Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Historian
Originally Posted by Asterix
I, in fact, vented my frustrations towards the papaer itself and Mr. Hardman. Whether or not the Daily Heil snipe was attributed recently or during the war, it seems to escape many that given the pattern the paper and it's writers seem to have woven for themselves, the reputation appears to have been well deserved.
In YOUR opinion. |
An opinion which seems to be shared by many, but yes, it is only an opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Historian
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asterix285224
Mr Hardman conclusion of the photo exhibition is intentionally narrow and his conclusion are astoundingly amateurish and completely devoid of any analysis or perspective
Again that's YOUR opinion. Why are you entitled to one but not Hardman?
|
I never suggested Mr. Hardman should be denied an opinion. I merely implied that Hr. Hardman is a complete daft.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Historian
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asterix285224
A question I would like to pose to Mr. Hardman, and while I'm at it, to all UK members of this forum: Had the British Isles been overrun and occupied, does he, or anyone else believe the British people would have acted any differently than the French? I dare say that the British people would have done much the same. A fine example I would like to point out is the occupation of Jersey and Guernsey. Some would have gone underground, some would have simply struggled to survive without rocking the boat, others would have thrived in the Black Market, and yet others still would have collaborated. And yes, there would have been those as well who would willingly turned over the Jews to the enemy. Yes, The British, the Amercians, Canadians, and many others would have very much like the French under those circumstances.
Nice of you answer your own question, and in doing so state the blindingly obvious. Your conclusion isn't 'news' to anyone in Britain.
|
Nor is the occupation of France any more "news" to the French, but thanks for not answering the question anyway. So what is Mr. Hardman's point then? Is he stating to all readers at how historically illiterate he really is, or is this just another "sticking it to the French" article?? What was it then, the whole point of the article?
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Historian
And denigrating opinions as being 'typical' of certain newspapers is also elitism.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Historian
So who is stopping you? That's the beauty of democracy- the freedom both to have an opinion AND express it; something you seem keen to deny anyone who dares work for the Daily Mail.
|
By this logic, we should also give
Signal the benefit of the doubt and discuss the merits of it's articles? For Mr. Hardman and/or the Daily Mail to give life under the occupation an thorough examination, or even interest is one thing. It is another for Mr.Hardman and the Daily Mail to stoop to a propaganda piece and draw conclusions from it. What next -
Der Sturmer to be used as a credible and viable source?
There was a clear distinction, and Mr. Hardman chose to ignore it.