# History's Greatest Phonies



## BAYLOR (Dec 13, 2015)

Historical figures that were lionized in their time for great deeds and and achievements. But upon reflecting  and revisionism didn't and really didn't deserve the accolades given to them or didn't do the things credited to them. The Charlatans and frauds of history.


----------



## Droflet (Dec 13, 2015)

Hmm, Winston Churchill, John Kennedy, any number of religious zealots?


----------



## BAYLOR (Dec 28, 2015)

Winston Churchill was a for real ,  he had quite a an interesting and adventurous  life.   His 5 years as prime minter  1940 to 45  helped save the world from Hitler and the Axis powers.  I have no illusion about  his flaws and he made some errors of judgement Gallopoli comes to mind.  i can't help but like Winston Churchill.  He was for real and a great man.


----------



## AnyaKimlin (Dec 28, 2015)

Most of those history records as great were great at what they are recorded at being great at they just sucked at other things.

Marie Stopes and Emmeline Pankhurst are classic examples. They were needed and I benefit greatly from them but as human beings they were at best unpleasant with some awful ideas. 

Millicent Fawcett on the other hand is a lady who does not get anywhere near the amount of credit she should.


----------



## althea (Dec 28, 2015)

Even heroes and heroines of history had human failings (don't we all),but that doesn't nullify their achievements.
I think Mother Theresa was a great person.To keep on, day after day, struggling in a hopeless situation -that is greatness to me.


----------



## Gramm838 (Jan 5, 2016)

All  religions.


----------



## JunkMonkey (Jan 5, 2016)

BAYLOR said:


> Historical figures that were lionized in their time for great deeds and and achievements. But upon reflecting  and revisionism didn't and really didn't deserve the accolades given to them or didn't do the things credited to them. The Charlatans and frauds of history.




Thomas Alva Edison - who did a great job of syphoning off other people's work into his own self-aggrandisement.


----------



## BAYLOR (Jan 5, 2016)

JunkMonkey said:


> Thomas Alva Edison - who did a great job of syphoning off other people's work into his own self-aggrandisement.




Edison was a master at self promotion

He didn't really invent the elect light .


----------



## JunkMonkey (Jan 6, 2016)

or the movie camera


----------



## althea (Jan 6, 2016)

Alexander Graham Bell didn't really invent the telephone,but he was the first to patent it.


----------



## BAYLOR (Jan 7, 2016)

Desilu said:


> Alexander Graham Bell didn't really invent the telephone,but he was the first to patent it.



If  only Elisha Gray  he'd gotten to the patent office a few hours earlier.


----------



## JunkMonkey (Jan 8, 2016)

Oh Bum!  I now have OMD going round in my head - why should I suffer alone!

Elisha Gay, you should have stayed at home yesterday
Aha words can't describe the feeling and the way you lied
These games you play, they're gonna end it more than tears someday
Aha Elisha Gay, it shouldn't ever have to end this way
It's 8:15, and that's the time that it's always been
We got your message on the radio, conditions normal and you're coming home
Elisha Gay, is mother proud of little boy today
Aha this kiss you give, it's never ever gonna fade away....


----------



## juelz4sure (Jan 8, 2016)

Christopher Columbus,  how do you discover someplace where people already lived? That's like walking into my neighbor's apartment and claiming it the new world and taking ownership.  Not to mention all of the historical evidence that shows other far more ancient civilizations had also come to this continent.


----------



## JunkMonkey (Jan 8, 2016)

Oh come on.  Columbus wasn't a fraud.  He (and his crews) really did sail across the Atlantic and create what he thought was a shorter (less dangerous) route to the spice islands of the Far East.  He didn't claim to have found anything that wasn't there before just an easier way to get to it.

He was wrong not a fraud - though he did lie to his crew a lot about their progress.


----------



## Brian G Turner (Jan 8, 2016)

JunkMonkey said:


> Elisha Gay



Enola Gay!


----------



## JunkMonkey (Jan 8, 2016)

Brian Turner said:


> Enola Gay!



I know.  I was making a joke.


----------



## Brian G Turner (Jan 8, 2016)

JunkMonkey said:


> I know.  I was making a joke.



I couldn't tell - I was an Ultravox fan.


----------



## Khuratokh (Mar 2, 2016)

JunkMonkey said:


> Oh come on.  Columbus wasn't a fraud.  He (and his crews) really did sail across the Atlantic and create what he thought was a shorter (less dangerous) route to the spice islands of the Far East.  He didn't claim to have found anything that wasn't there before just an easier way to get to it.
> 
> He was wrong not a fraud - though he did lie to his crew a lot about their progress.


While not a fraud he does tend to get lauded too much for his accomplishments. The more you learn  about him the more you despise the man. Yet the USA dedicated a holiday to him.


----------



## Caledfwlch (Mar 2, 2016)

Khuratokh said:


> While not a fraud he does tend to get lauded too much for his accomplishments. The more you learn  about him the more you despise the man. Yet the USA dedicated a holiday to him.



There appears to be a certain type of American who seem to be very attached to ideas that Columbus was the first white, European to find the continent, and that Native Americans (in the Continental US, not "natives" further south) were basically barbarians with a lack of both skills and permanent presences in things like mining. Yet the Vikings from signs being dug up in Newfoundland discovered the place long before Columbus, not to mention the Basques were fishing the Grand Banks as long as 2000 years ago, not to mention the Piris Reis map showing "something" being out that way, and the name Brazil comes from the old legends of Hy-Brasil, a land mass to the West, and Cocaine found to have been used by ancient Egyptian Mummies, well, before they became mummies one assumes  . I suspect a lot of "discoveries" from the past were simply rediscoveries, especially since as mentioned, clearly people got there thousands, or hundreds of thousands of years ago.

If the Welsh Legends of Prince Madog are, simply that, myths, then the Native American tribe supposed to be the one his people intermixed with were a very permanent tribe, unlike the others, and again under the idea some (I assume Bigots) hold that the Natives were barbarians with no permanence, these people defy it having lived in stone villages built around a central square. And evidence has been found of ancient mines being excavated by Native Americans a couple of thousand years ago.

I was chatting about this with Baylor, the OP the other day - we suspect that for example the Destruction of the Library of Alexandria may well have lost to us, incredible revelations about what was really known and discovered about the world in ancient history. It would equally not surprise me if the Vatican held in its Archives copies of or information on some - not intentionally suppressing it - they simply don't know they have it, having been run by centuries worth of by avid collectors and preservers of knowledge, and of course donations, I imagine the filing system is a little "anarchic" at best!

In a way it's sort of good, in that it means there are still things to explore, to theorise about, and to stir the imagination.


----------



## Allegra (Mar 2, 2016)

Certainly not the greatest, but at the time of the music recording business it is astonishing, more so, it was so easy! Though with nowadays technology to do this sort of thing would be like easy game and hard to detect.


----------



## Khuratokh (Mar 2, 2016)

Caledfwlch said:


> There appears to be a certain type of American who seem to be very attached to ideas that Columbus was the first white, European to find the continent, and that Native Americans (in the Continental US, not "natives" further south) were basically barbarians with a lack of both skills and permanent presences in things like mining. Yet the Vikings from signs being dug up in Newfoundland discovered the place long before Columbus, not to mention the Basques were fishing the Grand Banks as long as 2000 years ago, not to mention the Piris Reis map showing "something" being out that way, and the name Brazil comes from the old legends of Hy-Brasil, a land mass to the West, and Cocaine found to have been used by ancient Egyptian Mummies, well, before they became mummies one assumes  . I suspect a lot of "discoveries" from the past were simply rediscoveries, especially since as mentioned, clearly people got there thousands, or hundreds of thousands of years ago.
> 
> If the Welsh Legends of Prince Madog are, simply that, myths, then the Native American tribe supposed to be the one his people intermixed with were a very permanent tribe, unlike the others, and again under the idea some (I assume Bigots) hold that the Natives were barbarians with no permanence, these people defy it having lived in stone villages built around a central square. And evidence has been found of ancient mines being excavated by Native Americans a couple of thousand years ago.
> 
> ...



It's more the tendency of the USA to portray him as a man of great moral fibre (he was anything but) and him disproving the flat earth theory (which is a fabrication, most people believed it to be a globe ) that I'm riling against. 

In fact he thought the world was a lot smaller than was thought at the time. (He was wrong obviously). 
When of the natives he brought back as slaves, only half survived, he had this to say. "There are plenty left" 
Till his death he continued to believe he had found East India and flogged anyone who disagreed with him.


----------



## Khuratokh (Mar 2, 2016)

Paul Revere.

Did not say "the british are coming". Got arrested before he could do much


----------



## Caledfwlch (Mar 2, 2016)

Khuratokh said:


> Paul Revere.
> 
> Did not say "the british are coming". Got arrested before he could do much



It's amazing the post humus press some people get. I vaguely knew about this one.

My fellow Brit's like to sneer at what are seen as limited History Lessons in US Schools, but ours aren't exactly great, certainly weren't in the early 90's when I went, and I suspect it hasn't changed much.

We weren't allowed to learn about Welsh or in fairness much British History back then, which was ludicrous, since 1 minute walk from the school gates put you standing on top of a steep hill which is one of the main routes into my hometown, from which vantage point you could just see make out part of the ruins of Aberystwyth Castle, and if you went left at the school gate a minute or two brought you into sight of Pen Dinas, the Iron Age Hill Fort remains, crowned by a huge Stone upturned Cannon built in honour of the Duke of Wellington after the Battle of Waterloo, seems a bit random, but the Royal Welsh Fusiliers who recruited in this area were at the Battle, acquitted themselves well, and were even remarked upon by the Iron Duke himself, a comment that made me furious at the tv adaption of Sharpe, which had him making that comment about an Irish regiment in iirc a different episode. The Tower was to have a statue at the top of Welly Boots astride Copenhagen, his Horsie.

Aberystwyth Castle and Pen Dinas:
The photo is not great quality, but in the top right you can make out 2 Towers, the 1 on the right is a Church and the 1 to the left is one of the still standing towers, whilst further to the right can be made out the Memorial to the towns fallen during the First World War. (the angle and perspective of Pen Dinas makes it look quite close, but its actually over a mile away at least.



Spoiler: Photo's spoilered for size
















In my time at Secondary school we did a couple of months vaguely on the Romans and Agricola's Assault on Ynys Mon / Island of Anglesey to exterminate the Druids.

The rest of that year, and the next 4 were on World War 2. Mainly and very nearly exclusively the Holocaust, for 4 whole years! I learned more about the actual War in general, from a massive tomb of a book on the War, with coloured pictures and photographs, it was an Adult book, from Readers Digest and was great, the Commando Comics I used to collect, and my Maternal Grandmother who during the War was in the Royal Artillery manning Ack Ack Guns. My Maternal Grandfather was too young not hitting 18 until 1945, plus as a Farmer on the family farm he may well have been blocked from serving, as farming like mining was vital to the war effort. My Paternal Grandfather was a Royal Marines Commando, but died when I was 4 or 5 so never got the chance to hear his stories, and my Paternal Grandmother was in the "National Fire Brigade" and had the luck of 2 of the most vital but awful, considering what would have been seen by Postings, London during the Blitz, in an area hit hard, and Pontypridd in South Wales at a time when it got bombed badly. Had a Great Uncle in the Royal Navy's Submarine Service, so my "grand" family were represented in 3 military Services, but not the Royal Air Force.

The Holocaust was a horrific event, and it is vital to learn about it, but not for 4 years solid, especially when the subject matter involves a Global Conflict. And that was the sum of my School History Experience. You could fill 4 years of lessons just on my Town alone, given it is the location of an Iron Age Hill Fort, a Medieval Castle which was an important part of the "Ring of Iron" that  Edward Longshanks built to subjugate the Welsh. The Castle was also the site of a couple of Battles during Owain Glyndwr's Welsh War of Independence and a few years before and during the English/British Civil War of the 17th Century King Charles built a Royal Mint at Aberystwyth Castle, oddly enough, the man chosen to be in charge of the Mint, became very wealthy! 

And during WW2, the National Library of Wales which is based here in a Palace like building kept many of Britain's most valuable possessions, including the Crown Jewels. A lot has happened in this little town! (The Welsh Library was the first in Great Britain to use the "Library of Congress Classification" a Catalogue system borrowed from the US Congress.



Spoiler: Photograph of the National Library of Wales


----------



## Ajid (Mar 2, 2016)

Can somebody be a great phoney and also a hero?

I don't mean being great by being a phoney but being great and was also a bit of a phoney.

I have a man in mind but he was great but also a great phoney.
Well I'm going to have to say his name at some point.

Isaac Newton.

EDIT: I know I'm going to have to defend this one but I'm not claiming he wash't great on his own merit just that, he tried to irradiate everyone from history that had led to a few of his discoveries and claim it for himself. I Name hook as the worst affected.


----------



## Caledfwlch (Mar 3, 2016)

Ajid said:


> he tried to *irradiate *everyone from history that had led to a few of his discoveries and claim it for himself. I Name hook as the worst affected.



Sir Isaac Newton had access to Nuclear Weapons or radioactive Materials/Isotopes? 

More seriously, I had never realised he had done this. I suspect quite a few famous people are guilty of the same.

I seem to recall that Thomas Edison actually stole quite a few inventions claimed as his - I think he was the 19th century version of a modern Software "Patent Troll" and the likes of Apple and Microsoft continue his great work, stealing the work of Software Engineers and tiny companies who cannot afford to wage War in the US legal system as they have limited funds versus the big name companies who have access to unlimited resources.

I don't know much about "Electric" how it functions, the science behind it etc, but isn't the voltage used in the US based on a current system Edison created (and actually did create himself) but as Power Stations had begun cropping up offering electric, he destroyed in some way a rival who's system was better, and more stable and possibly "safer", hence the US and possibly us in Europe though I am not sure are stuck with a poorer system as a result?

I wish I could remember what it was about (and my Father is or rather was since he is retired an Electrician!) but I was working for a US owned Company here in the UK, and I had not long read whatever it was about him, and thanks to leaflets that arrived in the warehouse I was Systems Admin at, presumably to go with delivery orders to customers, I discovered that the Company I was working for is the modern Descendant of Thomas Edison's Company, though whether Edison's Company grew big enough to buy other companies, or if my company or its owners at some point bought Edison's company I cannot remember and feeling a bit sad that I was working for the company originated and associated with such an unpleasant and deceitful man.

I think this is what I am remembering
War of Currents - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Ajid (Mar 3, 2016)

Well spotted on the spelling mistake .

You are correct of course, and to be fair The saying "If I have seen further it is for standing on the shoulders of giants" is attributed to Newton. He did basicaly irradicate Hook from history though and there are a few ideas that we should attribute to hook that we attribute to Newton.

The war of currents is incredibly interesting, i think it would need another thread. But Tesla won in the end. A big part of it was Edison saying that AC was more dangerous than DC. Edison was showman, tesla not so much. Tesla died alone by electric light powered in AC.

There have been some fantastic things written about Edison and what he really invented/discovered. At the end of the day responsible  or not for it...


 ... He sold us on our modern day opiat.


----------



## BAYLOR (Mar 3, 2016)

Ajid said:


> Well spotted on the spelling mistake .
> 
> You are correct of course, and to be fair The saying "If I have seen further it is for standing on the shoulders of giants" is attributed to Newton. He did basicaly irradicate Hook from history though and there are a few ideas that we should attribute to hook that we attribute to Newton.
> 
> ...



AC could transmit power over a longer distance  and DC couldn't . It's too bad they couldn't have found a way to work together, Imagine what else they might have achieved together.


----------



## Ajid (Mar 3, 2016)

BAYLOR said:


> AC could transmit power over a longer distance  and DC couldn't . It's too bad they couldn't have found a way to work together, Imagine what else they might have achieved together.


I think there is space race type thing here. The fight produced more than they could in union.


----------



## BAYLOR (Mar 3, 2016)

Ajid said:


> I think there is space race type thing here. The fight produced more than they could in union.



Tesla was way ahead of his time , He talked about power transmission though the air Microwaves. he build a tower 1902 shoe purpose was transmitting energy  through the air .

Edison was many unpleasant things, but he was very clever, almost brilliant.


----------



## Ajid (Mar 3, 2016)

BAYLOR said:


> Tesla was easy ahead of his time , He talked about power transmission though the air Microwaves. he build a tower 1902 shoe purpose was transmitting energy  through the air .
> 
> Edison was many unpleasant things, but he was very clever, almost brilliant.



Almost, they were both brilliant. I feel edison was able to sell DC better than Tesla. Tesla, like me, was extrovert on paper but introvert in person. Edison on the other hand!! 

He was the salesman. Without eddison electricity would have been a school boys play thing. Tesla made it a mans play thing. 

p.s

Bowie made playing the weird uncomfortable tesla cool.


----------



## Caledfwlch (Mar 3, 2016)

You didn't make a spelling mistake, you used the wrong word 

Did a quick google out of interest -  *Irradicate - *according to my Chrome's Spell Checker, which is UK English is a typo, however Google says it is a real word - but given that the 2 examples I looked at appeared to have been taken from Dictionaries 100 years or more ago, I suspect it's an archaic word no longer in usage.
*
Irradicate = "To Root Deeply"*
Whilst *Eradicate = "To Destroy / Put an End to" *
And the word you used in your first post was *Irradiate = "Expose (Someone or Something) to Radiation or to Illuminate (something) by or as if shining a Light on it"
*
As the Rotarian, Walter S. Young, an Assistant Superintendant of Schools at Worcester, Massachusetts, believed to have been the first person to have used the quote in the written form via a published work, if not the coiner of the phrase, wrote "Everyday is a School Day" And a random person using a wrong word on the Internet, irradiate has thus led me, via a joke, to discover a new word and its meaning, even if it's probably an archaic word that has long fallen out of fashion!

I love the way the internet not just allows, but encourages the increasing of personal knowledge, and the random tangents that can be triggered by a word, event or post. Without the internet, me, your good self, and any passing reader would have likely been left completely in the dark (indeed we would probably remain Unirradiated!!) and possibly spend the rest of our existences baffled, perhaps even tormented by our lack of illumination on the meaning since the chances of one of us browsing an old, long out of use and outmoded Dictionary and find the word there, eagerly awaiting our excited discovery!

I wonder where no longer used Words go when they pass on from this reality - is it the same place as missing Socks, Pens and coins, I wonder, or do they have their own special plane?

Of course, with the Internet and the way it provides easy access to vast hordes and stacks of information, it makes it quite hard to avoid the intent of another famous quote "Never meet your Heroes" though perhaps amended into "Never Read about your Heroes" since disappointment can ensue.

I don't know about perception outside the United Kingdom, and it's not quite phoney, since it's more about other peoples perception, though he had arrogance enough to believe his own marketing, I suspect, but to people in Great Britain who have never looked deeper, or who have bought the "Hero Myth and Aura" that surrounds him, Winston Churchill is an untarnished Hero, the man who not only Led the Nation during it's Worst Crisis, but did so at a time when the very existence of the Nation and anything and everything it held dear was under threat of destruction.

To say Winston was.... Flawed does not even begin to give an idea of the real Man behind the famous Cigar. He was an absolute Cad, since the real words that could describe him and his politics and many of his personal opinions are very rude. Ireland of course well remembers his "little idea" and the brutality and violence that ensued.

As he created ADRIC - the Auxiliary Division of the Royal Irish Constabulary. the premise was take former Commissioned Officers of the British Army, not long back home after the First World War, many of whom were damaged, emotionally scarred, suffering from what we now call Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, or had been severely dehumanised by their actions and experiences of fighting such a horrific conflict, give them Guns again, and send them to Ireland to fight a Counter Insurgency War against the IRA. They took Men turned brutal and vicious, and coming home to a nation with no real place or jobs, very Angry, and made them a Police Force, and the results were hardly unexpected, seeing many innocent Civilians beaten, seriously injured and killed - it was like whichever idiot thought it would be a good idea to send the Paras (Parachute Regiment now known as/part of the 16 Air Assault Brigade) to Northern Ireland in the early 70's -  Britain's Airborne Infantry men trained by design to turn each recruit pretty much totally psychopathic, and vicious beyond words, which is pretty much what you want, and what is needed with a unit like theirs - they are Elite Shock Troops, designed and trained to Assault and hammer bloody big holes into the Enemies lines. And some twit thought it would be a good idea to send them into Northern Ireland, to act in a Civil Policing/Peacekeeping context, backing up and in some areas, replacing the Royal Ulster Constabulary. So it is hardly a surprise that Bloody Sunday happened.

Churchill was also behind the formation of the infamous "Black and Tans" formally known as the Royal Irish Constabulary Special Reserve - similar idea to the Auxiliaries, but recruited from Veterans at the Private/NCO class, rather than Officers. Same effect and brutality too. They or at least the concept even survived Partition and Independence for the Republic - as the "B Specials", more formally known as the "Ulster Special Constabulary" as pretty much exclusively a Protestant Force, their Policing of Northern Ireland was so impartial, and fair to both communities that when Great Britain had to deploy the British Army into the Province 1969, not to combat the IRA, remember, but to *protect the Catholic population* from the excesses of the Stormont Parliament and the Organs of State, under it's control in treating and keeping the Catholic population as 2nd class citizens with few civil rights, which in itself is stunning and shocking that it was allowed to go on till 1969 - these were, personal politics of the Catholics aside, British Citizens, living within the borders of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, yet they had far fewer rights than anyone else, the Migrants arriving from the former Imperial Colonies / Nations of the British Commonwealth faced racism, but they didn't face lesser Civil Rights, they did not face restrictions on Voting in elections - Catholics did, Catholics tended not to own their homes in NI, and thus, you were only allowed to vote in elections if you owned your home, even I think, Businesses had a right to vote, so even in an area that was 90% Catholic say, the politicians for that area were all Protestant Union, the Ulster Special Constabulary were scrapped by Westminster and gone, replaced by the Ulster Defence Regiment by May 1970. 

Ridiculously Churchill's original proposal for the Special Units to be established in Ireland was as a sort of "Irish Gendarmerie" but whilst the Gendarmes are tough, and you don't want to mess with them, they are a proper Police Force, with centuries of experience of and training in Policing Civil Communities, and like any type of Policeman, they protect the Public, all of them, and they enforce the law impartially and unbiased, nothing like the Irish Units created. It might have worked had they simply given the British Army's Military Police the job, at least then the "Special" Cops would have had training in Policing, and could have been led by long term and full time Military Police Officers and NCO's. Incidently, I think the Gendarmerie Nationale of France is the oldest and longest in existence, Police Force in the world - the Gendarmes were created in the middle ages, to ensure Justice, protection of the people and the enforcement of the law, in small towns and rural areas far away from Paris or any other large City, and to patrol the rural areas and countryside to protect movement and combat Bandits, thus it made sense they were a Military Provost Force with "Civil" roles, and that they took the form of Cavalry. They can and have been sent into Battle during Wars too, the last time being a Battle during the Napoleonic Wars. (I was surprised to discover that the Netherlands have a Gendarmerie, the Royal Netherlands Marechaussee) Britain is more or less the only, or one of only a tiny few European Nations that do not have some sort form of Gendarmerie, or Federal Uniformed Law Enforcement Agency.

Later on, when he learned that there were troubles in the British Mesopotamian Mandate (the Kingdom of, and later the Republic of Iraq) specifically that the Kingdom's Government were struggling with tax collection, as many were avoiding their taxes, especially out in the rural villages of the countryside. Winny's idea which thankfully was never adopted, but which Saddam Hussein would later try with great gusto, though for different reasons, was to send in the Royal Air force or Royal Artillery to carpet the recalcitrant Villages with Mustard Gas, or worse, to make an example of them, and to punish the tax avoidance. Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs like such organisations usually are in any Nation, enjoy astonishing, and in the pursuit of tax evasion very nearly unlimited powers, more so than the Police even (HMRC Can force Entry into Residential Homes without a Court Warrant) and often seem to consider themselves almost above the Law, Domestic & EU which in fairness, is practically how they are it seems sometimes, but even they would balk at the idea of using Chemical/Gas Weapons as punishment for Tax Evasion. He was a very unpleasant man, was Winny, and certainly not quite as Heroic as popular myth - ISTR that he was often a hindrance to his Senior Military Officers, much as Hitler could be, though not to the scale of Hitlers idiocy and the damage he caused his own war effort.

He was absolutely outraged when the Public voted him out of office in the General Election of 1945 - but whilst he may have been just the man to lead the Nation at War, but nobody was insane enough to put him in power during peacetime. I think at one point he even had to be talked out of using Royal Air Force dropped chemical/gas munitions on Germany, since it would have raised the stakes, and seen the same weapons dropped on British cities, not to mention Hitler was sent a strongly worded Message at the Outbreak of War, that if he dares use such weapons, Germany would be carpet bombed with the vile stuff.


----------



## Caledfwlch (Mar 3, 2016)

Ajid said:


> Almost, they were both brilliant. I feel edison was able to sell DC better than Tesla. Tesla, like me, was extrovert on paper but introvert in person. Edison on the other hand!!
> 
> He was the salesman. Without eddison electricity would have been a school boys play thing. Tesla made it a mans play thing.
> 
> ...



The Star Wars "Force/Ceremony" Theme, and the Imperial March done on Tesla Coils!


----------



## Ajid (Mar 3, 2016)

This raises another point about Faraday.

I had written a long response damning and supporting Churchil and thought better of it.


----------



## Khuratokh (Mar 3, 2016)

Khuratokh said:


> Paul Revere.
> 
> Did not say "the british are coming". Got arrested before he could do much


I was taught in school about the American independance after we delved extensively into the 80 years war. After reading about the horrific atrocities perpetrated by the Spanish (and the Dutch) and then to read about the specifics of the Boston "massacre". 
I was astonished to say the least. 
So much outrage about  a mere 5 people being shot.


----------



## SilentRoamer (Mar 3, 2016)

Of all the many religious charlatans (no doubt some of these truly believe their own dogma) Joseph Smith must hold a special place in the halls of charlatans. Finding a holy book under a tree in the 19th Century written in 17th Century English... classic.

I expect much of the other religious "revelations" to be of a similar nature just they are not as easy being held to account as their origins are lost in time.


----------



## svalbard (Mar 3, 2016)

SilentRoamer said:


> Of all the many religious charlatans (no doubt some of these truly believe their own dogma) Joseph Smith must hold a special place in the halls of charlatans. Finding a holy book under a tree in the 19th Century written in 17th Century English... classic.
> 
> I expect much of the other religious "revelations" to be of a similar nature just they are not as easy being held to account as their origins are lost in time.



As Fire infamously spoke to Gouda Mouk "Thou art who thou art!"  

*The Warwolf and Walrus by Hugh Cook.*


----------



## Caledfwlch (Mar 3, 2016)

Ajid said:


> This raises another point about Faraday.
> 
> I had written a long response damning and supporting Churchil and thought better of it.



Oh, the Man is a Hero for his WW2 Leadership, but he was a very flawed man with a nasty side. And part of the reason we needed his leadership is we were at War with absolute Bastards, and so we needed a ******* of our own 

In my random trawlings of the Net, I found an article talking about how, in the 80's when the Witch of Downing Street, Maggie Thatcher began imposing a National Curriculum onto Schools in England and Wales, History Teachers were the most resistant and Maggie said "Fighting the Falklands War was easier than fighting the History teachers"

As if she had been stuck in a foxhole with the Paras under heavy Argie fire. Yes, it must have been immensely difficult having to sit in an office 5000 miles away under no threat at all. At least Churchill iirc visited the troops on or near the front lines when he could - istr that he took a trip to North Africa to visit British Forces in Egypt or Libya, and the plane journey alone was incredibly risky.


----------



## Calum (Mar 3, 2016)

I have profoundly mixed feelings about Churchill. On the one hand he was undeniably courageous and his determination to keep on going was vital when many in Britain were ready to give in. On the other hand he was a bit of a nupty when it came down to practical politics and strategy (As Alan Brooke put it: _Winston had 10 ideas every day, only one of which was good_). Plus he was considered a racist by many even by the standards of an already bigoted society.

In short he was indispensable for his passion and vision but a bit on the rubbish side when it came to the actual execution. Basically the George Lucas of world leaders.


----------



## WaylanderToo (Mar 3, 2016)

Caledfwlch said:


> In my random trawlings of the Net, I found an article talking about how, in the 80's when the Witch of Downing Street, Maggie Thatcher began imposing a National Curriculum onto Schools in England and Wales, History Teachers were the most resistant and Maggie said "Fighting the Falklands War was easier than fighting the History teachers"
> 
> As if she had been stuck in a foxhole with the Paras under heavy Argie fire. Yes, it must have been immensely difficult having to sit in an office 5000 miles away under no threat at all. At least Churchill iirc visited the troops on or near the front lines when he could - istr that he took a trip to North Africa to visit British Forces in Egypt or Libya, and the plane journey alone was incredibly risky.




so you think that leaders of democracies don't agonise about sending young men out to die? No it's not being 'in the fox-holes' but for the most part it can't be an easy thing to do... nor should it be


----------



## WaylanderToo (Mar 3, 2016)

Caledfwlch said:


> The Star Wars "Force/Ceremony" Theme, and the Imperial March done on Tesla Coils!




try this for size  Playing guitar in a chain-mail faraday cage...


----------



## Caledfwlch (Mar 4, 2016)

WaylanderToo said:


> so you think that leaders of democracies don't agonise about sending young men out to die? No it's not being 'in the fox-holes' but for the most part it can't be an easy thing to do... nor should it be



I did not say that, and Maggie wasn't talking about making difficult decisions like sending young men to die, and making those decisions is certainly a lot easier than being one of the young men a decision involves.

I loathe and hate the "Sainted Margaret" as she is to Tories, but I actually think she was absolutely right in using military force to defend and/or liberate People and Land who are under the Protection of the British Crown. I have never understood the Belgrano issue, and don't see how its sinking was in any way wrong - had the Belgrano been sunk whilst in for example French territorial waters, the only "crime" committed would be violating sovereign French waters. We were at war, the Belgrano was a Warship, and thus a valid target, so what if it was sailing away, boats can be turned round.

The Liberation of the Falklands was also vital for important reasons. An argument that it was important in order to preserve global security. and prevent more wars sparking off could perhaps be made. But it was mostly vital in the future protection of both British and Crown Citizens, whether living in a Colony such as the Falklands or Gibralter, or Foreign Nationals/Crown Citizens in the Independent/Sovereign Nations within the British Commonwealth.

Belize for example is a former Crown Territory turned sovereign Nation, but Britain is obligated by Treaty with Belize to assist in it's defence, as Guatamala traditionally claimed big chunks of Belize, and seeing Britain unwilling to even protect its own Citizens, may well have invaded. Equally, friendly or not, Spain might have annexed Gibraltar under a nationalist/right wing government, not to mention various other places around the world.


----------



## WaylanderToo (Mar 4, 2016)

Caledfwlch said:


> I did not say that, and Maggie wasn't talking about making difficult decisions like sending young men to die, and making those decisions is certainly a lot easier than being one of the young men a decision involves.
> 
> I loathe and hate the "Sainted Margaret" as she is to Tories, but I actually think she was absolutely right in using military force to defend and/or liberate People and Land who are under the Protection of the British Crown. I have never understood the Belgrano issue, and don't see how its sinking was in any way wrong - had the Belgrano been sunk whilst in for example French territorial waters, the only "crime" committed would be violating sovereign French waters. We were at war, the Belgrano was a Warship, and thus a valid target, so what if it was sailing away, boats can be turned round.
> 
> ...




apart from your view on the sainted Maggie T  we're in total agreement


----------



## JunkMonkey (Mar 5, 2016)

> The Liberation of the Falklands was also vital for important reasons. An argument that it was important in order to preserve global security. and prevent more wars sparking off could perhaps be made. But it was mostly vital in the future protection of both British and Crown Citizens, whether living in a Colony such as the Falklands or Gibralter, or Foreign Nationals/Crown Citizens in the Independent/Sovereign Nations within the British Commonwealth.


As a fellow loather I just would like to point out that the fact that there was the certainty of sh*tloads of oil in the Falklands' waters might have made her decision a little easier.   But then that's the reason the Argentinians want them anyway.


----------



## Caledfwlch (Mar 5, 2016)

JunkMonkey said:


> As a fellow loather I just would like to point out that the fact that there was the certainty of sh*tloads of oil in the Falklands' waters might have made her decision a little easier.   But then that's the reason the Argentinians want them anyway.



Absolutely, but the British Government also has a duty of care to protect its citizens, whether that is medically via something like the NHS, or militarily when they are attacked by a totalitarian regime. Mitterand or whoever was President of France was playing a dangerous game by appearing to not support Britain during the Falklands - remember the common name to describe France in Europe is, "Metropolitan France" because, France too still has various colonies around the world, which like the Falklands are literally in legal terms no different to the isle of Wight, or Ynys Mon/Anglesey - and a British decision to not fight might have opened French overseas territorys up to danger too. Though, behind the scenes, I believe senior French military officers, and Defence Department Ministers, quietly filled Britain in on the capabilities etc of what Argentina's French bought equipment and vehicles could do, the same way that whilst the US Presidency/Government took an official neutral view, and if anything appeared to be against Britain protecting its rights and people (Big Oil probably thought they could deal with the Argies and get a good deal, not to mention the power of the Latin American Lobby in the US) but the US Military possibly without official permission from the White House, quietly assisted Britain with intelligence resources.

I just read a ridiculously daft book by Patrick Robinson. The man is very right wing, worships and idolises Maggie, and presumably with an eye on US Readers very, very pro american in his books. In around 2006, when some cuts and reorganisation of British Forces were going on, he decided that New Labour had basically committed Treason and left Britain unable to defend itself, or protect its territories, dependencies and colonies. And he wrote a novel where with secret Russian help (via a Russian Akula Nuclear Sub) the Argies invade the Falklands, and then destroy the British Fleet sent to liberate them. For someone supposedly an expert on military affairs, and a big supporter of the British Armed Forces, his book does those servicemen a massive disservice and is very insulting to them.

The Chiefs of the Navy & Army meet up, decide that due to the cuts a successful liberation is impossible, but then tell the Minister of Defence however, that they will not tell the PM that they cannot go, because they "took the Queen's Shilling" they will instead lead thousands of servicemen and women to their doom instead. Disgraceful. Not to mention the cuts were not half as bad as he made out, in order to make a political point.

He has the Senior Admirals and the Army's most senior General tell the PM they will go and fight, even though according to Robinson, the RN did not have any Air support, whatsover. No Officer would risk thousands of deaths on a mission that is suicidal and not ever going to be a success. Then, when the fleet arrives, the anti air vessels etc don't even stop Argie planes and exocets missiles. Yet the RN will have the best of such vessels outside of the US Navy, the whole book is a total joke.


----------

