In some ways Al Lowe could be right!

First let me compliment Al Lowe on his excellent web-site on Bishop. It's well done and goes as far as it can in its defense of Billy Bishop albeit somehat biased by Al's personal comments.

Firstly, I want it known that I have no axe to grind against anybody who in anyway fought in the skys of WWI. They were incredibly brave men who endured the worst kind of horror that war has to offer. Some lived to tell about it, many did not. They should all be held in a certain amount of reverence.

Secondly, I certainly have better things to do tha bash men who are dead 42 years. I was simply
responding to a thread "Why don't you believe
Bishop"? For my responces, I was taken to task.

Points I will conceed to Al Lowe. I agree that many of the records on all sides are probably incomplete or not 100% accurate. A sidenote on Jasta 20, despite their "incomplete records" they were still able to list able to list 41 casualties including 19 killed, 11 wounded, and include 3 that were injured in a bombing raid. The 19 killed
puts Jasta 20 at 3rd highest of all the German Jastas of WWI surpassed only be Jastas 2 and 10 and more than Jastas 5,6,11,15,18, 26, 27, 36, and 37. For a Jasta that enjoyed moderate sucess at best (64 confirmed victories) it doesn't appear that they were inclined to withhold too much.

Secondly NOBODY can prove or disprove that the raid of June 2 ever took place. Better men than I with better resources than myself have tried and failed. It's certainly more difficult to disprove something That Never took place as opposed to something that did take place.

It's futile to continue a case against the man because for every Bishop victory that has no corresponding German loss within 100 kilometers or 48 hours, you'll resort to incomplete German records and cite some Unteroffizier from Jasta 32 who wasn't on the roll that week when in fact it could have been something as simple as that he was in Berlin getting his pipes cleaned! Then the LOL, (legion of Lowe) start writing their bravo Al threads not contributing anything other than I should quit cause I can't prove it didn't happen. I can't!

That brings us back to the question, Why don't you believe Bishop? When I put the impetus on you to prove the raid, you decline, or bob and weave like Ali.

From our discussion and your website, you bring three things to the table in your argument for the Bishop raid

1- his combat report
2- that his combat report was in fact believed to be true and for this action he was awarded the Victoria Cross
3- that his combat report went unchallenged and was accepted as fact for almost 50 years before somene had the audacity to look into it

Is there more? Let us know.

In today's society you need to have a witness to be credited with something as inane as a hole in one at your golf club. 300 games in bowling have to be shot during league play, yet Bishop was awarded the hightest award that could be bestowed on a soldier by the Queen of England
on simply his word. Aren't we within the realm of reason to be skepticle that this raid ever took place.

Bishop could have cleared alot up for us by knowing where he was, giving an unusual characteristic of the aerodrome which in the case of Esnes, Pronville, Estourmal, or Awoignt
ther were many. Bishop couldn't even give us the color or markings of the planes he allegdely
attacked. I'll even grant you in the heat of battle
that it could have skipped his mind. If there was a battle!

In Markham's article he interviews people who 's
families have lived within 300 meters of these aerodromes for over 300 years. Some even lived thru the war and remember nothing of the supposed raid but can remember Voss passing by on a motorcycle or MvR passing the farm to be treated for his head wounds. Wouldn't French peasants have celebrated the raid if it had in fact took place?

That I can't prove that this raid ever happened
has given you cause to claim victory on several occasions. Based on that logic, can I put you down as a proponent of Werewolves, Vampires,
The Loch Ness Monster, Bigfoot, and Extraterrestial? YOU CAN'T DISPROVE that they don't exist and there is a ton more documentation to support their veracity than any raid and half the victories Bishop ever claimed!

Once again I ask you, Can you produce anything to even remotely substantiate that the June 2 raid ever took place?

Can you at least see why some of us question wether in fact that raid ever took place?

VBR,

Dennis

[Billy_Bishop]

I can "see" the other side, but that doesn't make it right.

The problem is this whole controversy didn't start until AFTER Bishop was dead. The time to have started asking questions would have been while he was still alive. I'm certain that Bishop could have provided more than enough evidence to have convinced most of the skeptics.

But he's dead, as are all of his Squadron mates (as far as I know). All we have left in the way of evidence are a few copies of German records, some RFC/RAF documents that managed to survive the devastation of two world wars, and a lot of 2nd and 3rd person testimony.

We even have backhanded testimony from one of Bishop's detractors, Ira Jones. But at this late date, unless something is unearthed, or until the British War Office agrees to release information they have, I'm afraid there will never be definitive proof one way or the other.

As to whether Bishop really did what he claimed, and whether there was enough evidence to award the VC, I have this remark from H. Clifford Chadderton;
"Every authoritative historical source agrees on one point of information: The Victoria Cross would not have been awarded without proof. The fact that Billy Bishop's aerodrome raid was not confirmed officially by eyewitnesses would have ensured that the normal British military advisors would be all the more careful in assembling the facts supporting the recommendation for the British Empire's award, described by Percival as '...the supreme award for valour, and no other nation has an exact equivalent to it.' "

As for me "dancing around" the subject of proving Bishop did what he claimed. From my point of view, I have nothing to prove. That was done when his award of the VC was confirmed a little over 2 months after his raid. What has YET to be proved is the opposition's position that he DIDN'T attack a German aerodrome. What do they have? A few surviving records, and copies of records from a nation that LOST two World Wars? A few comments from a few men who just might be envious, and perhaps one of them was kicking himself for not going along?

Just as we'll likely never have proof OF the raid, other than that which already exists, we'll never see proof that the raid didn't happen. As long as that is the case, then I'm afraid I have to side with His Majesty King George V, the Imperial General Staff, and Maj. Scott. All things considered, that puts me in pretty good company.

And as a fellow forumite once said "The King's highest decoration doesn't get handed out based on rumors."

VBR,

Al Lowe

[Billy_Bishop]

One other point, I almost forgot.

You came up with some things that were I presume, supposed to show me that the RFC wasn't perfect when it came to victory credits.

I have no problem with this. I know how their scoring system worked, so there was little point in that excersize. However, you made it look, at least in your presentation, like MacMillan and Collishaw deliberatly lied on their victory claims. I don't see how you could assume they KNEW they were wrong at the time.

Granted, MacMillan could have paid closer attention to his "Two" identical victims. However, from the description, Voss likely didn't just sit still while MacMillan was shooting at him.

As for Collishaw, just because the RFC doesn't agree with the RNAS, does that make him wrong too?

While I think there was definitely some error in someone's claims. I can't say with any certainty that Collishaw's "6-pack" was fabricated.

And I have to believe, until shown some good evidence saying otherwise, that MacMillan put in his claims for two triplanes in good faith.

As for Bishop, I work on the same principle there. Until I am shown something more definitive that would prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Bishop submitted his claims in good faith, then I can not call him a liar and a cheat.

As for his reported cheating on an exam at RMC, I'm willing to bet that at least half the people on this forum have cheated on a school test, or something similar. I fail to see how that could/should effect how they would conduct themselves in war.

VBR,

Al Lowe

Please be patient - as stated elsewhere I am new to the detailed study of WWI aviation. My question is - are there any examples of decorations being awarded for public relations purposes, to encourage the populace, tp placate an ally or for example make Canada proud ? I am not saying anything regarding Bishop - I have only read a couple books that cover him and am FAR from an expert. I have heard of WW II examples of this in various armies - including the U.S.
My only question - are there any known examples in WW I and particularly in Britain with the VC ?

John G.
just learning - please no one yell !

[Billy_Bishop]

As far as I know, the VC has never been awarded for publicity purposes. Though some have said that the rather late award (1919) to Edward Mannock might have been to aid the RAF in a post war budget battle, but it was deserved to him whether for publicity or not.

Generally the types of awards that are given for publicity are knighthoods in the case of the UK, and I believe medals like the Legion of Merit for the US. Although, France tends to give away the Legion of Honor Chevalier when ever it suits their purposes.

In WWI, while France and Germany tended to really publicize their aces throughout the war, the British didn't until 1918. The reason being the senior service (Royal Navy) didn't want to be over shadowed by the "upstart" flyers. Consequently the only mention of RFC/RNAS pilots was when they were "gazetted", i.e. their award was announced in the London Gazette. That was pretty much the limit of British advertising. Although I believe the Commonwealth countries might have done a bit more chest thumping than that.

VBR,

Al Lowe
4-bit amateur aviation historian and/or enthusiast

[Billy_Bishop]

See message in thread about 3 or 4 screens back, "About Billy Bishop"

VBR,

Al Lowe
4-bit pain in the rear nuisance

[Billy_Bishop]

"Can you at least see why some of us question wether in fact that raid ever took place?"

Ah, no. >-)

VBR,

Al Lowe

[Billy_Bishop]

Oh, and I do think the Loch Ness monster probably exists, Big foot, maybe, people from other worlds, most definitely.

Vampires, I don't know, I've never met any. Werewolves, same as for vampires.

VBR,

Al Lowe

[Billy_Bishop]

You made a comment SOMEWHERE that I answered your question with a question.

I just wanted to point out, you started it by answering MY question with several questions.

As far as proof, yes, Bishop's combat report went unchallenged for OVER fifty years. At this point in time, it's really a moot subject. What's the point in challenging the record of a dead man?

That's what Cowan did. And I can't say I blame him. If he had challenged the record of a living man, he most likely would have been sued for libel.

Lucky thing for him that Bishop died early.

VBR,

Al Lowe

[Andrew_Smith]

Yeah take that! I just thought I would jump in because Al sure is talking a lot.And to himself!!!

VBR,
Andrew