Page 1 of 1

Incendiary article?

Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2017 5:12 pm
by barr7430
I await the Fatwah for the so called incendiary piece appearing in this month's WI - I thought it was quite mild :wink:

Re: Incendiary article?

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 12:34 am
by quindia
Oh, my, let me download my copy to see what you've done now...

Re: Incendiary article?

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 1:52 am
by quindia
LOL...

"The straw which rendered my camel hors de combat..."

You, sir, are funny!

Re: Incendiary article?

Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2017 12:16 pm
by j1mwallace
Perhaps the populace are awaiting you with tar and feathers in Dumfries !
You know hat we do with troublemakers here !

Re: Incendiary article?

Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:03 am
by airbornegrove26
I didn't think it was bad at all. Pretty informative, but I'm sure it will ruffle some feathers.

Re: Incendiary article?

Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 12:10 pm
by Gunfreak
What's all this about?

Re: Incendiary article?

Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 2:04 pm
by Glorfindel
I assume this is about the 'Camaret' article which mentions the strong possibility that Marlborough committed treason by giving advance notice of an English descent on the French coast.

If not, my apologies !

I'd never heard of this affair before so thought the article was really interesting, particularly as I was in the middle of reading David Chandler's book 'Marlborough as Military Commander'. He mentions it but doesn't dwell on it for long.

The Duke certainly seems to be a man of great extremes. There are so many positives that left contemporaries in awe. However, like many iconic figures, there was certainly a very dark side to his character (overwhelming greed and likely treason). What is not clear, perhaps, is how much these unappealing characteristics were 'of their time'. Were they typical of other high born figures (to differing degrees) or was he exceptional in this respect.

Cheers,



Phil

Re: Incendiary article?

Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:16 pm
by quindia
Oh, no, this is a new-ish one mostly about the 'myth' of British military superiority in an issue extolling the Iron Duke throughout the rest of the mag... :lol:

Re: Incendiary article?

Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 9:28 pm
by barr7430
Well, you see, I actually get set up with these things.. here I am trying my bes to be an honest scribe and the editor sticks my piece in the middle of a love-bombing of Wellington...

It's a fit up! :shock:

Re: Incendiary article?

Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 9:35 pm
by quindia
Ah, so it's Dan's fault... :roll:

Re: Incendiary article?

Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 9:56 pm
by barr7430
You've got that right

Re: Incendiary article?

Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 2:54 pm
by Old John
Regarding Camaret Bay letter, have you read Frank Taylor's Marlborough's Wars Volume 2 1707-1709 Appendix 7 "Disgrace" which gives a different perspective to the background of the letter, would appear culprit was Godolphin's Jacobite contact who alerted Louis XIV to the proposed raid a month or so before Marlborough's letter, the preparations for a raid were well known in France and the raid was talk of London well before Marlborough's letter, enabling Vauban to improve defences

many senior figures at the time were in touch with St Germain so as protect their titles, land, families in case succession to British Throne came into question whether, Mary, William, Anne, Hanoverian or a Protestant Pretender succeeded

Slightly different topic, who commanded Allied forces at Waterloo ? Wellington of course, ergo BRITISH VICTORY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

cheers Old John Defender of Corporal John