.scotsman.com/news/education/schools-to-get-cash-for-wwi-battlefield-trips-1-2937206#axzz3qikDACrj

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 09:33 AM

That is really good, Allan, but again I am probably not getting my point across well enough. Sorry :-( I think it is a wonderful thing if the kids go and learn the real meaning of 'lest we forget'. But if they are not taught that war is abhorrent as well, do they really learn by their ancestors past mistakes? I know my kids were all taught of the horrors of war, including WW1. I am interested to see if my grandkids are taught the same. Or will they be taught it is a good and noble thing to go and get killed or kill other people? I am probably worrying for nothing as schools only provide part of their education anyway. But it is still a concern for me.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 10:19 AM

Well I don't think they came back thinking war is a great thing. The theme very much seemed to be re the vast waste of life and the horror of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 10:25 AM

Glad to hear it! Thanks Allan. Maybe we should do the same trip for politicians and newspaper magnates :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 10:54 AM

But if they are not taught that war is abhorrent as well, do they really learn by their ancestors past mistakes?

I think that everyone knows that, including young people.

Or will they be taught it is a good and noble thing to go and get killed or kill other people?

Of course not.
But they must consider if there is ever a case to defend home and family from the aggression of an evil and cruel tyrant like Hitler or the Kaiser.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Raggytash
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 12:42 PM

There,s a siesmic shift, The Kaiser has just become a cruel tyrant just like Hitler. Is there no end to this mans talents?

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 01:52 PM

"cruel tyrant "
Jingoistic, outdated crap.
He was described (at worst),

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 02:03 PM

whoops!!
"cruel tyrant "
Jingoistic, outdated crap.
He was described (at worst), as bombastic and impious and was noted as a poor wartime leader, but that was about it - (after all, - he was the grandchild of her Maj, Vickie (gawd bless her).
On the other hand, our ally, King Leopold II of the (Gallant Little) Belgians, was renowned for cutting the hands off Congolese plantation workers if they didn't meet their rubber quotas, and eventually managed to oversee the massacre of ten million of them - now that's what you can call "Tyranny" with a capital T.
Amazing what you learn by spending a lifetime studying W.W.1!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 02:23 PM

Uh-oh...

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Rapparee
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 02:45 PM

WWI was caused by a bunch of treaties -- The Triple Alliance, The Triple Entente, and others -- that provided a "domino effect". Like a bunch of kids shouting "He's my friend! You can't do that to him!" and a schoolyard brawl breaks out -- only in this one millions die. Governments fall (not that they were all lily-white to begin with) and the world changes.

The Treaty of Versailles imposes government-approved looting of German resources, which pisses off the Germans, who follow the rantings of a former Wermacht corporal and blame the Jews for the problems of inflation, unemployment, and so on.

Of course, the glory of the conquered must the restored, so Germany tosses the Treaty and rearms. After taking the Rhineland, Austria, and Czechoslovakia, it makes a treaty with Russia and invades Poland.
Britain and France didn't care before, Hitler assumes they don't care now. He;s wrong and millions die. Of course, his allies, Japan and Italy, also suffer. The whole world suffers, just as it did a quarter century before.

Promises made to various countries during the war so that their support would be gained are kept, but many are broken. France, for instance, promises Indochina independence and reneges; the Vietnam war results and many, many die. Korea is divided at the 38th parallel, and Stalin back Kim Il Sung, who invades in 1950. Millions die, and as usual a country is devastated (this war has not ended and North Korea abrogated the truce a couple years ago).

It all hangs together....

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Teribus
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 04:02 PM

" I know my kids were all taught of the horrors of war, including WW1. I am interested to see if my grandkids are taught the same. Or will they be taught it is a good and noble thing to go and get killed or kill other people?"

Now that last bit - "Or will they be taught it is a good and noble thing to go and get killed or kill other people?" - rather puzzles me. Can anybody dredge up any examples at all of such a thing EVER happening, or any such view EVER having been stated?

Buying and wearing a poppy is in no way a "political" statement - what you are doing is supporting a charity. Attending a national or local commemoration ceremony is an act of remembrance where individuals and associations acknowledge the sacrifices made by others. At no time at all in recent years have I seen any attempt to celebrate or glorify war by anyone. Those who think different have been challenged on this forum to provide examples where any politician in this country has mentioned "celebrating" WWI, they have singularly and notably failed to do so and according to extracts from Hansard only the word "commemoration" has ever been used.

The article linked to in the OP is exactly what I would expect to read in any "Guinard" article on the subject - what else would you expect them to publish.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 05:19 PM

Now that last bit - "Or will they be taught it is a good and noble thing to go and get killed or kill other people?" - rather puzzles me.

Why is that then, Teribums? Can you not understand speculation? Is it not allowed in your little world of homage to your masters? No-one has ever said it will happen. And how come you very obviously omitted the next sentence in the same paragraph - "I am probably worrying for nothing as schools only provide part of their education anyway.". Is it by any chance because you chose to follow your role models, the popular press, in distorting the truth?

Talking of the press. You may note that the Guardian was only the vehicle for the article. It was written by a chap called Harry Leslie Smith who, according to his mini bio, is a survivor of the Great Depression, a second world war RAF veteran and an activist for the poor and for the preservation of social democracy. He has written several books about Britain during the depression, the war, and postwar austerity.

Now, who do I take more notice of, I wonder...

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 05:25 PM

The axe grinders are grinding,
Grinding, grinding
The axe grinders are grinding, my god but aren't they a bore.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,pensée
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 06:01 PM

My Dad (R.I.P.) was in Belgium in '44
steading men about to lose their legs
then piling lost legs and burning them
A good man-
who never wanted to seeEurope again

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 06:11 PM

My dad escaped from a concentration camp
He was happy that the Germans were defeated.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,pensée
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 06:24 PM

Very brave indeed.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 08:47 PM

I will continue to wear a poppy at this season (albeit a 'pin badge' these days)
I have worn one each year since very young, and did many years distributing them, and organising distribution. (and counting & banking the money).
I will be in church for the Remembrance service on the nearest Sunday (8/11 this year) although I will continue to wear my poppy until 11th/11th.
I occasionally get a new poppy (old ones get lost etc.) but usually re-use an earlier one. This is not being tight-fisted, the donation still goes in the collecting box.
I quietly thank God that I have never been called upon to go to war, and also give thanks for those who did so believing that they were standing up for what was right (no matter what the truth may have been).
They have left us a great example of service. My one time GSM (Group Scout Master) had been a P.O.W. in the far east. He would give us yarns of how the men kept each other going. He never forgave the Japanese, and although I believe in forgiveness, and hope I would be able to forgive in similar circumstances, I am not one who is entitled to judge his lack of forgiveness.

"They shall grow not old,
As we that are left grow old.
Age shall not weary them,
Nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun, and in the morning,
We will remember them!"

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Rapparee
Date: 06 Nov 15 - 09:04 PM

"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori."

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Nov 15 - 03:45 AM

"what else would you expect them to publish."
Harry Patch's condemnation of the war would do nicely - he was a true hands-on expert
"Patch told the then prime minister, Tony Blair, that nobody during the first world war should have been shot for cowardice. "War is organised murder," he insisted, "and nothing else." He said that, for him, 11 November was "just showbusiness". Instead, "the day I lost my pals", 22 September 1917, was his true remembrance day. Trench dogs had fought over biscuits snaffled from dead men's tunics, and Patch had thought, "what are we doing that's really any different? Two civilised nations, British and German, fighting for our lives."
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 07 Nov 15 - 04:07 AM

I will continue to wear a poppy at this season (albeit a 'pin badge' these days)
I have worn one each year since very young, and did many years distributing them, and organising distribution. (and counting & banking the money).
I will be in church for the Remembrance service on the nearest Sunday (8/11 this year) although I will continue to wear my poppy until 11th/11th.
I occasionally get a new poppy (old ones get lost etc.) but usually re-use an earlier one. This is not being tight-fisted, the donation still goes in the collecting box.
"I quietly thank God that I have never been called upon to go to war, and also give thanks for those who did so believing that they were standing up for what was right (no matter what the truth may have been).
They have left us a great example of service. My one time GSM (Group Scout Master) had been a P.O.W. in the far east. He would give us yarns of how the men kept each other going. He never forgave the Japanese, and although I believe in forgiveness, and hope I would be able to forgive in similar circumstances, I am not one who is entitled to judge his lack of forgiveness.

"They shall grow not old,
As we that are left grow old.
Age shall not weary them,
Nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun, and in the morning,
We will remember them!"

Amen.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 07 Nov 15 - 04:09 AM

Apologies - everything except "Amen" was a quote from Nigel's post, and should have been italicised. Bloody stupid HTML, bloody old-fashioned Mudcat.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Nov 15 - 08:36 AM

Interesting how Keith A of Hertford refers to "sacrifice" in this thread. On other threads he reckons that dying in battle through jingoistic ignorance was a justified endeavour.

I used to wear a poppy for the same reasons as others; expectation and not sticking out for what shallow people would call a bad reason. If governments send people to die unnecessarily, the least they can do is look after the veterans rather than expect charities to subsidise the blood on politicians' hands.

There are no WW1 veterans left. Time to move on rather than the sickening revision of history presently being popularised by attention seeking "historians" and their impressionable sycophants.

I wore no poppy this year or last and nobody noticed. Progress.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Nov 15 - 10:13 AM

"They shall grow not old,
As we that are left grow old.
Age shall not weary them,
Nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun, and in the morning,
We will remember them!"

I visit the spot several times a year where Laurence Binyon wrote his poem, where there's a bench to sit on and a little slate plaque bearing these lines. Beyond the place there's a magnificent view of the Rumps headland beyond pillow lava cliffs. It's one of my very favourite places in the whole world. It's an easy uphill walk from Polzeath on the coast path to a few hundred yards past Pentire Point, though we always park at Pentireglaze farm and do a circular walk from there, taking in the Rumps, where you have to watch your feet. If you do the walk around mid- to late May the steep slopes and cliffs are alive with thrift and bluebells. We never miss!

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Nov 15 - 10:33 AM

On other threads he (Keith) reckons that dying in battle through jingoistic ignorance was a justified endeavour.

I did not and do not.
I deny that they were all ignorant or jingoistic.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Thompson
Date: 07 Nov 15 - 10:44 AM

I find it quite, quite scary how British TV presenters, newsreaders, interviewees are all wearing poppies in lockstep. Very very nationalistic, and British nationalism has done one hell of a lot of harm in this world over the centuries. It terrifies me, and seems kind of fascistic.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Megan L
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 07:02 AM

14th September 1914 Battle of Aisne Private David Sinclair

No jingoism or patriotic fervour "I'd better go lass they will call me up soon enough." Janet Sinclair received the telegram every woman dreaded "Missing presumed dead" from that day till her own death in May 1960 Janet Sinclair kept a light lit in the window every night.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 07:05 AM

I watched the Albert Hall gig on the BBC last night and, to be honest, I can only describe it as mawkish. Don't get me wrong, I think commemorating the dead and reminding oursleves not to do it again is a good thing. I would even go for the pomp and ceremony. But the over-egged display of emotion did nothing for me but put me off visiting the experience again next year. Not even a Jim Radford
moment to cut the saccharine :-(

I also felt the appropriation of the event by the church particularly disturbing. There were many that died who believed in a different god or none at all. Are they not to be commemorated in the same way? Why make it all about Christianity? I guess it was supposed to be uplifting but I found it quite the opposite. Maybe just me...

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Thompson
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 09:26 AM

But is it "reminding ourselves not to do it again"? All the talk of "heroes" and "dying for our country" scarcely seems to give that message.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 09:59 AM

"But is it "reminding ourselves not to do it again""
Obviously not, from the fact that there is not a year since at least the end of W.W.1. when a war hasn't been taking place somewhere on the planet.
Perhaps it would be worth commemorating the fallen by reiterating exactly what these 'official' wars are - basically, young people being shipped off, often forcibly, under threat of punishment, to kill other young people they have never met and have no quarrel with at the behest of politicians.
Not going to happen of course - too many interests at stake.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 10:37 AM

Well, it is what it reminds me about. Looking at some of the postings on this forum others are not of the same mind. I can only hope that eventually the ones who want to learn from past mistakes will be in the majority.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 11:07 AM

But is it "reminding ourselves not to do it again"?

So next time we let Hitler have free reign to enslave all those not worthy of putting to death?
Communists were quite high on his list.

I find it quite, quite scary how British TV presenters, newsreaders, interviewees are all wearing poppies in lockstep.

Perhaps they want to acknowledge why they are not restricted to broadcasting propaganda, and in German.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 11:18 AM

Professor, is it absolutely NECESSARY for you to continually display your ignorance and uncomprehension? Just curious.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 11:20 AM

It's not about fight or be enslaved. It's about fining a better way. I don't know what it is because I am not clever enough. But someone must be able to figure it out and others must learn.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Raggytash
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 01:01 PM

What is rememberance sunday if NOT propaganda. You really should choose your words more carefully.

And before any of you get on your high horses I do think we should remember our dead and endeavour to ensure it doesn't happen again.........and again ....... and again

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 01:37 PM

The Second World War was very different to W.W.1. - one was territorial - about protecting the Empire - the latter was a genuine attempt to stop a real "tyrant" - no comparison.
Even so, Germany was rearmed, and Hitler,could have been stopped before he got started - he was welcomed as a "bulwark against Communism" (Churchill) and despite what was happening to the Jews in Germany, the British authorities were still prepared to appease the fascists right up to the "peace in our time" speech.
There were high-up members of the British establishment whop welcomed Fascism
"Perhaps they want to acknowledge"
And perhasps they have been bullied into wearing one, like the black T.V. presenter who received a barrage of racist hate mail - letters appeared in the press demanding that presenters who wouldn't wear one were sacked.
Gi' us a break
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: The Sandman
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 02:16 PM

Britain's most decorated enlisted soldier in WW1 was a conscientious objector who never fired a shot
by Tom Martinscroft, 9 November 2014 - History - Ancient, Medieval &

Lance-Corporal William Harold Coltman VC, DCM & Bar, MM & Bar volunteered for Army service in January 1915, but requested to serve as a non-combatant stretcher-bearer due to his religious beliefs.


When 23 year-old Coltman was sent to the Western Front as a rifleman with the North Staffordshire (Prince of Wales) Regiment, the horrors of battle convinced him that helping his wounded colleagues rather than taking the life of the enemy was the greater matter of conscience.

His decision actually placed him in far greater danger than that faced by his comrades. Slightly built and just 5 feet 4 inches tall, he lugged the dead weight of casualties (sometimes on his own, carrying them on his back) across the quagmire of no-man's-land without the means to defend himself.

His courage and his unwillingness to give up until all the wounded had been rescued, often long after his battalion had been relieved, began to earn recognition when he was mentioned in dispatches and awarded the Croix de Guerre by the French Army.

In February 1917 he was awarded the Military Medal (MM), a level 3 gallantry award, for rescuing a wounded officer from no-man's-land.

He was awarded a bar to his MM for his conduct behind the front line in June 1917, when he removed stocks of hand grenades from a store which had been set alight by mortar fire, as well as rescuing men trapped in a collapsed tunnel.

He was awarded the Distinguished Conduct Medal (DCM), a level 2 gallantry award, for his actions over a period of days in July 1917. He saved many lives at great personal risk by evacuating wounded from the front line under shell fire. He continued to search for wounded throughout the night under shell and machine gun fire.

He was awarded a bar to his DCM for his conduct in late September 1918 when he treated and carried many wounded men under heavy artillery fire. He continued his work through the following day without rest or sleep, indifferent to shell and machine-gun fire, and refused to stop until he was positive that his sector was clear of wounded.

A week later his actions earned him the Victoria Cross, the highest award for gallantry in the face of the enemy that can be awarded to British and Commonwealth forces.

During the allies' advance in the last stages of the war, Coltman tended to the wounded without a break for 48 hours. When he heard that more wounded men had been left behind during a retirement, he went forward alone in the face of fierce enfilade fire, found the casualties, treated them, and on three successive occasions carried his comrades on his back to safety, saving their lives.

Coltman never sought adulation for his courage. After receiving his Victoria Cross from King George V at Buckingham Palace in May 1919, he went straight home to avoid a civic reception in his honour in his home town of Burton-on-Trent, Staffordshire.

On demobilization, he quietly took a job as a groundskeeper with the Burton-on-Trent Parks Department, from which he retired in 1963. During WW2, he commanded the Burton-on-Trent Army Cadet Force in the rank of Captain.

William Harold Coltman VC, DCM & Bar, MM & Bar, died in Burton-on-Trent in 1974 at the age of 82. He once expressed the hope that future generations would know nothing of war, beyond what they read in books, and that there would come a time when no Victoria Cross could be won

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 03:43 PM

I was sitting in the A and E of our local hospital. Looked around- there were. About 20 people of all sorts sitting or standing. Two were wearing poppies. The rest of us weren't been disrespectful, we just weren't wearing poppies, in the same way as most people.

The hype about it being some kind of dereliction of duty not to do so is absurd and sometimes intimidating, especially when it comes to TV. And I'm sure for every person who gets bullied into putting one on, there are many who don't do so because they dislike that kind of bullying.

I see today they had some kind of big Albert Hall event, with the Queen in attendance and a.range of performers, including Rod Stewart. A kind of Royal Variety Show with poppies...

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Paul Burke
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 04:12 PM

In any case, all this "remembrance" manages to forget that the vast majority of war casualties, in most wars in the gunpowder age and afterwards, were civilians. Any real remembrance would include remembering that Britain refused refugee status to Jews (and others) fleeing from the Nazis, and specifically apply that memory to modern conditions. Yes, we allowed the Kindertransporten. But we denied refuge to their parents and grandparents.

Proper Little Madams (remember them?) sang a song about it almost 40 years ago:

Lest we forget the little children burned alive by napalm's fire,
Lest we forget the dead civilians hanging tangled in the wire,
And the faces of the women raped and shattered to the core-
It's not only men in uniform that pay the price of war,
Lest we forget.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 05:25 PM

Kevin, the whole bloody thing makes me feel horrible once every year. I think we treat wounded service men and women terribly. I'm not a pacifist and I'm proud of the blokes and women who sign up. A generation ago it seemed like a great career in which you'd learn fantastic skills. It's still like that, but nowadays you're almost certainly going to be sent to the front line in some bloody useless damaging conflict. But the young people who sign up are not particularly ideological. They see defending our country as a very virtuous way of doing good as well as helping themselves, and that's as fine as it gets. But every year the militarisation of the poppy and the glorification of war goes on apace. All the parades are militarised, replete with marching bands and royals wearing acres of medals that they have simply not earned. It's sickening. I have nothing against the genuine old boys and the wounded proudly parading with their medals. The best part of the programme this morning was the interview with the mother and sister of the fine young bloke who was shot to death in Afghanistan five years ago. For me, beside that, all the silly pomp melted away.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 05:50 PM

Cue music, and segue to This

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 06:19 PM

Cheers, Greg. I've also just sent that link to my sister who is on her way home from an Unthanks gig. That song is a bullshit-free zone.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 06:55 PM

Two words sums up the Twentieth Century - machine gun

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Joe Offer
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 08:09 PM

What can I say, olliamh? I seriously considered filing as a Conscientious Objector, but at that time in the U.S., C.O. status required total pacifism. At the time, I could not honestly say that I would be a total pacifist if my country were attacked, and I could not bring myself to oppose what I still believe to be true about Western participation in World War II.

But in good conscience, I could not bring myself to participate in the Vietnam War. So, I enlisted for a job I could agree with, for a 4-year commitment instead of 2 (and then was released after 3 years). After training, I went to Berlin and studied the Communist government of East Germany for two years. One goal I set for myself was to find out why it was we were supposed to hate communists. I found out the East German Communists were just plain folks, although they tended to be a bit bureaucratic.

In the meantime, I have become more stubbornly a pacifist - but it doesn't cost me as much now, since they can't conscript me or imprison me for opposing warfare. So, olliamh, what price did you pay to resist the (admittedly) immoral draft for Vietnam? I paid with four years of my life instead of accepting the 2-year draft. What did you do?

Gee, am I required to state that I have never supported child rapists or Nazis? It seems that to deny an accusation like that, is to give credence to it. I wonder where olliamh gets those accusations from.

I'd like to believe that today's society has a more realistic view of the horrors of war, and that is no longer considered unpatriotic to describe war as horrific. But I'm not so sure. It was not so long ago that the U.S. Department of Defense prohibited the press from taking photographs of the caskets of soldiers returning from the Middle East to Dover, Delaware - that was during the George W. Bush administration, when it was important to the Administration to convince American voters that we were winning the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 08:37 PM

I really don't know why you dignified that horrible post with a response, Joe.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Joe Offer
Date: 08 Nov 15 - 08:58 PM

Well, Steve, it gave me an opportunity to explain the process I went through to deal with the challenge of conscription. It was a difficult decision, and there were no answers that were completely right. I don't blame anybody for whatever decision they made about the draft at that time. A few of my German language school classmates were reservists. They finished their training and went home, since reservists were never called to active duty at the time. But they did their time, and I can't blame them.
Nowadays, reservists aren't safe any more. In the last 15 years, very few U.S. military reservists have been able to avoid being sent to war.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Nov 15 - 03:25 AM

"I found out the East German Communists were just plain folks"
My experience exactly, having spent some time hitching over Central and Eastern Europe in the sixties, including half a dozen Communist countries - a friendly, welcoming people, happy to talk of their lives and interested in ours.
One of the most moving experiences was when two of is hitched into Czechoslovakia in 1968 on the morning the Russians re-opened the border and spent two weeks in Prague with a bunch of students, mainly arguing with Russian soldiers as to why their government had invaded - very few "enemies" in those discussions.
People are people and politicians are..... well.... what they are!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Nov 15 - 04:25 AM

Paul,
Association of Jewish Refugees.
"Most Jewish refugees from Germany and Austria found it very difficult to enter
Britain. However, by September 1939 about 70,000 Jews had been granted refuge
in this country. The main area of settlement was North-West London.
Among those who obtained entry visas were many women who came as domestic
servants. Almost 10,000 Jewish children were admitted without visas on
Kindertransports. Several thousand men arrived on transit visas, which allowed
them to re-emigrate to other countries.
The Jewish community in Britain responded actively to the desperate plight of
Jews in the Third Reich. The Central British Fund for German Jewry was set up to
raise funds. The CBF guaranteed the government that it would bear all costs of
maintaining the Jewish refugees. The Jewish Refugees Committee and other
Anglo-Jewish organisations found homes for the children and accommodation and
jobs for the adults.
In February 1939 these organisations and their Christian and charitable
counterparts were housed in Bloomsbury House, London, a lifeline for many a
desperate refugee. Initially, many refugees were destitute and faced a desperate
struggle to maintain themselves and their dependents, while also coping with the
emotional and psychological aftermath of enforced emigration."

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Nov 15 - 04:45 AM

Greg,
Professor, is it absolutely NECESSARY for you to continually display your ignorance and uncomprehension?

Same old Greg bile.
Same old inability to identify a single actual fault.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Nov 15 - 05:34 AM

"Association of Jewish Refugees."
None of which in any way negates the fact that Hitler was being appeased right up to the start of the war - taking in refugees is a little like leaving the stable door wide open while the horses are still bolting and then cleaning up some of the mess.
The British establishment was riddled with Antisemitism and pro Nazism even while the war was being fought and businessmen, politicians and the nobility were preparing an interim Government for the day "Herr Hitler won".
Even the former King was in line to return to the throne
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Nov 15 - 05:57 AM

Jim, Britain declared war on Germany when they refused to withdraw from Poland.
Happy with that?
Weak as a result of disarmament, we were in no position to stand alone against them.
It was a remarkable though costly achievement that we did.

Britain could have done more for Jewish refugees, but no country did better.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Nov 15 - 06:02 AM

"Happy with that?"
Britain went to war when they had no other alternative - anything they might have done to oppose the rise of fascism in Europe beforehand, they didn't do and denigrated and criminalised those who dis as "premature ant-fascists"
Not happy with that at all
Enough of this dialogue - we know where you stand on Britain's appeasement
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Nov 15 - 06:13 AM

Britain went to war when they had no other alternative

There was an alternative.
More appeasement instead of an ultimatum and a declaration of war.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Paul Burke
Date: 09 Nov 15 - 09:42 AM

Keith, Yes, we allowed the Kindertransporten. But we denied refuge to their parents and grandparents.
is what I wrote.

Most Jewish refugees from Germany and Austria found it very difficult to enter Britain. is what the Association of Jewish Refugees wrote.


And the 70000 admitted is similar to the stingy 125000 our current goverment has offered to admit (over several years) from those hundreds of thousands or millions fleeing countries which we are either currently fighting in, or the government is discussing fighting in. So much for remembrance.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Nov 15 - 10:03 AM

Another thread poised for ruination by incessant Kiethsturbation.

Can we please ignore The Professor, folks, and get on with the thread?

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Teribus
Date: 09 Nov 15 - 10:08 AM

"The hype about it being some kind of dereliction of duty not to do so is absurd and sometimes intimidating"

What "hype"? Not once have I felt that I HAD to wear a poppy because of any peer-pressure to do so - whether you wear one or not is entirely voluntary, entirely up to the individual.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Nov 15 - 10:17 AM

Paul, I accept we could have done more, but did any country do more for Jewish refugees than Britain did?

Also, had Britain not stood up to Hitler, at terrible cost, how much worse it would have been.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Black belt caterpillar wrestler
Date: 09 Nov 15 - 10:24 AM

I have yet to see anyone wearing a poppy this year, apart from on TV.
Perhaps the hype is losing its effect.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Nov 15 - 02:15 PM

Professor, tell your story walking, eh? If you want to discuss Jewish refugees, mushroom hunting, mosquito control & etc start your own goddamn thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Nov 15 - 11:47 PM

Greg, I have not raised any of those issues.
Paul Burke raised the issue of Jewish refugees, so your criticism is clearly directed at him.

Black belt caterpillar wrestler - do not worry. Poppy sales increase year on year, as does attendance at remembrance events.
The poppy factory is having to increase capacity.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Nov 15 - 02:53 AM

Stalin had to increase tractor production in The Ukrain too.

Similar story.

Similar reality.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 15 - 07:56 AM

"The poppy factory is having to increase capacity."
Perhaps because they are not £25 pounds each this year as were the ceramic ones last year.
Only one third of the profits from the poppies went to charity - the rest (suggested to have amounted to £10m) went to 'expenses' - undisclosed.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 10 Nov 15 - 08:02 AM

Was there ever any truth in the rumour I heard as a child that the Haig family benefited financially from the Poppy Fund.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Nov 15 - 08:06 AM

Or perhaps Black belt caterpillar wrestler - 09 Nov 15 - 10:24 AM - there's NO "hype" at all.

In the days when people wore jackets there were things called lapels with button holes - no such things on T-shirts and hoodies - makes wearing the poppies as currently sold a bit difficult.

Could be something to do with your neighbourhood or part of the country, plenty of poppy wearers in evidence from what I have observed

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Charmion
Date: 10 Nov 15 - 08:18 AM

No, Raggy; that was a foul canard. Here's a quote from Wikipedia:

"After retiring from the service, Haig devoted the rest of his life to the welfare of ex-servicemen, making many speeches (which did not come easily to him) and answering all letters in his own hand.[232] Haig pushed for the amalgamation of organisations, quashing a suggestion of a separate organisation for officers, into The Royal British Legion which was founded in June 1921. He visited South Africa in 1921, Newfoundland in 1924, and Canada in 1925 (visits to Australia and New Zealand were being planned when he died) to promote ex-servicemen's interests. He was instrumental in setting up the Haig Fund for the financial assistance of ex-servicemen and the Haig Homes charity to ensure they were properly housed; both continue to provide help many years after they were created."

The source of the above information is "Douglas Haig, 1861-1928" by Gerard J. de Groot, published in 1989.

Whatever his failings as a commander in the field, it is clear from plenty of evidence that his post-war life was dedicated to helping veterans.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 10 Nov 15 - 08:31 AM

Sadly Charmion your post does not address the crux of the issue other than stating the rumour was a foul canard.

I have no doubt Haig did many things ex servicemen and for the Royal British Legion but that does not say anything about how the monies from the Poppy Appeal (or Haig Fund as it was first named) were distributed or whether he and his family benefitted financially from it.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Nov 15 - 08:45 AM

I think charities and those who devoted their services to them back then did so for no reward whatsoever - could be that Raggytash is thinking of how things are done today where big charities cream of about 80% to 90% of the take to pay their "bosses" six figure salaries and to pay for jetting around "fund raising".

Not a single penny of the sums raised went to Haig or to any member of his family - look into the rules related to setting up charities and the running of charitable trusts.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 10 Nov 15 - 08:49 AM

I am going back to rumours I heard over 50 years ago.

I can't recall my father (Royal Navy 1943-46) ever wearing a poppy though.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Nov 15 - 09:24 AM

GUEST,Raggytash (Date: 10 Nov 15 - 08:02 AM)

As a child who was it spreading the rumour? Now 50 years on do you look back and reflect if they were knowledgeable? (leans to weighing up on whether they were credible or not) What did they do? What was their "inside" track to know the workings of the Haig Fund, the Haig Charitable Housing Trust and the Royal British Legion?

All the above I would have thought obvious questions to reflect on before throwing a scurrilous rumour out again for discussion. Another obvious move if the prospect bothers you would have been to write to the Haig Fund/RBL and ask them - kite flying one of your hobbies is it?

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Nov 15 - 09:42 AM

I had meant to post this in response to 06 Nov 15 - 09:04 PM, but was distracted:

If in some smothering dreams, you too could pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin;
If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,—
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Raggytash
Date: 10 Nov 15 - 10:19 AM

Guest, I posted the question to see if anyone could throw light upon the subject. I thought that was the purpose of a discussion forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: MikeL2
Date: 10 Nov 15 - 10:29 AM

Hi BBCW

I don't know where you live or what you do there, but where we live most of the people we see in the High Street or the pubs and around our home are wearing poppies. What I have noticed though is a gradual reduction of poppies fastened to the front (mainly) of cars and other vehicles. We both wear our poppies in remembrance of all the people who died in all the conflicts and wars. Not with pride but in sorrow of the devastating losses on all sides.

My Grandfather fought in WW1 and my father in WW2 when he was badly injured and taken prisoner. He always wore a poppy and went on the Remembrance Parades.

I was in the RAF and though I went to Suez I was not involved in any
fighting. I was awarded campaign and service medals which I never wore once I came out of the RAF. I used to go on the Parades but I don't now-a-days. I will observe the silence as I watch it on TV.

In Remembrance

MikeL2

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Nov 15 - 11:21 AM

The questions (all reasonable IMHO) still stand:

- Were those who were spreading these rumours knowledgeable?
- Were those spreading the rumous credible?
- What did they do? Did they work for the Haig Fund, the Haig Charitable Housing Trust or the Royal British Legion?

Additional question - what on earth led you to believe that they had access to the financial records of any of the following:

- The Haig Fund
- The Haig Charitable Housing Trust
- The Royal British Legion
- The personal banking transactions of Haig or any member of his family

Because unless they had then the source of the baseless rumour-mongering was probably just good old plain tooth-sucking envy as your father was ex-RN he'd know the meaning of the phrase. Nothing at all so despicable as besmirching someone who is unable to defend themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Raggytash
Date: 10 Nov 15 - 12:37 PM

Guest, I have no idea of how to respond to your post. I have told you I was a child at the time when I first heard these rumours. Thats all they were rumours. Now in an attempt to try and get clear, truthful and precise answers to those rumours I have posted to this thread.

I am afraid your negative response to my query does nothing to dispel those rumours.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 10 Nov 15 - 02:35 PM

They don't seem to sell poppies in our village, tho they used to bring them to the doors with their collection tins up to a few years ago. I expect the villager who organised it has died; but if I find any on sale I will spend a pound or two on one.

Meanwhile I shall wear my National Service Medal tomorrow, as I generally do on the actual anniversary of the 1918 Armistice, 11 November.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Nov 15 - 04:05 PM

VD&Bar?

Don't worry Raggytash. Mudcat seems to have the odd creature who trolls like the guest having a pop at you. The internet gives them an outlet for getting a stiffy that normal real social interaction could never deliver. Personality disorder is difficult to countenance but the internet is full of them.

Calling it The Haig Fund is bound to have attracted such concern, justified or otherwise. In addition, years ago before discredited people such as Max Hastings and others were asked to revise history to sanitise our inglorious past, Haig's justifiable reputation as The Butcher of The Somme would have made people suspect of any attempt to rehabilitate him.

de Groot was financed by Haig's family for his kind history. Perhaps Wilipedia accidentally forgot to mention that?

Isn't life strange?

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 10 Nov 15 - 10:52 PM

Guest, could you give us a source for the information that the Haig samily funded deGroots biography ? I am very curious about that!

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Nov 15 - 11:37 PM

Can't remember seeing any red poppies fixed to front of cars - I suspect that the Red Nose days did for that.

Actually, in the light of the fuss about public figures not wearing red poppies, I'd love the same principle to be applied to Red Nose Day. Parliamentary Question Time would be greatly improved by this.

As for the matter of respect for veterans, my father was with the 8th Army in North Africa and up throuh Italy, and never wore a Red Poppy in his life. Never sung God Save the King, or the Queen either.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Thompson
Date: 11 Nov 15 - 03:24 AM

Anyone know anything about William Coltman's family and childhood? He sounds like some man for one man!
If we're going to go back to talking about fighting Hitler, does anyone have access to British newspaper archives online? It might be instructive to look for the editorials on 4 March 1933 (I think it was) when Hitler swept into power, and see whether the Establishment represented by those newspapers approved or disapproved of this very thuggish party taking over Germany, which until then had been the intellectual light of Europe even during the days of starvation when English Quakers ran soup kitchens to feed the starving children in the 1920s.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Nov 15 - 07:03 AM

Look, the cocoon of smug patriotism is what gets the buggers through the day.

Don't upset them by relating real rather than jingoism tainted history...

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Nov 15 - 12:40 PM

So Raggytash a rumour you heard over 50 years ago sticks in your mind yet you have no idea as to how you came to hear this rumour, or who was spreading it - frankly I find that unbelievable and totally lacking in credulity.

As you cannot provide any detail relating to these "rumours" of yours then it can only be assumed that those you heard them from had no connection and therefore no inside knowledge related to the working of any of the organisations that Haig and his family were supposed to have ripped off. Exactly why someone who had been elevated to the peerage and awarded £100,000 by Parliament in 1919 (Equivalent of £3.61 million today) should rip-off a charity that he created is beyond me, added to the fact that Haig had his own private income courtesy of the Haig & Haig Distillery worth roughly £10,000 per year serves not only to dispel your rumour commonsense would lean towards your rumour being blown to smithereens.

Come back and peddle your rumour when you've hung some meat on it's bones.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Nov 15 - 12:44 PM

Hi Teribus. Lost your cookie?

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Black belt caterpillar wrestler
Date: 11 Nov 15 - 02:18 PM

An update on poppy wearing.
I have seen 10 people wearing poppies today. 8 of them were my MP, council members and BT representatives, at a meeting with over 50 members of the public.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Nov 15 - 02:55 PM

Calling it The Haig Fund is bound to have attracted such concern, justified or otherwise.

You are sadly deluded Guest.
It was a huge plus for the campaign.
The man was a great national hero.
He was revered.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 11 Nov 15 - 03:26 PM

Guest, I will say it again.

These were rumours I heard as a child.

BECAUSE there were rumours of course I have no evidence to support them.

What I am trying to discover by asking the question is have they any substance.   

You, merely dismissing the proposition, neither dispels or confirms the rumours, although I am sure there are those who would suggest it tends towards a substantiation of the same.

I gather that is not a premise you would wish to expound.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Nov 15 - 03:34 AM

Yes Keith.

And Rolf Harris was revered too

Jimmy Saville was a national hero

Haig was put on a pedestal representing justification of the carnage, slaughter and waste. Rather fitting given his contribution to it. History relates a less glorious account, despite the recent revisions to sanitise the butcher of The Somme.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Nov 15 - 04:27 AM

He was revered, especially by the men who served under him.
You were wrong to assert, "Calling it The Haig Fund is bound to have attracted such concern,"

No other name in the world would have been as good for the cause.

Rag, as neither you nor anyone else can find anything to remotely support the "rumours" you claim to have heard as a child, we can safely say they were, and are, bollocks.

As a child, I heard some rumours about where babies come from.
I won't bother to make enquiries here about their veracity though.

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

As a child, I heard some rumours about where babies come from.
I won't bother to make enquiries here about their veracity though.

I would say here (Mudcat) was the perfect place to make such enquiries, Keith, and an ideal place to bring up any old rumours or fairytales. They are, after all, part of folklore and to find out how and when they started should be part of the folklorists studies. In fact, I will start a thread forthwith.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 12 Nov 15 - 05:13 AM

Professor, I'll try and keep this simple just for you.

I said I had heard rumours. I did not say they were correct. I asked if there was any justification for them.

I asked that because I didn't know. It's called trying to find out information.

Simples................

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Nov 15 - 05:34 AM

Here it is.

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

Rumours you heard as a child - strange that you cannot remember who you heard them from - strange that no other poster to this thread heard any similar rumour - that because it was extremely "local"?

If the rumour was spread by Earl Haig or his wife's Bank Manager they might be credible, likewise any office-holder within the British Legion who had any form of budgetary responsibility. If the rumour was spread by some disaffected Joe Bloggs in the street then it is not credible. If the rumour was spread by someone wishing to tarnish the reputation of a man long dead then the rumour is not credible.

People act as they do for motives that they can justify to themselves. The motive for "ripping off" a charity would be financial gain, in this case in the years between 1919 and 1928 in this period Earl Haig would have received £200,000 (Over £7 million) perfectly legally a massive sum, so financial gain could be reasonably and logically ruled out as a motive.

"The Butcher of the Somme" a title Haig never heard in his lifetime and a title that was only dared to voiced after his death by far lesser men with guilty consciences - I will go with General Pershing's opinion voiced immediately after the end of World War I that Haig was "the man who won the war".

A question for Haig's detractors on this forum, tell me what great tactical changes and innovations were introduced by Moltke, Falkenhayn, Hindenburg, Ludendorff or Groener? What great tactical changes and innovations were introduced by Joffre, Pétain, Nivelle or Foch? On the other hand I could detail many backed and introduced under Haig's command in the British Army.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 12 Nov 15 - 06:24 AM

Guest, if you can remember every detail of your childhood, which in my case is over 50 years ago, you're a better man than I am Gunga Din.

I keep repeating they were RUMOURS, nothing more nothing less. Just something I picked up more than 50 years ago.

Rattling on about Haig the General does nothing to alter that one iota.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Nov 15 - 06:29 AM

I know what you are getting at, Guest, but your statement so financial gain could be reasonably and logically ruled out as a motive. is ludicrous. 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.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Nov 15 - 02:07 PM

Rag, I am sure you would have done a few Google searches for evidence of your claimed rumours before putting them to the forum.
Obviously you came up with nothing, or you would have mentioned it.

You ridicule people for believing things without evidence, so you must now agree with me that your "rumours" are complete bollocks and a waste of everyone's time.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 12 Nov 15 - 03:21 PM

I realise Professor I have no evidence, AGAIN it was a rumour from my childhood.

That is why I posed the question on this forum.

Is that really too difficult for you to comprehend.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Paul Burke
Date: 12 Nov 15 - 05:53 PM

Haig was "the man who won the war".
Rubbish. Here is The Man Who Won The War. He's a bit overwhelmed by the antihuman road system around him and the glitzy but tawdry buildings (is there a word, "glazen"?), and lookedfar more the hero when he dominated the rundown factories and shops at the end of Oldfield Road in Salford. But I had it direct from a couple of 7-year old boys on a 57 bus that this was the man that did it.

Subject: RE: BS: Why a veteran is not wearing a poppy
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Nov 15 - 06:15 PM

I recognised it right away, Paul. Even without the TGWU headquarters :-)

Did the 57 go round Swinton and come back though Pendlebuty or was that the 77? One did that and the other went though Pendlebury and came back though Swinton. Either way, they passed my Grandparents place on Bolton Road. They became the 56 and 57 before they were stopped altogether and one of them went to Belle Vue where I used to watch the speedway and I usually missed the last one back :-(

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

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
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 - 03:42 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 04:27 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
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: 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,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
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: 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,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: 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: 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,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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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,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: 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
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: 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: 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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?