Billy Bishop: 'Liar and Cheat'

[Ron_F]

Hugh,

an excellent point made about what pilots percieved, or maybe ghost writers did. But that episode, other that Mcaffery embellishing it without checking sources, proves only that BB 'thought' it was MvR. and he was apparently wrong, since MvR didnt fly that day....

im sure you'll agree, that many pilots, when seeing a grandish colored German scout, or even a splash of Red, thought it was Richthofen himself.

as to color of his Nieport, what are the references to that it was changed? i think there was a passage in his book that they painted it for him, due to his sucess, but im not sure if the date is mentioned....

[Hugh_A._Halliday]

Bishop exhibits a pattern of letting the story grow and grow. To take a very glaring example - the original documents state Scott's machine was hit by one bullet, but by 1934 Bishop writes that "He had...also considerably damaged Major Scott, and had shot through part of his engine, with the result that it was operating at reduced power."

Details of aircraft markings etc are provided by Philip Markham and Greg Van Wyngarden, "Bishop's Aircraft - Colours and Markings, No.60 Squadron, RFC" in OVER THE FRONT, Volume 10 No.3 (1995) citing letters written by Bishop at the time to his fiancee. Nothing like original sources !

[EARTHLING]

Tom Cervo

Three points arise regarding your remarks about Bishop not meeting Fokker DR1's:

1 The question was addressed to Al Lowe, who makes a point of not replying.
2 85 Squadron had joined up with a patrol from 74 Squadron and had encountered a mixed bag of Pfalz and Fokker DR1's. This means that they were in the vicinity. This was soon after 85 had arrived in France.
3 Dallas CO of 40 Squadron was shot down on 6th June 1918 by 3 Fokker Triplanes. Bishop was in France according to his victory list from 27th May- 19th June.

I find it surprising that he appears never to have met one. 4 Pfalz shot down on 19th June?

VBR
Peter S

[Billy_Bishop]

* * *"Entrenched belief is never altered by the facts." *Anonymous

"I try not to let the facts get in the way of the truth."

Randall Wallace
Writer/Producer

[Billy_Bishop]

Why do we have doubts in the case of W Bishop and as far as I am aware nobody else?
By this I mean doubts expressed by fellow flyers.
Al
I do not think it serves any useful purpose, to bring ones personal circumstances into a discussion, unless it is to make us feel guilty.
Why no comment on the lack of Fokker Tripehounds in the record of the three weeks in command of 85 Squadron. Did he never see one?

Regards as always
Peter S

I'm sure, if we dig long enough and deep enough into other pilot's histories, that we will find that some where, some one doubted everyone. There were, some who doubted Frank Luke. But again, his first CO, Harold Hartney did not. There were stories after the war that attacked Albert Ball. As well, Ira "Taffy" Jones wrote a series of articles attacking Manfred von Richthofen as well.

For the most part, I think that we find evidence of doubt about Bishop from SOME of his contemporaries BECAUSE we have dug so deep into his story.

As for the Fokker Dr. I, if Bishop had encounted one, I'm sure he would have reported it. Since he did not, then he must not have seen it. Also remember, the Dr. I was falling into disfavour following MvR's death. And there were only 320 of them built.

As before, I saw no reason to mention it, since I thought Tom C. explained it pretty well.

As for my mentioning personal references, that was my way of demonstrating traits that I saw in common between war veterans. While it is not something all vets have in common. It is a phenomonon that can be observed among a number of vets who saw combat.

I don't see it as an excuse for post war actions, but perhaps as a way to better understand those actions. From all accounts, Bishop's post war drinking habits only became worse as time wore on.

Some would call it an attack of conscience for telling lies. I would call it an attack of conscience for the death and destruction he caused.

Liars very seldom have an attack of conscience. If they can tell a lie that gets them fame and fortune, they will continue to tell lies and eventually get caught at it.

I some how doubt that a liar would have the fortitude to go stomping across the continent recruiting pilots for a training program, and in so doing, ruin his health almost to the point death, and at the very least, shortening his life span by numerous years.

I am sometimes amazed at how we can so easily forget his contributions during WWII while we're caught up arguing about what he did or didn't do in WWI.

Although I also wonder, if he had been killed in action in WWI, if we'd be having this conversation at all.

VBR,

Al Lowe

[Hugh_A._Halliday]

Speaking of questions that have gone unanswered, some that were posed in Post No.259 and repeated in Post No.280 have still not been answered. They arise from Stephen Dieter's published review of THE MAKING OF BILLY BISHOP. To repeat:

(a) What is the passage in a periodical which he states was "severely misquoted" by Greenhouse ?

(b) To what degree does the Greenhous version differ from the original ?

© Which passages does he believe have been inadequately foot-noted ?

(d) How would he compare the level of scholarship (particularly in primary vs secondary sources) of Greenhous vs others such as McCaffrey or Bashow ?

[Hugh_A._Halliday]

"Liars very seldom have an attack of conscience. If they can tell a lie that gets them fame and fortune, they will continue to tell lies and eventually get caught at it."

A generalization which assumes that liars never stop (debatable) and are always caught (debatable; the people who routinely bash politicains will likely disagree most vocally)

"I some how doubt that a liar would have the fortitude to go stomping across the continent recruiting pilots for a training program, and in so doing, ruin his health almost to the point death, and at the very least, shortening his life span by numerous years."

Why ? Does stretching the truth in 1917-1918 incapacitate a man for life ?

"I am sometimes amazed at how we can so easily forget his contributions during WWII while we're caught up arguing about what he did or didn't do in WWI."

Admitting his Second World War services (which were significant but let us not get carried away; while Bishop was attending wings parades he had a very efficient Air Commodore running the office) the Second World War services are irrelevant to the subect of the debate as to his First World War career.

"Although I also wonder, if he had been killed in action in WWI, if we'd be having this conversation at all."

Like, types like Ball or Richthofen having been killed in action, nobody ever writes in about them ?

[Billy_Bishop]

"Although I also wonder, if he had been killed in action in WWI, if we'd be having this conversation at all."

Like, types like *Ball or Richthofen having been killed in action, nobody ever writes in about them ?

To be sure, people have written about both MvR and Ball. And there have been attacks made on both men, but none, I dare say, to the degree that Bishop has been attacked.

VBR,

Al Lowe

[Ron_F]

how many times did 85sqn flights meet up with Dr1s? with exception of Mannock on 22 July, none of the other recorded aces (according to ATT) shot 1 down. does that make it curious as to thier achievements?

60 sqn flamed a Dr1 in June, but no mention of it in the text. but Scott does give reference to Fokker biplanes in August, showing up in numbers. I'd think that if one of his pilots shot down a triplane, it would have been mentioned.... of course, i take into account that his book is more a collection of reports and accounts by Scott and various other pilots...

food for thot....

[Hugh_A._Halliday]

"Generally speaking, liars who tell stories of the magnitude to which Bishop has been accused, are usually found out sooner or later."

Could it then be that Bishop has finally been found out ?