You can always rely on the rancid BBC to try and undermine the glorious achievements of our past – and the Battle of Britain was always going to be in their sights. On Today at 8.31am (no link yet)
“It is the 70th anniversary of Winston Churchill’s speech praising “the few” of the Battle of Britain. History professor Norman Davies and author James Holland discuss whether we in fact mis-remember this hugely significant moment in the nation’s history.”
UPDATE.
The BBC used the 1pm news programme on Radio 4 to interview lady who had played a key part in the preparations for the Battle of Britain and beyond. It finished by her deep regret that Hiroshima was bombed and the assertion “Never Again”. So, even on this day, BBC advanced pacifist agenda.
The BBC love to rubbish British history. As I pointed out in the thread below, Hugh Dowding has not had a single mention on the BBC yet, why?
It was his leadership not Churchill’s that allowed the RAF to prevail.
If the BBC can turn a proud moment in British history – the abolition of the slave trade – into an excuse to brand the British as worse than the nazis, then a re-writing of the Battle of Britain as, what, a major obstacle to European union (one of Hitler’s major political objectives, BTW) is only to be expected.
I’ve always suspected the BBC seceretly admired Hitler, after all the BBC looks up to Stalin, Chavez, Castro and other mass killers.
Hitlers treatment of the Jews would go down well at TV centre I suspect.
And Hitler was a National SOCIALIST who didn’t believe in democracy. So the Beeboids would love him, if only he hadn’t invaded Russia. As usual the real world does not conform to the tiny, twisted, Beeboid mind.
You forgot Mao. All the boxes ticked there for the BBC.
I think the fact that Hitler invaded the Soviet Union is basically the left’s only piece of evidence to support the crazy assertion that Hitler was right wing.
Right-winger: ‘Hitler was into redistribution of income, sacrificing self-interest in favour of the state, declared himself and enemy of capitalism, blamed Jews for everything wrong, and was an environmentalist. That’s basically your typical SWP member. Hell, his party was called the National Socialist German Workers Party. The Nazis were lefties.’
Left-winger: ‘Zomg shut up you facist. Hilter invaded teh Soveit Union. I hope you die in a fire!!1!’
How sick can the BBC get ? There MAY be a degree of debate about the Battle of Britain – but is today the appropriate day for it ?
This is of course the craven appeasing BBC that kept Winston Churchill off the airwaves as inevitable war approached.
The BBC were appeasers even way back then. Before my time, but my late father who lived through the period and was a desert rat in WW2 had a visceral hatred of the BBC. Like father like son !!!!
Martin,
You may be amused that my father’s name was John and , before WW2, he had never set foot out of Scotland . When he joined up , the “Sassenachs” called him ” Jock”, a name which he retained all his life.
His view of the english was ” I quite like them, until it comes to their turn to buy a round of drinks ” !
Slainte !!
I heard some of that rubbish this morning on R4. They were basically trying to belittle our part in the outcome of WWII. One ‘expert’ was most upset at the end because he didn’t get to praise the Poles and Russians enough. We are all aware of the part they played in the war, but we are supposed to be commemorating and remembering our own forces and the sacrifices they made.
I have immense respect for all of the Sailors,Soldiers, Airmen and civilians of that time and feel angry that it seems they went through all that for nothing as the country and way of life they fought hard to save has been squandered away by our feckless and corrupt, any culture but ours loving, lefty socialist political leaders. All walks of the establishment and Public bodies like the BBC seem to be populated by these New Labour toadies.
When you think about it, there is a lot in common between the typical Beeboid and the typical Nazi. Jew-hating, homosexual, paedophilic, British-hating, cocaine-snorting (did the Nazis do that – Ed Balls in his Nazi uniform suggests they probably did!), power-mad – and just plain nasty!
Professor Norman Davies who was trying to belittle the importance of the Battle of Britain was refused tenure at a US university because of allegations that he played down the degree of Polish complicity in the Holocaust. He seems fixated on Polish history – and has a Polish wifde and a home in Krakow. Why on earth did the BBC think him a fit person for this morning’s discussion – except as a XXXX-stirrer ?
………………
And the woman bemoaning Nagasaki was used completely out of context. Her recollections of working as a WAAC in the Battle of Britain should have been the sole focus of any interview today.
Once again showing there is a big yellow pacifist streak at the BBC.
John A,
Would that be “respected left-wing” historian Norman Davies, by any chance ?
And the Nazis were all meat-hating vegetarians…
p.s I am probably being rather unkind to the typical Nazi – but you have to start somewhere in looking for analogies with the slugs at the bbc.
Ian E,
Please apologise for that insult to slugs, immediately !
The BBC seem to foget that if we had lost the BoB then we’d have either been invaded or forced out of the war. As it was by hanging in it not only convinced America we were worth helping, Hitler had to leave a lot of his forces in France, knowing that at some point an invasion would come. If Hitler had been able to muster all his resources on Russia, that might have been enough to tip the balance. One of the main reasons for the bombing campaign on Germany (again missed by beeboids and leftists who also hated Arthur Harris) was to draw German resources away from the Russian front and to relieve at least some pressure on Russia.
The BoB also proved ot the world that the Germans COULD be stopped, it was the first time Hitlers war machine had been beaten back.
Why some now try to play it down is beyond me, perhaps it’s just a hatred of our nation.
Anybody who uses the word ” mis -remebering” can safely be ignored in the wise assumption that only drivel will follow.
Do you mean “mis-remembering ” ?
I would like tio hear the item first.
Davies may well have a genuine historical point here. Holland has published an excellent account of the seige of Malta from the islands’ perspective, and I certainly would like to hear his points.
This is the link Piggy:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8931000/8931021.stm
Nice one Craig
All well known historical arguments being rehashed there. Nothing particularly controversial.
The only new piece of information came from Holland, who asserted Dowdings confidence, in contrast to poor old Park, whose 11 group was taking the bulk of the attacks.
I am familiar with the arguments and the history of the period.
A German invasion would have been slaughtered at sea, Fighter Command could not have stopped an invasion, but its immortality was indeed, arguably due to Churchills conscious myth – making of the Battle of Britain (which he named and defined) at the time.
It was as Churchill rightly calculated a huge symbol. The Americans were convinced we would hold on as early as june, ironically after we crippled the French battle fleet at Oran and Mes el Kebirs, to stop them going over to the Germans (they were not going to).
All very worthy stuff. Nothing too bad I found. Tone was fine too.
Piggy Kosher is certainly correct regarding the facts of the historical issue. As I did not hear the programme I do not feel qualified to comment upon the likely institutional bias although for many years it has been taken as a “given” by the left that the use of the atomic bomb was to prevent the Soviet Union invading Japan. Since the Soviet Navy had no capability to land large numbers of troops nor keep them supplied, there is only the land grab that took place in August 1945 (none of the seized territory was returned and Stalin had considered an invasion of Turkey but the Red Army was exhausted).
Regarding Nagasaki, I do have some sympathy but for the simple reason that the city of Kokura was the primary target and was obscured by smoke. Nagasaki was the secondary target for the day. The citizens of Kokura were doubly lucky as they were the secondary target if Hiroshima was obscured by cloud! Given the likely massive casualties if Operations Olympic and Coronet had gone ahead, the use of the atomic bombs makes sense. One may consider the opinion callous, but tens of thousands died instead of tens of millions.