|
Post by littlegreyrabbit on Mar 23, 2012 0:26:07 GMT 12
Ahh well, now this is where we differ.
I sometimes find it difficult to distinguish the SOE/military intelligence types from those Nazis they claimed to oppose some much.
I don't see anything objectionable about what I wrote. I point out how Phil Lamason's account seems to have strayed from all previous accounts and I speculate a motive that indicates no personal gain or benefit on his part.
|
|
|
Post by chinapilot on Mar 23, 2012 0:45:48 GMT 12
Do not feed the troll.
|
|
|
Post by fwx on Mar 23, 2012 10:05:16 GMT 12
Sorry chinapilot, I can't leave it with lgr's speculation of a "motive" - Lamason was a pilot, not military intelligence.
littlegreyrabbit, speculation seems to be your speciality. I would have thought that the first principle of historical research is to go back to primary sources, ie., individuals who were actually there. Lamason was definitely there, and is still here to talk about it. Not only him, but the other survivors interviewed in the documentary, who support most key aspects of the story that you claim are only 'according to Lamason'.
You obviously spend a lot of your time and efforts looking for the gaps and inconsistencies in the historical record - and using these to create your own revised version of it. Despite people still alive who know otherwise, for a fact. The problem is, if you watch this documentary, you would have to scrap a huge chunk of your speculation of what went on at Buchenwald. And you would have to apologise to these men whose word you have doubted. Uh-huh ....
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Mar 23, 2012 10:17:28 GMT 12
I think we have read enough shit from little grey rabbit. He is so intensely interested in debating the story but has no interest in watching the documentary which is full of first hand evidence, which means he is not actually interested in the story but only in trolling on this forum. Therefore, as a troll, he's now going to be banned.
|
|
|
Post by pjw4118 on Mar 23, 2012 10:47:54 GMT 12
Re Malcolm Cullen , the family is stll in Maungaturoto
|
|
|
Post by chinapilot on Mar 23, 2012 10:57:23 GMT 12
If you feed him he will return for more...just ignore HIS posts as replying gives him the attention he craves.
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Mar 23, 2012 11:50:20 GMT 12
Re Malcolm Cullen , the family is stll in Maungaturoto My cousin is married to a Maungaturoto Cullen, they are definitely a well known clan in the area....
|
|
|
Post by wheezynana on Mar 23, 2012 13:01:54 GMT 12
I think we have read enough shit from little grey rabbit. He is so intensely interested in debating the story but has no interest in watching the documentary which is full of first hand evidence, which means he is not actually interested in the story but only in trolling on this forum. Therefore, as a troll, he's now going to be banned. Thank God for that!! Anne
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Mar 23, 2012 13:32:23 GMT 12
Ahh well, now this is where we differ. Still no name my little myxomatosis friend??
|
|
|
Post by errolmartyn on Mar 23, 2012 14:43:16 GMT 12
Ahh well, now this is where we differ. Still no name my little myxomatosis friend??Dave has banned lgr- committing him to indefinite solitary in his hutch. Errol
|
|
|
Post by lostairmendirector on Mar 23, 2012 18:41:43 GMT 12
I would have thought that the first principle of historical research is to go back to primary sources, ie., individuals who were actually there. Lamason was definitely there, and is still here to talk about it. Not only him, but the other survivors interviewed in the documentary, who support most key aspects of the story that you claim are only 'according to Lamason'. This is what "skeptics" (ahem) like littlegreyrabbit refuse to accept because they have already made up their minds about what "really" happened. It's the same reason he won't watch the film - it challenges his view of history. It's the reason he called Lamason and the others liars without a shred of hard evidence. They are desperate for this to not be true. And this film will ruffle feathers because now you are hearing these stories from a group of mostly Protestant Westerners who were members of the military. The tired old tactics for discrediting the witnesses, historically used against the Jewish survivors, don't work here. For me, this is such a small part of the film, and so easy to accept, that it never occurred to me that anyone would think to dispute it. But for Holocaust deniers, a lot of their beliefs are a house of cards. So odd little details that don't mean much to us mean the world to them, because if people were executed in the basement of the crematorium, then the witnesses that they think they've discredited in fact told the truth about that practice. And if those witnesses were truthful about that, then there's a whole mountain of other claims that they may have been telling the truth about. For deniers, it's all about discrediting someone as quickly and simple-mindedly as possible so you don't have to deal with anything else that they said happened. If this were a court of law, and Lamason was a witness that you wanted to discredit, you would have to demonstrate that he is an untrustworthy person. You would have to prove that he has a whole history of lying about what happened in Buchenwald. He does not. You would have to prove that he had a motive for lying. He does not. Nearly everything he said in the film is backed-up by other witnesses that we interviewed, or by the stack of books that have been written about this subject. There are only a few minor details mentioned where he was the only living witness left, simply because he was the group's commanding officer and was privy to information no one else knew. Lamason had contacts inside Buchenwald's underground. Among them were the scientist Balachowski, and the resistance fighter Jan Robert. Both of these men are well-known figures in the history of Buchenwald. Jan Robert was a contributor to The Buchenwald Report, and Balachowski testified at Nuremberg. He passed away in the 1980s, and Robert died right after the war. However, I was in touch with both Balachowski's scientific organization in Paris and with Robert's grandson. As much research and verification as possible was done. The same underground network that correctly warned Lamason and Yeo-Thomas that the SOE agents were about to be executed also warned him that his group would be next. They had a pattern of being correct, and we heard this straight from Lamason himself. And it was backed-up by a Canadian airman who took it upon himself to locate the documents that confirmed they were to be executed. That's how the other airmen now know the date that the executions were to have started on. If there was no document, where did the date come from? The only reason we don't have that hard evidence is because that airman has since passed away. But we do have the personal files withe DIKAL stamped on the back, which lgr tried to shrug off but that does have significant meaning in this debate, although it alone is not a smoking gun. But even if the other docs never existed, the eye witness account from Lamason himself, of a warning from the same people who had been correct about the SOE, and the same people who successfully got word out of camp to the Luftwaffe about the airmen being there, is enough to satisfy most people who don't have an ulterior motive for it to not be true. People like lgr annoy me because they try to bury a claim under a mountain of disjointed arguments. They try to overwhelm people who don't know as much about a certain subject so that at least seeds of doubt are planted. Political pundits do this all the time. "Kogon didn't mention the execution order... therefore it must not have existed." Or "I don't believe the SOE were executed in the crematorium... even though my own source, Kogon, verified it in the book he helped write." Or "The execution order never happened because the US Army said other things about the camps that weren't true... even though the film never even mentions what the US Army said about Buchenwald."
|
|
|
Post by grannygussie on Mar 27, 2012 16:18:46 GMT 12
Dear lostairmendirector, found this site by chance and was interested in this topic. Hope to see doco in Oz. Please pass on 10000 thankyous to all old chaps who flew, that you meet and tell them so many still appreciate them. They are St Crispin's Day men, tho' nobody would wish it upon them. I'm on another small site, German based and obsessed with the men, planes and finding crash sites. I've had terrible trouble with my computer and was trying to tell the German lad who runs it that you were doing a German showing and for him to let his contacts know. Trouble is, I wasn't sure if I had read it was imminent but whether I'd missed that your message was dated 2011, 2010... Only came on again today and I advised Steffen to come to this site but he says his English isn't good... If you placed a message there, I'm sure you'd be made very welcome and they'd love to know about the German showing, even if it's booked out. His site is lostaircraft.com and deals with allied and German aircraft - all aircraft, and the crews, parts, restoration,etc etc. Seem nice and have lots of nonGerman members.
|
|
zolteg
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by zolteg on Mar 27, 2012 19:04:20 GMT 12
Following received by email this morning: ==================================
Many thanks for taking the time to propose the awarding of an honour for SqnLdr P.J. Lamason. I have consulted with the Honours Unit at the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, the organisation responsible for dealing with these types of requests. They have advised that the subject of an honour for Sqn Ldr Lamason was raised by another correspondent a couple of years ago following a similar TV programme. The rules relating to retrospective recognition of WW2 service are based on direction given by His late Majesty King George VI who stated that no recognition of service or acts of gallantry or bravery performed during World War II were to be considered after 1949. The Queen has followed her father's wishes in this matter and no honours have been conferred in New Zealand for service during WW2 since that date. It is not possible, therefore, to recognise Sqn Ldr Lamason's service with a New Zealand Royal Honour of any kind, without breaking this convention. Successive NZ Governments have abided by this convention ever since.
While it is correct that SqnLdr Lamason was not awarded a Royal Honour for his service while a POW, he was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (twice) and two Mentioned in Despatches for his flying service before he became a POW. This is fitting recognition for his bravery during WW2, even if not specifically for his actions while a POW.
As I'm sure you appreciate, any form of recognition that was provided now would set a precedent that would almost certainly result in requests for similar recognition for other ex-service personnel. Such requests have been received by the NZ military and NZ governments since the 1950s and have been consistently declined. For example, no doubt you can recall the unsuccessful attempts by the Manahi family for the award of a Victoria Cross to Sgt Manahi for his actions during WW2.
I regret that I am unable to give you a more favourable response but I trust that you will appreciate the convention that the Government is adhering to.
Yours sincerely,
Peter Stockwell
Chief of Air Force
==============================================
So, failing that, I'm wondering if a hangar, meeting room or other facility could be named after him. Would hate for this story to be lost to future generations of servicefolk.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Mar 27, 2012 22:46:36 GMT 12
That was a quick respomce from the Chief of Air Force, and though it's not the desired answer, it is good to see he has explained the reasoning clearly and shows there's nothing that can be done.
You make a good suggestion about naming a building after him, Zolteg. Might I also suggest that a display in the Air Force Museum of New Zealand on Phil Lamason's time as a POW, and other notable RNZAF POW's, might be well in order so their ordeals are remembered.
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Mar 28, 2012 0:48:51 GMT 12
Littlegreyrabbit - Does it really matter that much? The Nazi guards quite clearly murdered many thousands of people at Buchenwald. Most will agree that those included the SOE agents - you think otherwise, but whatever you find at the bottom of all this research you're conducting, you'll never ever clear those Nazis of being evil, murderous bastards who should all rot in hell; and attempting to defend them by seeking some paperwork that might clear them of a few agents' deaths will never win many friends. This well researched and well made documentary is hugely important for New Zealand as it has highlighted the bravery and incredible leadership of one of our countrymen, who not only brought together Allies of many nations under his command in a way that they collectively defeated fear, oppression, starvation, abuse and the very real threat of murder, but he also took great personal risk to stand up to the Nazis in a most brutal of all hellholes. Seeing such a man's story being told by a foreign documentary the will get worldwide coverage is simply fantastic for many of us on this forum - a New Zealand aviation forum with a very strong RNZAF following - and if you want to continue to imply that this great New Zealander is a liar and has made up parts of the story, I suggest that you'll lose even more friends. Please take the nitpicking and theorising elsewhere. Well said Dave, and Errol Martyn. I don't know how I came to miss this thread, though I was aware of the showing of the documentary and did watch it. I thought it extremely well done and [for an American production!] remarkably accurate in setting out to tell the story. The Rabbit guy seems to be floundering on a rock of incoherence and despite my reading all of the comments on this thread I must confess to being still a little confused as to what points he is trying to make! I knew of Lamason, and for those outside of New Zealand his traits of doing the right thing and his pugnacious attitude to the Germans was typical of his background. Kiwis do tend to be essentially fair-minded and practical! I picked up on the "Colonel" bit, and dismissed it immediately as being typical of what an American would consider his [equivalent] rank to be, though his actual rank of of Sqn Ldr is a Major equivalent, the description of that rank as "Squadron Leader" would lead an American to the "Colonel" conclusion. It's a minor issue in the general scheme of things! Overall, this documentary did an excellent job, and I enjoyed it immensely. There will always be trolls and nitpickers however, and the thread seems to have attracted at least one.
|
|
|
Post by grannygussie on Mar 28, 2012 16:21:14 GMT 12
It seems unfair and bleakly bureaucratic to have a cut off date, when we know from hindsight, that many breathtaking acts of magnificence and selfsacrifice and bravery, were not public knowledge, not even known about by by 'superior' officers at the time. I don't mind that the Queen respect her father, as far as the old honours go, but why can't there be a new honour made, for awards in any war, at any time, for Remarkable Bravery and/or Self Sacrifice by a group or individual discovered and/or agreed to have been overlooked by contemporaries? I think Sqn Ldr Lamasan sounds as tho' he should be in the line and I'd like John Simpson Kirkpatrick to be recognised and a number of others. I find this niggardly meanspiritedness about recognising these people disgusting, especially as a lot of the deserving were Other Ranks. It could stretch across the old Empire countries of the war. How many times do you read of cynical Officers telling men, "If you'd died, you'd have been recommended for a VC," and somehow, they come out with nothing. Perhaps if the close relatives of the King weren't doled out medals for being in the vicinity of a brave act or being the officer in charge of men who achieved an extraordinary act from bravery and quickwitted sacrifice, there would be a greater generosity of spirit. I never forget the achievements of Alan Turing and what British bureaucracy put him through and the tragic result.
|
|
|
Post by lostairmendirector on Mar 30, 2012 17:00:17 GMT 12
Sorry I disappeared from the thread for a few days - I thought it had gone quiet.
Thanks to grannygussie for the kind words - I will try posting to that German site tonight.
On the topic of awards, as much as I would like Lamason to receive just recognition for what he did in Buchenwald, I believe wholeheartedly that he personally doesn't want or need it. However, I think that something like this becomes part of a family legacy for one's descendants - we will always have what my grandfather did as part of our family - and now at least there is another film to help immortalize the men who went through this.
As suggested, maybe something else can be done - the naming of something, a plaque, etc. Believe it or not, we are still trying to get a plaque dedicated at Buchenwald, and I am hoping that our screening of our film there in a couple of weeks will be the catalyst to finally do it. When you tour Buchenwald, there are memorials everywhere for all of the various prisoners who were there. I believe there is even one for the British SOE. But nothing for these 168 airmen. So hopefully that will change now, as well, while there are still a few left to see it done.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Mar 31, 2012 19:52:39 GMT 12
I hope that maybe your film will get some awards so it will raise the profile of this story and the men involved.
|
|
|
Post by lostairmendirector on Apr 3, 2012 17:10:18 GMT 12
FYI, I have heard that Phil Lamason has received a bit of "fan mail" since the film aired. I won't post his address online, but if anyone in NZ wants to look him up, he's lived in Dannevirke for many years. I think the letters expressing thanks and good will have been uplifting for him.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Apr 4, 2012 0:42:37 GMT 12
That's very nice to hear.
|
|