Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 6th September 2008

Free Capercaillie CD

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Time to remember



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 07 November 2007
AN IMAGE of war soon to be covered by a shroud of secrecy. The sinking of the Lancastria, built on the Clyde, captained by a Scot, and hit by a German Junkers Ju 88, was the worst single loss of life in British maritime history.
This photograph, taken less than 20 minutes after the bombing on 17 June, 1940, shows a few survivors struggling to keep their heads above water as the vessel, belching smoke, goes under with the loss of an estimated 4,000 lives.

So traumatic was the disaster that Winston Churchill, the prime minister, slapped on an order preventing details being published for 100 years.

Today, a new battle has begun to create a commemorative medal in honour of the victims.

At the time this picture was taken, Reg Brown, a Royal Engineer, was still in the water, fighting for his life. Yesterday, Mr Brown, 87, said: "We swam through the dead, dodged the oil and the flames and dived down when the Germans strafed the water. We were lucky, but 67 years on we're still fighting for recognition."

It is a fight The Scotsman is proud to join. The Scotsman was the first and only British newspaper to defy a "D-notice" that banned any reporting of the sinking, which claimed the lives of 400 of the 1,000 plus Scots on board, to maintain morale at a time of national crisis.

We reported the heroism and courage of those on board a ship which was carrying infantry units such as the Fife and Forth Yeomanry attached to the 51st Highland Division; the 6th Battalion Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders and the Kings Own Scottish Borderers.

Yesterday, MSPs also joined the campaign to secure a commemorative medal for survivors of the Lancastria or their families by agreeing to write to the Ministry of Defence, the Scottish Government and the Corporate body of the Scottish Government. Holyrood's petitions committee listened to an impassioned speech by Mark Hirst, whose grandfather Walter survived, but like everyone involved was sworn to secrecy under the threat of a court-martial.

Mr Hirst said last night: "It's excellent news that The Scotsman is to get behind our campaign. The newspaper was very courageous at the time to report the sinking and wrote a strong editorial. It's good to have its support once again. Our members and particularly the survivors will be delighted."

Earlier Mr Hirst, who lives in Abernethy, Perthshire, told MSPs: "Successive British governments have chosen not to mark or commemorate this incident. However, our view is that those who took part in this forgotten event deserve a level of official recognition." He appealed to MSPs to correct the "decades of silence" and reverse the "sense of ingratitude" that survivors and families of victims still feel to this day. The committee then agreed to find out if the Scottish Parliament had the authority to award such a medal.

The Lancastria Association of Scotland, which has members around the world, has campaigned since 2005 for greater recognition of an event which, as a result of Churchill's D-notice, is largely unknown.

Fiona Symon, whose father Andrew Richardson, from Kirkcaldy, was one of the victims, said the disaster "cried out for acknowledgement". She added: "My mother died in 1992 still very bitter and sad. My father's life and the lives of the thousands who died with him seemed to be regarded by the country as being of less value than others who died in the Second World War who are remembered with honour. In many cases the survivors have suffered more than any of us. They've had to live out their lives with the horrendous memories and nightmares. Today, they would have been offered counselling but instead they were forbidden to talk about it and have been forgotten and ignored."

She said there was no shame in the disaster being covered up initially as "desperate times called for desperate measures". But she added: "The shame came in the silence and the cover up over the 67 years which have followed."

The Lancastria was launched in 1920 as a Cunard liner although her original name, Tyrrhenia, was changed after American customers said they could not pronounce it. The outbreak of war brought an end to scheduled sailings to New York and at first she carried cargo before being requisitioned in April 1940 as a troop ship, assisting in the evacuation of troops from Norway.

In June 1940 the Lancastria was sent to the mouth of the Loire as part of Operation Oriel to evacuate servicemen as well as women and children.

Although designed to carry 2,200 it was instructed to board men "without regard to the limits set down under international law". The estimated number ranges from 5,000 to 9,000. The three direct hits at 3:48pm caused the ship to list to starboard then port. It rolled over and sank in 20 minutes.

There were only 2,477 survivors, with more than 4,000 believed killed, a death toll that accounted for roughly a third of the total losses of the British Expeditionary Force in France. Among the survivors was the Captain, Rudolph Sharp.

That afternoon witnessed many acts of courage, among them by a Scots priest, Father Charles McMenemy, who led men to safety and gave his own lifebelt to a Sergeant Major who could not swim. The priest, one of four Catholic chaplains on board was picked up after 45 minutes in the water.

Reg Brown, who now lives in England, was in the water for more than three hours. "When we were picked up two lovely French nurses stripped off our clothes and poured brandy down our throats." He said he was delighted The Scotsman was taking up their fight.

Last night, a spokesman for the Ministry of Defence said: "The MoD does not issue commemorative medals to mark specific incidents during the Second World War."

How paper stood up for truth

THE SCOTSMAN


AFTER the troopship Lancastria was sunk by Nazi bombers at the cost of around 4,000 lives, the prime minister, Winston Churchill, imposed a "D notice" on the incident.

It prevented survivors or those who went to the aid of the stricken ship from discussing what they had seen, and forbade newspapers from reporting the tragedy.

However, The Scotsman refused to accept that such a disaster should be hidden from the public.

Under the editor, Sir George Waters, the newspaper took the decision to print the story, following a report in the New York Sun believed to be somewhat erroneous.

In an editorial, The Scotsman said such losses as those suffered in the tragedy "unfortunately cannot be avoided in withdrawal operations, and it may be wondered why the fate of the Lancastria was not disclosed until a report, not altogether accurate, had appeared in the American press".

The leader writer goes on to deliver a somewhat damning judgment of the government's actions.

"The government have given repeated assurances that it is not their policy to conceal news of losses and reverses, since they know the people of this country are not easily depressed by misfortunes.

"There is no reason to suppose that in general the government are not fulfilling their undertaking of dealing honestly with the people in the publication of information, and there may have been special reasons for delaying the announcement of the loss of the Lancastria.

"Yet it is obvious that the belated release of news gives an opportunity for rumour to get busy, and to embellish facts in a sensationalist form.

"It also spreads suspicions that the government policy is to tell the public what they think is good for them and nothing more."

The writer concludes that "frank and timely publication of information, good or bad, is the best antidote for gossip and distrust".

Last night, Mark Hirst, of the Lancastria Association Scotland, said the opinion piece was "very strong and powerful", particularly given the stage of the war at which it was written.

PARLIAMENT AGREEMENT

TODAY


THE Scottish Parliament's petitions committee yesterday agreed to write to the Ministry of Defence, the Scottish Government and the corporate body of the Scottish Government after a plea by relatives of the survivors for the Lancastria to be recognised.

The campaigners say in their petition that the UK government has not designated the wreck of the Lancastria a maritime war grave and there is still no official memorial to the victims.

They say the Scottish Parliament should commission a medal to go to each survivor or to the families of survivors.

The full article contains 1432 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 06 November 2007 11:22 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: World War II
 
1

Mad King Bambo,

Roon at Flabskin's bit 07/11/2007 00:34:14

"How paper stood up for truth"

Aye.

These were the days.

2

Richardinho,

07/11/2007 00:37:49

If the government banned reporting of this incident at the time so as not to damage morale, why did the Scotsman defy this ban, and why does it still think it did something clever?

3

Col. Blimp IV*,

07/11/2007 00:53:34

#1 and #2

You are both absolutely right.

4

Hula,

07/11/2007 00:56:40

No surprise that the Scotsman has a long, long history of being a complete pratt of a paper. Only surprise is it brags about it. No fool like an old fool.

"NEXT WEEK, ONLY IN THE SCOTSMAN!!!

We reveal the names of your friends who work for MI5, even though there is a press embargo on these hard working heroes!!!

Hurrah!!!

5

brian mcc,

the arctic 07/11/2007 00:57:27

100 year shroud of secrecy. An overloaded vessel designed for 2200. Not the 1st time in maritime history and in time of war, won't be the last. "You have served well, but if you ever speak of this disaster, expect court martial."

6

James C,

07/11/2007 01:31:52

Many people in the UK with a maritime background have heard of this tragedy, but hardly anyone else has - yet it massively eclipses THAT ship which sank in the North Atlantic.
The wreck site has never been designated a War Grave - something the MOD has refused to do because she was a 'civilian' ship. Now THAT is CRIMINAL.

7

Guga II,

Rockall 07/11/2007 03:26:48

No less than you'd expect from that total a******* Churchill; trying to pervert history.

He was the man who, apart from continually seeking to aggrandise himself, was responsible for the disaster at the Dardanelles. He was the man responsible for sending the troops in against the miners at Tonypandy in 1910, and was also responsible for sending 10,000 English troops, and tanks, in against the Red Clydesiders in 1919.

Strange, isn't it, that so many of these event have been conveniently air-brushed from history; mainly to preserve the phony image of that drunk who, during the Second World War, spent most of his time drinking champagne and whisky, and smoking large cigars, whilst the plebs were trying to survive on rations.

Anyway, it is quite noticeable that the Hootsmon was once a decent newspaper that was willing to stand up for the rights of the people; rather than being as it is now, a supporter and apologist for the New Labour Numpty Party.

8

tomi,

07/11/2007 04:39:36

#4 Obviously, you would love to live under a dictatorship

9

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta, CA vote Hillary Clinton... US Pres. 07/11/2007 04:56:51

The sinking of the Lancastria, was in my opinion a horrific tragety of war.

But I find that WC's censoring of that event to the people, was even a greater tragety for freedom of speech .

Our Pres Bush and VP Cheney does that censoring stuff , all the while we remain in IRAQ.

GC

10

Boy Wonder,

07/11/2007 07:08:03

#7. Oh how my grandad used to rage over "that bl**dy warmonger, Churchill, who had as much blood on his hands as any war criminal!" He hated the man with a vengeance. I don't know if he knew about the Lancastria (I certainly didn't) but if he did, it just would have enraged him further and he'd've hated Churchill all the more.

I can understand a "D" notice during a war such as WWII was ... in only in retrospect. It should have been lifted right after the war, allowing this country to grieve properly for its fallen dead.

I don't know about a commemorative medal being struck. Should there be one for such a tragic loss of life??

A for the Hootsmon ignoring the "D" notice, well why doesn't that not surprise me? So much for supporting the war effort, eh?? This rag hasn't changed its colours, only sides ... and it probably will again.

11

eddylongshanks,

07/11/2007 07:39:38

Guga - if its all been airbrushed from history how do we all know about it ?

12

St Andrew,

Edinburgh 07/11/2007 07:52:14

1 - 10 Churchill did have his faults and was not a good peace time leader but at a time of the country's darkest hour he stood up to be counted and pulled things together, fought hard to get the Americans into the war and saved the UK from a fate worse than death from the Nazis.
Of course he would want to ban any reports of this disaster at the time as it happened during a time when our survival was still in the balance and moral was important.
However that should not have stopped any post war government up to today to have the details published.
This article is about honouring the brave soldiers and sailors not placing blame.

13

eddylongshanks,

07/11/2007 08:03:02

#12 but its a common theme in this part of the world and particularly on these threads to place the blame, one of the stumbling blocks to progress I fear.

14

Auld Dodd,

Leven 07/11/2007 08:23:42

"We reported the heroism and courage of those on board a ship which was carrying infantry units such as the Fife and Forth Yeomanry"

I wonder if they got the name correct back then ?
It's The Fife and Forfar Yeomanry.

15

Dr. James Wilkie,

07/11/2007 08:30:02

The worst sea disasters of all time were the sinking by Soviet submarines of two German liners carrying civilian refugees and wounded soldiers from the Baltic countries. In one of them more than 9,000 people lost their lives, in the other somewhat less but still on the scale of the Lancastria.

16

Guga II,

Rockall 07/11/2007 08:34:32

#11 eddyenglishman. You are a fool. We do not all know about it. If you have any friends, ask them if they know who John MacLean was. I doubt, in your part of the world that any of them will have heard of the Red Clydesiders, or know about them sending 10,000 English troops and tanks in against Scottish civilians.

17

inter alia,

07/11/2007 08:36:22

My Uncle Dan [Trooper' Lothian and Border Horse] was among those who drowned in the Lancastria. My father and his remaining brother [another brother, Tucker, L/Cpl Cameron Highlanders' died of bayonet wounds at St Valery] knew how their brother(s) had died. Sometime after the end of the Second World War my Dad received his medals. He threw them in the back of a drawer. Think my Mum chucked them in the bucket. At my advanced age, I see now what they meant. Politicians - emphasising differences between folk - and not similarities - are the guilty gits.

18

scully,

colchester 07/11/2007 08:37:27

THE FUTILITY OF WAR. NOTHING CHANGES.

19

Porry,

The Continent 07/11/2007 08:40:41

It is high time to commemorate this incident and those who lost their lives in it. At the same time we should stop writing of 'Nazi bombers' when we write of German Air Force planes, as the term Nazi refers to a political party. Except for the members of the 'Waffen-SS' (SS troops were originally not part of the German armed forces), German career officers were not permitted to join Hitler's party.

20

Guga II,

Rockall 07/11/2007 08:55:27

#21 99% of them were Nazis, while they were winning.

21

carrottop,

Dumfries 07/11/2007 09:21:10

Why don't the Scotsman and the rest of the Scottish press call the bluff and publish full known details of the incident now complete with survivors reports, they could also set up a memorial service for the next of kin who still survive. The point must be who will care enough to do anything once the next of kin and survivors are no longer with us and would guess this is what is worrying people associated with this incident.

22

gus1940,

07/11/2007 09:30:53

#17

The 'Wilhelm Gustlov' - a former 'strength through joy' cruise liner.

23

Dung like a Honky,

johannesburg 07/11/2007 09:37:22

the more serious question this raises is just how many D notices and the like are currently in force, and why the British public are spoonfed with a diet of government approved information. Solution? A constitution for Britain and each constituent country or province in WRITING and a multi-party review of ALL D notice material. And if it embarrasses anyone, then too bad.

24

williams,

livingston 07/11/2007 09:41:04

* 22 Guga, you are obviously a diehard Nationalist; fine, hate the Scotsman; fine, but when you say that 99% of Germans during the second world war were Nazis, then you are talking absolute drivel.
Stick to what you think you know about.

25

Dr. James Wilkie,

07/11/2007 09:53:17

On the subject of suppression of facts, we are still awaiting the true story of how the recall of the Scottish Parliament came about - and it wasn't a Labour Party initiative! Not even the Scotsman has dared to print the facts.

26

Dougie - Edinburgh,

07/11/2007 10:07:57

7. Guga II, Rockall
What would you have preferred he did? Allow a communist revolution in Scotland? Look at what a mess that made of Russia and be glad he didn't!

22. Guga II, Rockall
99% of Germans were fighting for their own country just as our grandfathers fought for theirs.

27

Dougie - Edinburgh,

07/11/2007 10:13:26

#24 Wilhelm Gustloff :)

28

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 07/11/2007 10:25:57

-- Churchill did have his faults

And the Devil may have some virtues.

God, it seems, looks after his facists; Stalin his partner in crime lingered on, and on and on, despite attempts to poison him. Aye, Stalin did have his faults like getting Russians to bear the brunt of winning WW2 so that righties can mouth off so that the USA, once led by Washington and Lincoln, now is Bushista slum nation under control by the Cheney gang.

"The Third World by the Rocky Mountains" as Chinese see it.

O my. Where do we go from here?

29

Peter,

Archie's Toupee 07/11/2007 10:39:24

An estimated 300,000 troops were evacuated during this retreat. In terms of overall numbers of the losses incurred it was acceptable in military terms considering that the original target for the evacuation was 100,000.

I can see why, at the time, Churchill did what he did. They had turned a total military disaster into a propaganda victory. Lancastria would have reminded people at home of the scale of the actual defeat.

In war personal has to take a back seat. I hope these MSP's can get this sorted and lance this boil that has long festered amongst families in Fife.

That Maggie Broon et al have never had the D notice lifted in the last 30 odd years leaves you wondering what other bags of rusty nails have been hidden by D notices that government would rather not come to light?

30

Dougie - Edinburgh,

07/11/2007 10:59:49

#31 I know of another related war time cover-up by the British government; the bombing of the German ship Cap Arcona which contained mainly prisoners. There are Dutch documents which show the British government was warned about this but the bombing (and strafing of survivors in the water) was ordered anyway with the result of thousands of Allied and Soviet deaths. British documents about this incident are protected for 100 years.

31

Purlie Wilson,

Melbourne Australia 07/11/2007 11:10:17

Some secret, check out Lancastria on the Internet, every man and his dog has something to say.

32

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 07/11/2007 11:24:26

-- I can see why, at the time, Churchill did what he did.

Why, Peter? Are you a psychopath too? Their intelligence is always on paranoia red alert; they will put on the charming face when it's the best defence and this, I warn, goes for and will disarm otherwise sensible women.

CHURCHILL NEVER HAD A PRINCIPLE HE DID NOT AT THE END BETRAY.

This does not mean that there was no slant to his actions, no systematic bias.

There was, and that bias was towards LOWERING THE BARRIERS TO STATE POWER.

i.e. betrayal was his only game and do you not see him as more the flunky at the gate rather than war hero? You make your choice.

It's not surprising he is venerated by Margaret Thatcher , old croaker Pinochet and Gordon Brown.

33

Sgritheall,

Switzerland 07/11/2007 12:04:12

#12 St Andrew

saved the UK from a fate worse than death from the Nazis

what is a fate worse than death? Let me know if you can think of one.

34

Pomona man,

07/11/2007 12:26:22

The Queen Mary II has an extensive permanent display of the history of Cunard (and of White Star), their Captains and their Ships in peacetime and in war. The story of the Lancastria and her tragic end is there for all to see. So it's no secret, but unfortunately can only be seen by those fortunate enough to take a passage on this magnificent ship.

A medal is not appropriate. Quite rightly the MoD have stated their position on this. However, a memorial is long overdue. Most memorials of this nature are paid for by public subscription, not the MoD. It therefore just needs someone to open a fund, and who better to do this than the Scotsman. And not just for the Scottish dead, but for all nationalities who lost their lives. So come on, Scotsman. Start a fund for a memorial to the victims of the Lancastria. Get an English newspaper on board. Invite ideas - especially from the survivors - as to where it should be and what form it should take. Invite the survivors and families of the dead to the unveiling. Give them that lasting recognition.

Meanwhile, it high time the MoD designated wrecks of civilian vessels chartered into war service as war graves to give them the protection they deserve rather than suffer the ignomity of pillage as will otherwise inevitably happen one day

35

Ayrshire Scot™,

07/11/2007 12:41:05

40 Wini

would you care to elaborate on the groups you think are living a fate worse than death ?

36

Pomona man,

07/11/2007 13:06:26

According to BBC History, I now read that the Lancastria IS a designated war grave (which seems right considering she was actually a Royal navy vessel at the time carrying the designatory letters HMT). So who's right? I can't find an official list of navy war grave vessels on the web, so can anyone else give an authorative answer?

37

The grouch,

Ontario 07/11/2007 13:11:17

Hey Guga, You just get back from the twilight zone??
Had a bad Hair Day, huh... Gotta' lighten up..All that hate is gonna make you a cross eyed Scotty..It's a heavy cross to carry, being a closet Marxist...But, it's still not to late my Chunky Friend..Leave the cave and get some SUN..Get a Little Love In Your Heart..
Think Thin..Shalom

38

Porry,

07/11/2007 13:22:02

Since Dougie mentions it (#33), the 'Cap Arcona' had 7,500 KZ-prisoners from Hamburg-Neuengamme on board when she was sunk off Neustadt/Holstein in 1945 by the Royal Navy. British troops that had advanced as far as Lübeck (roughly 30 km from Neustadt) at that time, knew about the passengers, however, the message had not reached the RAF before the ship (and with it the freighter 'Thielbek') was attacked.

39

malkster,

Scotland 07/11/2007 13:24:08

#37

Yep no priciples but he got the job done didn't he and saved the country.

40

pcxas1,

Germany 07/11/2007 13:28:00

12: "Churchill saved the UK from a fate worse than death from the Nazis."

What did Churchill saved the UK from?
Hitler detested that he had to fight England.
If he had only be half as keen to wage war against
England as Churchill was against Germany, than
Britain would have been conquert.
In fact, the Generals which tried to overthow Hitler
in 1944 blamed him for not using the chance to
occupy Britain in 1940.
Churchill only wanted to be known as a big war hero this time , not for the mess-up at the Dardanells a war earlier.

41

malkster,

Scotland 07/11/2007 13:32:50

#48

We didn't go to war with Germany for the sake of it we stood up to the bully.

42

Nobby Clarke,

christchurch 07/11/2007 13:37:28

Churchill's baleful influence extends to the present day in two ways: the client state relationship with the USA, and his rejection of the offer of an alliance from De Gaulle on 11 November 1994.

Both back from the grave!!

43

Partan,

Fife 07/11/2007 13:39:31

#44 I'm told that the idea of such ships automatically being war graves is more of a popular myth than a legal fact.

#14 The Fife and Forfar Yeomanry were an armoured regiment - not infantry as the article suggested - during WW2. They were originally a cavalry unit.
Sorry if I'm trying to teach my granny to suck eggs

#38
Some might consider the fate of those in the concentration camps to be just one possible example of a fate worse than death?

44

malkster,

Scotland 07/11/2007 13:45:23

#50

I didn't think Churchill or De Gaulle were alive in 1994

45

Partan,

Fife 07/11/2007 13:54:10

#48
"Hitler detested that he had to fight England"
I'm sure that knowing it wasn't personal makes us all feel a lot better about his conduct.

p.s. Was it only "England" he detested fighting? What about the rest of the folk from home and abroad who helped them out a bit?

46

pcxas1,

Germany 07/11/2007 13:54:38

49: "We didn't go to war with Germany for the sake of it we stood up to the bully."

Sure - an imperial power defends selflessly other
countries.
My point is, that Churchill carried on after the fall
of France mainly of selfinterest. It certainly was
not in the interest of Britain continuing the war
war against Germany, when the German leaders
didn't want a war against Britain.
Quote Hitler: "The British Empire is important for
the balance of power. If we invade Britain, than
the British Empire falls apart und we have paid with
German blood something that will only benefit
Amerika and Russia."

It sad that the British and German people fought each other only that Stalin could expand his influence into the middle of Europe.

47

Misty from Canada,

Winnipeg Manitoba Canada 07/11/2007 13:54:46

The loss of life in war is the curse of war. The hiding of facts or errors which caused deaths is just as bad. It is over and the truth should be available for historians as it leads to a lesson learned and perhaps a peace. 11 Nov 07 is close and we will not forget. Where do I write to support the release of this.

48

Nellie,

Liverpool 07/11/2007 13:56:29

#37 I think that is a bit of a generalisation about Chirchill. At least he didn't fotget why we went to war on Germany, which was because of our defence pact with Poland. Unfortunately, Churchill was not allowed to "finish the job" and liberate Poland from the other aggressors and occupational force in poland, Stalin's Russia. This was because it suited the USA's Roosevelt not to support such a campaign! (Just as well, I suppose, because we'd probably have lost against the Red Army!)

49

malkster,

Scotland 07/11/2007 13:59:40

#54

Hitler was a madman of course we had to stand up to him. He was gassing people in concentration camps! I realise you Germans have a bit of a guilt issue but stop rewriting history.

50

pcxas1,

Germany 07/11/2007 14:15:12

57: "Hitler was a madman of course we had to stand up to him. He was gassing people in concentration camps! "

There was certainly no gassing in concentration camps in 1939 or 1940.
Hitler ordered the "Final solution" exactly BECAUSE
Britain and the USA were fighting him und he thought the Jews were behind it.

I wonder how many years have still to pass to call
a senseless war senseless.

51

Mobat,

07/11/2007 14:18:46

#54

Is this a Wah!!

Self interest, no, it was to put the likes of Hitler in the box they belong.

As for the Lancastria, this is long overdue, lots of folk out there putting work in to get the recognition. There was a petition on the government site, and very good YK and French sites too. Allways get a bit dust in my eyes when I hear "roll out the barrel" now

52

malkster,

Scotland 07/11/2007 14:52:10

#58

You make the slaughter of millions of people sound rational, people like you are frightening.

53

american billy,

billy usa 07/11/2007 15:05:25

I also remembered the sinking of the Athenia on September 3 1939
a civilian passenger liner full of woman and children sunk by one of hitlers submarine aces Fritz Julius.
Hitler had the ships log destroid as to not rejoicing in the disaster
427 people lost there lives.

54

Gayle,

Scot abroad 07/11/2007 15:09:05

These men deserve recognition, they sacrificed their lives so we could be free.

That's what we should remember.

So that being said, here's to my mom who served in the Air Force stationed in London England. I am proud and honoured to know her and others who fought during this dark time.

55

inter alia,

07/11/2007 15:38:39

#62: Gayle: what a load of s*i*e. " .. they sacrificed their lives .." They were in the bloody army. You do as you're told.

56

Hagar,

Somersaete 07/11/2007 15:40:03

#7 Guga - Not surprised you dislike Churchill as he stood against Hitler, you seem to share his political views on a regular basis.

57

Tomdonald,

07/11/2007 15:46:38

I reckon the average age of contributors to this topic, and many others is about 43, half my age.
Get it into your heads that WWW3 started on 9/11. It will finish when ObL is captured.
The other day Tippett's obituary concluded with the words "I did not bomb Pearl Harbour, I did not start the War (WW2), but I was going to finish it"
The Lancastria killed about 5% of the number killed instantly in Hiroshima.
I wonder how many contributors say "deliver us from evil" - never, 5 per annum, 7 per week, 12 per day?

58

Ross Fyffe,

Scotland 07/11/2007 15:53:33

I would like to see the Scotsman try to release the Dunvblane papers, anothe rset banned for relaease for 100 years .................. and we all know why those papers are hidden from view and it is certainally not for the survivors sake .....................

So come on Scotsman campaign for another real story .

59

James C,

07/11/2007 15:55:55

The Lancastria is not an official war grave, the 'HMT' status is meaningless in that context as she was still a civilian ship but on charter to the MOD and most of her original (Civilian) crew remained with her. This was the same for most of the Merchant ships sunk during the war.
There is some information on wikipedia about her.
The French have made some moves in recent years to protect the wreck site from Divers and looters, however it is a national disgrace that the UK Govt isn't even interested. How much would it really cost to give it the legal protection it deserves?
Over 30,000 Merchant Navy men were killed in the Second World War - all of them civilians, all of them volunteers and it was down to them and only them that the UK survived. Otherwise there would have been no food on the table and no fuel, if the Germans had won the Battle of the Atlantic then Britain would have had to capitulate in weeks.
It is also little known that you were actually SAFER in the Army/Royal Navy/Airforce than in the Merchant Navy.
The percentage loss of each force stands at:

Army 6.0%
RAF 9.0%
Royal Navy 9.3%
Merchant Navy 17%

Please remember those brave men this weekend - they are forgotten all too often.

60

Armstrong Cowan,

Germany 07/11/2007 16:02:39

They were desperate times calling for desparate measures and rewriting history and calling Winston Churchill names is ridiculous. I am from Fife and my mother and father met as teenagers whilst working for the Royal Navy at Rosyth. They knew nothing about the sinking of the Aircraft Carrier Glorious in the North Sea nor the other two Carriers that went down in the Clyde and the Forth . They were involved with the Murmansk convoys that didn't come back. Our leadership did what they thought was right at the time. Now everyone calm down and be grateful and say thank you to the entire war generation that fought for our freedom. Thank God in Heaven that the Germans didn't win the war.

61

Gayle,

Big Smokey T.O. 07/11/2007 16:05:57

#63, Not here to spark a debate with you. The men I know who served as well as my mom and her sibs knew exactly why they were there.

They are not angry that they were there, which sparks the question. Were you?

62

Steve Ev,

Malta 07/11/2007 16:54:06

There have been many coverups during Wartime, for example closer to home take the sinkings in WW1 of the Hampshire and the Vanguard in the Orkneys with huge loss of life and covered up, and no doubt with Scottish crews on board. lets face it there will be cover ups as long as wars continue. Is the Vanguard now classed as a War Grave as I did a number of dives on her in the mid eighties ? Awesome

63

A.Mackenzie.,

USA 07/11/2007 16:57:25

I deplore governments' banning information until all guilty parties are dead. For example people don't know that Alexander Hamilton wrote Washington's Fairwell Address. His hand written script resides in the Library of Congress and was given by his family in 1859. Archives have a way of surviving. Incidentally did Edward 1 destroy the archives he stole from Einburgh in 1296 or 7?

64

Ayrshire Scot™,

07/11/2007 17:02:05

77 Wini

some fiend is having at you on the other thread

http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=1767642007#comme...

65

SeriouslyAmused,

07/11/2007 17:08:05

#68

Aye Jim and when their ship was lost, along with many comrades, what happened then? The survivors were treated with utter contempt - once the ship went down the men had no rights, employment and wages ceased instantly and when they eventually returned home had to line up to get another vessel (if of course they were fit for it, many who survived would have endured horrific injuries from exploding boilers and falling amongst the decks of their sinking vessel amongst other things) because there was nothing else they could do, their families would starve.

No heroes welcome for these brave souls.

66

Danielrober2,

In London for work 07/11/2007 17:20:08

Who was wrong? Hitler for starting the blasted war.

These D files from WW II should probably be opened. If there is any bad news and I’m there’s a heck of a lot of it. Lets just get it over with, rather than this drip feed of information keeping old flames alive. A 100 years probably seemed very sensible during that terrible war, so did freedom of information. A terrible time.

After all by the end of the war the UK won, with help from just about everyone, in spite of fighting on 3 different fronts. Europe, North Africa and the Far East. Churchill lead us through the night and what a hell of a night that was.

All four of my grandparents were active, one navy, one commando, one war munitions worker, the other (Glasgow girl) ‘still have not been told’. They all told me that Churchill was the right man, for the right job, at the right time. We where lucky, other politicians would have negotiated giving the German air force time to concentrate on Russia, whilst their navy built invasion boats. A terrible time.

67

Rami,

New Hampshire 07/11/2007 17:41:47

This is a very sorry event in History. I say
make a "Memorial of Dedication to God and
Country". I would look upon this tradgedy
as Scotland's Personal Pearl Harboure.

68

Steve Ev,

Malta 07/11/2007 17:46:58

Another terrible case of secrecy was the sinking of HMS Barhum on 25th November 1941 off Sollum North Africa. Hit by three torpedoes from U-331 her 15inch magazine blew up taking to the bottom 861 men (Scots amongst them). All news was kept from the next of kin for several weeks. The War Office wrote to those affected informing them not to talk to anyone about the incident. Whilst the photograph of sinking of the Lancastria is a sad one, spare a thought for the Barham, the whole event was filmed, Painful stuff !!!

69

Billy Boy,

LA LA Land California 07/11/2007 18:00:11

Growing up in Dundee I remember hearing stories about how much the people disliked Churchill. (he represented Dundee in Parliament, that is a story by its-self). One such story was about the loss of life of thousands of Scottish servicemen who Churchill had sent - against the advice of the admiralty- to reinfirce the singapore garrison. As I matured I was surprisd to hear such praise about him and it intrigued me. I bought a book written by Lord Moran -he was Churchills doctor- which confirmed what I had heard as a child. He was an intelligent, pompous, egotist. Was he good for Britain? thats subjective, was he good for Churchill? absolutely.

70

Ross Fyffe,

Scotland 07/11/2007 18:18:48

I would like to see the Scotsman try to release the Dunblane papers, another set banned for relaease for 100 years .................. and we all know why!!! those papers are hidden from view and it is certainally not for the survivors sake .....................

So come on Scotsman campaign for another real story .

71

emigre,

Anz 07/11/2007 18:48:40

(7) Churchill had his faults, but don't blame the Gallipoli slaughter on him. His plan would have seen a massive amphibious assault several months earlier than the actual landings, much further east along the channel. (source, GH Liddel Hart)
At that time, the Turkish garrison was only a few battalions.
The local naval commander, however, refused to follow this plan because a drifting mine damaged one of his ships. The attack was delayed so long that the Turks received massive reinforcement - including German advisors from the other end of the continent, and when it did happen, it was on the isolated tip of the peninsula. Not Churchill's plan, at all.

72

Caora Dubh,

Coirt sheasgair 07/11/2007 18:50:15

It was sunk during Operation Ariel, not Oriel. When the Germans invaded France the British Expeditionary Force was split; most of the BEF and many French soldiers too, retreated to Dunkirk and the first (and famous) evacuation.

The remainder of the expeditionary force was forced to the southern Channel ports, from which they were evacuated in round 2: Cherbourg, St Malo, St Nazaire, and even Nantes, far up the Loire.

73

An Engl¡sh vo¡ce…,

07/11/2007 18:53:40

81 Boudica

you are a joke

74

McTaggert-Skye,

07/11/2007 18:55:05

At Yalta Stalin proposed executing 50 000 German officers. Alone of the Western allies, Churchill stormed out saying that the British Empire would not condone such an act.

Puts WC in rather a better light in my eyes.

75

Blackie,

Aberdonian abroad 07/11/2007 19:07:18

Please stop talking about casualties as Scots or English, there may have been some Welsh or Irish on board. Aren't these souls equal and did they not all wear a BRITISH uniform. People who are all upset because Scots were on board are prejudicial.

76

Caora Dubh,

Coirt sheasgair 07/11/2007 19:10:59

#7 Guga II: You are 100% right. Churchill had no real military experience to talk of. He gained his rank through his blue blood alone, and he was a complete and utter military idiot, who deserved to have been court-martialled many times over. He is not the only one: there are many such examples stretching way back through many wars.

What UK citizens may not realize is that the British armed forces degenerated completely during the 19th century. Only wealthy aristocrats could buy rank in the army and to a slightly lesser extent the navy. Officers could buy leave too, so that many high-ranking men had only a few months actual experience in the army, and no experience of warfare.

In "Blood, Sweat and Arrogance" by Gordon Corrigan you can read what a pratt Churchill was. A disaster during WW2, he severely curtailed rearmanent in the face of the rise of fascist Germany (unlike Chamberlain, who tried desperately to win Britain enough time to re-arm properly), and then turned round and blamed Chamberlain for the damage that he himslef had wrought. Churchill's interference in the Norwegian campaign should have instantly subjected him to criminal charges, but anyone with the right connections in that era, got off lightly.

Bob Whinney says in his book "The U-boat peril" that Mountbatten's squadron was notoriously "unlucky" during battle, and professional, competent naval men avoided service under Mountbatten like the Black Death.

In fact the damage done to the UK by the aristocracy is inestimable. The aristocracy had to be fought tooth and nail for the smallest steps towards a meritocracy. The aristocracy took centuries to realize that in many fields of endeavour a professional training and long experience at the coal face are required to make correct decisions. The pre-war aristocratic stranglehold on the upper echelons of the civil service and even the judiciary retarded the UK severely. Even now, many aristocrats d

77

Caora Dubh,

Coirt sheasgair 07/11/2007 19:33:13

#90, McTaggert, Eilean Sgitheanach:

I put to you the following:
1) Winston Churchill had no real military expeience, yet was made First Lord of the Admiralty during WW1. He was responsible for the Dardanelles fiasco.
2) He opposed rearmanent in the 1920s and early 1930s in the face of the growing threat from fascist European states, and then had the damn cheek to pretend that Chamberlain had been responsible for the sorry state of the UKs forces immediately prior to WW2.
3) Knowing full well the state of the armed forces, he then put pressure on the UK to put troops in the front line before the army was properly armed, especially with adequate vehicles and guns.
4) Churchill's interference in the Norwegian campaign is beyond shocking. It is a disgrace, and should have been a crime. He constantly meddled with the plans of the trained officers. He violated almost every rule of good military conduct, and the Norwegian campaign was a fiasco as a direct result. Churchill killed members of the UK armed forces through his hubris and gross incompetence; Churchill thought that he always knew best; in fact his leadership was appallingly bad.
5) Churchill's interference cost good military commanders their jobs, and put second rate ones in their place. When Montgomery won at El Alamein, he was simply putting his sacked predecessor's plan into operation (Wavell's plan). Churchill bought it, because Montgomery had the right connections and was protected by the right people, but Montgomery himself was a bungler.

I put it to you that aristocratic squabbles, aristocratic nepotism, and aristocratic hubris have cost the British Isles very, very dearly. It is high time that we all agreed not to recognize any hereditary title and asked for the deliberate confusion of civil recognition with aristicratic titles to be abolished. I cannot tolerate someone earning a title by service to the country, having to share that title with an hereditary nitw

78

Danielrober2,

In London for work 07/11/2007 20:42:09

#93 Caora Dubh, Coirt sheasgair

I don't think the UK had spare money in the 1920's and 30's for weapons. It was not called the Great Depression for nothing.

I can see Montgomery is been hammered for been too careful with his armies.

The Royal Navy is getting unappreciated for Norway, even though they broke the back of Germanies destroyers (10). That allowed Uk submarine operations to take place over greater distances, such as to Poland and the med (out of Malta).

By the way Prime Ministers are meant to interfer with military operations, its called democratic control.

79

Danielrober2,

In London for work 07/11/2007 20:44:14

Terrible War. The more such monuments to the lost the better, least we forget.

80

emigre,

Anz 07/11/2007 21:02:54

First Lord of the Admirality is a political position.

81

JESSE,

uk 07/11/2007 21:04:34

It seems, that a lot of the discussion centers on finger pointing and nasty remarks directed at one another.

As usual there are those of you, who know little or nothing about history and facts.

Your inability to think in a factual and gentlemanly fashion ends up by constantly referring to Nazi this and Nazi that. If you can't win an argument or demand gobs of sympathy and money--you call someone a Nazi.

Since all of you are so attracted to the National Socialist Party, I srongly suggest that you read -- Fascism in Britain: From Oswald Mosley's Blackshirts to the National Front-- Author: Richard Thurlow.

What? Fascists and Nazi's in England?

Gasp! Never!

Well, hardly ever.

82

tyson,

watching Churchill's back 07/11/2007 21:15:46

#93 Churchill, as a Sandhurst grad, had served as a junior officer on the N.W. Frontier, and seen action as a (very active) war correspondent in South Africa. After his plans for the Gallipoli campaign led to disaster, he did penance by assuming command of a (Royal Scots Fusiliers, 6th bn) battalion in France. Without a doubt, he had more first hand experience of war than any Prime Minister before or since. If I am correct, he was an anti-Nazi throughout the 30's to the extent that many of his social set regarded him as a bore due to his continued warnings about Hitler, and his constant call to prepare for war. Upon becoming P.M. he inherited the woefully underequipped BEF already in France. The British Army's lack of ordnance, especially armour and anti-tank weaponry was not of his making. By rallying Britain in it darkest hour, he played a major role in saving western civilization. It is hard to imagine any other politician of his age being able to do what he did. Despite his many faults, he is one of the few political figures of the 20th century that I can admire.

83

Shawan,

Australia 07/11/2007 21:16:13

BOMBING OF S.S.CORONDA.

Now I understand why I could find no record on the bombing of the SS Coronda off the Irish Coast, during the same period in the main press.

Although the loss of life was not as great there are approx (29) Scottish Merchant seamen buried in a Commerative graveyard at Rothesay,a few from the island of Uist and my grandfather, Joseph Doyle (29 yrs) old.
Maybe we can now read an official report on that as well.

84

Lynn,

Madison, Wisconsin, USA 07/11/2007 21:39:33

"57: "Hitler was a madman of course we had to stand up to him. He was gassing people in concentration camps! "

There was certainly no gassing in concentration camps in 1939 or 1940.
Hitler ordered the "Final solution" exactly BECAUSE
Britain and the USA were fighting him und he thought the Jews were behind it."

#58: You're right, there WASN'T any gassing in concentration camps in 1939 or 1940. That was because it was being done in mobile units that went around to the various and sundry asylums and sanitoriums in the country, and killed off those deemed "sub-human" (i.e., the mentally and physically disabled). When others were found that matched the "non-Aryan" classification (the Rom, gays, political opponents), they were also gassed. Different types of gas combinations were used, so as to find the most efficient and cost-effective for use in the "Final Solution".

85

Steve S,

Ed'burgh 07/11/2007 22:13:00

Anyone here from Peebles? Did you know your (Conservative) MP was jailed during the war for being a fascist sympathiser.

Written local histories tend not to mention it much. Not so much a secret, just a bit of an embarrasssment.

86

Tomdonald,

07/11/2007 22:52:03

As usual no comment on old Tomdonald at 65. To have been through WW2 but retained in industry, experienced a blackout on a moonless night, seen Coventry being bombed from anywhere within a 50-mile radius circle, to work continuously from May to September 1940 without a day off, are some of my unforgettable experiences.
As for cover-ups I have a trunk full of MoI publications including one on the bombing of Coventry. There were none. Lord Haw-Haw was hanged as a traitor, but he was so economical with the truth that we listened to him as a comedian!
Churchill inspired us for 6 years with a National Government. Gordon Brown has the same idea but he doesn't inspire me!!

87

CANUCK,

TORONTO- CANADA 07/11/2007 22:56:10

(except in very low tones behind closed doors)Churchill ordered the Winnipeg Rifles -the only fully equipped regiment available in the Empire at that at the time - to Hong Kong -just to show to the East that Britain was trying to do something - they lasted only a few days after their arrival.

Mountbatten - ordered the Canadian regiments
into Dieppe - this was to show Stalin that Britain was trying to do something on the western front.

The men were incredibly brave with a very large proportion of them losing their lives or ending up in captivity- up until recently it was " Shut up,Suck it up, do not speak about it - they did their duty"

I am very pleased to see a lot of investigating reporting developing over the last few years slowly revealing what exactly went on and who and why such events took place.

Slowly very slowly all the truth comes out ,let us hope this present generation will be able to keep up the investigating reporting impetus to finally reveal all that actually went on .

88

Danielrober2,

In London for work 07/11/2007 23:21:39

# 104 CANUCK, TORONTO- CANADA

The Winnipeg Rifles were also at Dieppe, my grandfather had many relatives with that regiment. He was one of very few not to die there.

He also made peace with Germany in the 60's before i was born. Because all wars do end. Dragging up the past is good when your looking at learning lessons, but very few answers for the future are often found in the past.

This is one of the few actions that i have never looked into with detail, out of respect. Some times those that have passed need to be left in peace.

Its a shame Canada's/Newfoundland's war contibution is often over looked. She was a very sharp dagger.

89

the old chap,

australia 07/11/2007 23:37:28

Being an old chap who experianced the war in the UK one has to remember that at the time it felt as if the war was going to last for a hundred years. It probably would have if the Japanese hadn't attacked Pearl Harbour.
In those days it was a UK and the Black Watch etc were British Regiments.
We were alone and the function of Churchill was to rally the nation or nations as they are know and give them a firm purpose.
Love him or lothe him he did the job and stuck to his guns right to the end.