In response to a post by "Hannes" below.

you lost your bet. And why are always needing such an enormous amount of words - I guess it should cover the weakness of your arguments.

BTW the Kofl did never mention the hostile nonsense claims but the German pilots were well aware of the Allied overclaiming - they made enough POW to get an idea about the "other way of claiming". Additionally the Germans published some articles dealing with the - from the German point of view - strange way of claiming OOCs and shared victories (as multiple victories).

Obviously it is useless to tell you anything about the German side (records, pilots etc.) if it is not fitting in your ignorant and biased view.

I give up!
Please, search another helper for the acquisition of Kofl reports. I will not waste my time.


My Response.

IF the German pilots DID pay attention to the KOFL reports, then why haven't we heard anything from them? They truly believed that much in their superior officers to think that reports would not be "modified"?

Don't take what I'm saying the wrong way (But I know that SOME of you will anyway). I am not saying that the KOFL reports WERE modified. But knowing the distrust that the typical soldier usually has for the higher ranks, I just don't see them as taking the KOFL reports as the be all and end all of the actual results. Of course I can be wrong. I'm not perfect!!!! So stop expecting perfection!!!

As for using a lot of words, I have a lot to say, and sometimes, it takes a lot for me to say it all. AND I sometimes STILL don't get it all said.

As for my previous post. THAT is my opinion. No better or no worse than anyone else's.

As to my "ignorant and biased view", it is no better or no worse than anyone else's BIASED view. And let's be honest, if you have an opinion on this subject in one direction or the other, you ARE biased.

And it's never useless to tell me anything about the German point of view. UNLESS I'm told in such a way as to try to "rub my nose in it". Then I don't pay it much attention. Why? Simple, if someone is trying to "inform" me of something in such a rude manner, I don't read it.

If anyone has ANYTHING to tell me about the KOFL reports, then frigging just tell me!! Hell, if you got a copy, scan it, then fax it or email it to me!!

Yeah, I don't read German, but there are translation services on the net. Sure, they're not perfect, but between those and my seldom used High School German, I can probably get it close enough for government work.

Everyone talks about "helping" me to understand things. Problem is, other than some rants on this forum, I get very little "help". Since I've started my "crusade" as it were, to take some of the stain off of Billy Bishop's rep that was put there by a Canadian, (Paul Cowan) 99% of the "help" I've received has been from those who are of a similar mindset as I am.

The ONLY thing I've ever received from anyone that could point a finger and say that "MAYBE" Billy didn't do his famous raid of 2 June, 1917, was a copy of Phil Markham's article.

Someone (and I'm Sorry I don't remember who) faxed it to me a couple of years ago. AND, when I first read it, I did have some creeping doubts about the raid. But then I made the mistake of talking to another professional historian. And he pretty much explained most of my doubts away.

Wishful thinking? I don't know. Bias? Yes, but then I've NEVER, I repeat NEVER claimed that I was unbiased. There are very few things that I don't have a bias for in one direction or the other. If you doubt me, check out my personal website, You'll also get an idea of how I can ramble on about things. But then if you've been to my Billy Bishop site then you know I how I tend to ramble.

And FYI, NONE of this is meant as a slam at anyone. I know you don't believe me. That's ok. I don't believe all of you are unbiased either. ;-)

I know that in the past, my passion has gotten the better of me. But it also works for the other side too. Some of you think you're on the right side and I'm on the wrong side. Turn that around, and maybe you'll see where I'm coming from. I know, I have tried to be less offensive in my tones. And when I do get offensive, I try to keep my antagonists anonymous. The problem then becomes that you all see yourself in that role and jump at me. ;-)

I guess it just seems too one sided to me. People will point at this report, or that book, or something else, and using that, and that alone say "Bishop lied".

Well, do I think he lied?? No. Do I know if he lied?? No. Is there ABSOLUTE proof that he lied? No. What it comes down to is belief. So believe what you want to, if you got proof, fine. Send me a copy. I'll consider it. But let's face it. We'll NEVER know for sure, not unless some super special secret document happens to surface that can point a finger and say one way or the other.

J, I could have told you that.

Until next time,

Al "the ignorant one" Lowe

Back to Billy Bishop The arrow will return you to the Bishop main page.

Honourary Canadian

Created: May 31, 2001
Last updated:
©2001 by Albert Lowe, All rights reserved.
The opinions expressed on this web page are those of Albert Lowe alone. By no means should the use of any reference be construed as to suggest that anyone else mentioned on this site shares those opinions, unless stated explicitly so.
If you have any problems with my opinion, you should email me, Al Lowe.
Designed and maintained by A.L. Computing