Billy Bishop: 'Liar and Cheat'

jbs · 16 April 2002, 03:14 PM

Craig & all,

Yes it is possible that he could have been wrongly awarded the VC, however, factual manipulation affects not only BB but many, many other pilots, including

Lothar Von Richthofen and his victory over Ball.

One of the points raised by Greenhous, according to the Star, is that if the questionable raid had taken place there would have to be evidence and other aerodromes would have been warned.

Bahh... who's to say it didn't? There were many documents destroyed in allied bombings in WWII that could infact prove Bishop, or any other pilot, had many more kills. You cannot discount an event based on evidence that does not exist because it could go either way. Although Bishops raid is questionable, he was an excellent, honourablem, and heroic scout pilot (lone wolf style) who survived the war and did shoot down a number of aircraft.

Why discount his reputation based solely on surcumstantial evidence?

As to whether one should trust the "gummint"
Yes at times it should be questioned, however, in most cases when no other documetation is available (as in historical refernces) there is no other choice. Albeit this is soemtimes hard to swallow, just look at the Armenian Holocaust.

cheers,
jbs

ps thanks for letting me rant, this whole topic really really really gets me.

Billy_Bishop · 16 April 2002, 03:15 PM

Craig, the difference between 1917 and 2002 is 85 years. The world was MUCH different then than it is today. The idea of honour was different then than it is today.

Men held their honour to be more sacred than most do today. I DON'T doubt BB when he said he made a raid on a German Aerodrome on 2 June, 1917, because there is nothing to show me he was not a man of honour.

I may have doubts about his total score, but only because, after having talked to fighter pilots, I know they are prone to make mistakes on things like, oh AIRPLANE IDENTIFICATION and such, as well as the exact nature of the damage they caused.

Anyway, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

VBR.

Al Lowe

Hugh_A._Halliday · 16 April 2002, 04:23 PM

Before climbing all over the author, read the book.

WFS · 16 April 2002, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Before climbing all over the author, read the book.

While the entire book is not available for scrutiny, at present, the author's statements and claims are. It seems to me that, by releasing excerpts as part of the pre-release publicity, the author has made himself and his claims fair game for critics. He chose a controversial subject. So, why should he be exempt from the controversy?

MilesC · 16 April 2002, 07:44 PM

I am certainly hoping that Mr Greenhous has done a bang-up job of documenting his information with credible sources. He has done first rate work in the past (note the official history of the RCAF participation in WWII), and I anticipate first-rate work on this topic. I really don't want to be disappointed, although on this topic I would love to be (if that makes sense :

) considering his quotes to date.

Miles Constable *:-/
If you are going into an alligator swamp, it is best you know how to wrestle with them.

wings · 16 April 2002, 08:46 PM

The weekly Kofl 6 Armee German reports covering Bishop's section of the front during 1917 are in the Ferko Collection in Dallas. Anybody can order copies.

Wayne Ralph · 16 April 2002, 09:31 PM

I haven't had the opportunity to read Greenhous's biography about

Billy Bishop, so I can't speak to the merits of his case. But the controversy about Bishop's record - a long-standing controversy - should not mask the underlying truth that most military gallantry awards have a political ingredient. It is simply naive to think that a decoration as coveted as the Victoria Cross, awarded by the reigning monarch, is received only on the basis of objective facts reliably proven by independent parties.
Stories abound in the British Army of officers who received gallantry awards that properly should have been awarded to the batmen who fought by their sides. Other VC awards to flyers have had controversies. For example, Lieutenant

Alan Jerrard, a pilot with 66 Squadron in March 1918, received the VC because his flight commander said he deserved it. Jerrard played no part in the process, being a prisoner-of-war at the time. What was he to do after the war? Tell King George the Fifth that it was all a mistake - a case of enthusiastic embellishment. Hardly!
Victory scores of fighter pilots in all wars and among all air forces are, by and large, overstated. Overclaiming is an inevitable outcome due to the confusion of air combat. It is sometimes the result of ambition, often caused by the demands of propaganda and public relations, but only rarely due to outright deceit.

William Barker received his Victoria Cross for fighting alone against 60 German planes, shooting down, depending on the storyteller, between four and ten of the enemy. That's what the newspapers in London said in November 1918, and the newspaper stories created a legend that endures. Barker never made any such claim, nor did he ever endorse the legend. Barker combined forces with Bishop after the war to start the first airline in Toronto, Bishop-Barker Aeroplanes, Limited. Politicians and businessmen invested money with the two young flyers in their new venture. After all, the King had given Bishop and Barker the Victoria Cross. Wouldn't you want to help out two Canadian heroes?

Yours sincerely,

Wayne Ralph, biographer - BARKER VC - The Classic Story of a Legendary First World War Hero - ISBN 1-902304-31-4

Unit 102, 15050 Prospect Avenue
White Rock, BC V4B 2B4

(604) 538-9434

wayneralph@telus.net

rammjaeger · 17 April 2002, 02:36 AM

>>Bishop, who died in 1956, shot down no more than 27 planes<<

How did Greenhous verify this impressive number of downed airplanes?? *

Billy_Bishop · 17 April 2002, 03:22 AM

Quote:

>>Bishop, who died in 1956, shot down no more than 27 planes<<

How did Greenhous verify this impressive number of downed airplanes?? *

My guess is, he went according to Bishop's witnessed victories, and discounted all other claims.

VBR,

Al Lowe

Billy_Bishop · 17 April 2002, 03:30 AM

Quote:

The weekly Kofl 6 Armee German reports covering Bishop's section of the front during 1917 are in the Ferko Collection in Dallas. Anybody can order copies.

Which is all fine and dandy, except, the airfield(s) in question are in 2 Armee area. In either event, the Nachrichtenblatt report that denied Bishop made the raid had at least TWO items wrong. First, according to the report, he didn't make the raid as claimed on 7 June, 1917. And they also doubted his claim for FOUR aircraft shot down.

This is ok though, since his dawn raid was on 2 June, 1917, not 7 June. And he claimed THREE aircraft shot down, not four.

VBR,

Al Lowe