Billy Bishop: 'Liar and Cheat'

[GuyCanuck]

An article appeared in our local newspaper this morning under the above-mentionned headline.
QUOTING:
"First World War flying ace Billy Bishop was a "fraud" and a "mythomaniac" says a retired National Defence historian in a book to be released June 1. Bishop, who died in 1956, shot down no more than 27 planes - about a third of the 72 he claimed to have knocked out of the sky, says Brereton Greenhous in "The Making of Billy Bishop". Only 4 victories were witnessed by others.
Bishop was a man of mediocre attainments driven to seek fame, said Mr. Greenhous. At Royal Military College, Bishopn was caught cheating on his first-year examination and sent back to repeat the year.
But even more of a motivator, he was engaged to Margaret Burden, the granddaughter of department store magnate Timothy EEaton. The small town boy from Owen Sound had to prove he deserved her.
And, at the time, the British military needed a war hero to rival Germany's "Red Baron", Manfred von Richthofen.
Mr. Greenhou believes the entire story of an attack on a German airfield, in which Bishop claimed to have destroyed 3 planes and been hit in the process, was concocted. Instead, he says, Bishop landed somewhere behind French lines, detached his Lewis gun from its mounting and fired a short burst into the tail of hos own Nieuport 17.
.......he was brave, good looking, and charming - he was a Victoria Cross. People assumed that he must be an honest man." END OF QUOTE
Even though Mr. Greenhous's book has not yet been released, it has already stirred up a simmering controversy.
It appears that there will now be another dogfight!

[Aviatik]

...I can already hear Al Lowe loading his guns!

Aviatik

[SEDieter]

Brereton Greenhous was also referred to as some who "lets his enthusiasm carry him away some times."

This is a long-standing axe issue for Mr. Greenhous. Some years back(1989) he wrote an article in the Canadian Historical Review entitled "The Sad Case of Billy Bishop VC" which summarized his problems with Bishop's record.

Does he prove anything? Does he refute anything? In the end, I have to say that after 90 years there is no absolutes, other than those who were there have passed on.

Having read pretty much anything relating to Bishop in the twelve years I've been working on this subject, including over four and one-half at the Billy Bishop Museum, one thing seems clear. Those who believe in Bishop hate to see his image tarnished, and those who don't believe Bishop will look at the same evidence to magnify not what is there, but what is missing.

Steven Dieter
Former Historian
Billy Bishop Museum

[Lyle]

Bishop was a man of mediocre attainments driven to seek fame, said Mr. Greenhous. *

I believe this statement shows that Mr. Greenhous doesn't really have a clue...men of mediocre talents do not go very far, and the VC for Bishop is evidence of his abilities. Bishop got to his position in life because of his own efforts, connections or no connections.

"Ambition is not a vice of little men."
Napoleon Bonaparte

[Billy_Bishop]

...I can already hear Al Lowe loading his guns!

Aviatik

Locked, loaded, and going to fly on Newtalk 570 at about 3:45PM today. Those in Kitchener-Waterloo-Cambridge Ontario, or anywhere within listening distance.

VBR,

Al Lowe

[WFS]

Al:

This sounds like the best reason yet for you to write your Billy Bishop book.

Wayne

[jbs]

I hold in my hand today's Toronto Star, it states the book is due by June of this year.

Quote: pg A25

"He was encouraged by his superiors to lie, but he was a natyral liar anyway" :'( >- (the so called Historian) Brereton Greenhous

Al, I mist your comments but I was with you in heart, Let us know when you need to reload.

[SEDieter]

I was just interviewed on-air by CKCO television, the CTV affiliate here in Kitchener. *They had an interview with Mr. Greenhous and his "claims".

His "new" evidence is the Weekly Activity Reports filed by Army Air Commanders. *In fact, it isn't new and Greenhous admits this in the footnotes of his new book:

The provenance of this report (and two others, one for the previous week and the second for the same week by the neighbouring KoFl.6) is unclear, but they appear to have been acquired and translated by the late Fred Steiger, DHist's (as it then was) German expert, probably during and after one of his research trips to West Germany in the 1960s and early 1970s. *Alternatively, they may have been donated by Phil Markham, who acquired them from his American friend, the late Ed Ferko, who vast archive of German air material was deposited with the University of Texas.

So, there you go. *Even the author, who says the truth needs to be told, isn't absolutely certain about the origins of his key sources.

[Craig]

Some things never change.

I personally doubt that BB performed "that famous raid", and that his, and the scores of most British Empire aces are wildly innacurrate. I do so because of the lack of evidence that they were accurate, and the ample evidence that they were inaccurate.

BUT, that's beside the point, which is: why is it that so many Forumites, who distrust their own "gummint" in their own time, (at least, prior to 9-11) somehow find it okay to trust the Britsh government of 1917 so blindly? I refer to the "he had a VC, so therefore he was honorable" tack. What's WITH that? Is it really inconcievable that he was awarded the VC without really earning it?

[Stephanie]

It has not come to my attention that anyone here trusts the British government, let alone "blindly"