Friday, 10 May 2013

A Challenge To Peter Hitchens


Statue of Marshal of the RAF Sir Arthur Harris outside the central church of the RAF, St. Clement Danes. The front of the stone base bears the inscription:
MARSHAL OF THE ROYAL AIR FORCE SIR ARTHUR HARRIS BT
G.C.B. O.B.E. A.F.C.
1892 – 1984
COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF
BOMBER COMMAND
ROYAL AIR FORCE
1942 - 1945
The side of the base bears a plaque with the words:
MARSHAL OF THE ROYAL AIR FORCE
SIR ARTHUR HARRIS BT GCB OBE AFC
IN MEMORY OF A GREAT COMMANDER AND
OF THE BRAVE CREWS OF BOMBER COMMAND,
MORE THAN 55,000 OF WHOM LOST THEIR
LIVES IN THE CAUSE OF FREEDOM.
THE NATION OWES THEM ALL AN
IMMENSE DEBT

The sculptor was Faith Winter, the architects were Tony Hart and Mike Goss

Mail on Sunday columnist Peter Hitchens refuses to amend or even acknowledge an error he made regarding the rank of Marshal of the RAF Sir Arthur Harris in an article published on 30 June 2012.

This is any open opportunity for him to justify his assertion and I offer him the hospitality of this site to do so, as he was able to do last year on a related topic.


I found an excellent quote about Tony Cliff of the International Socialists in Jim Higgins "More Years for the Locust"


"For Cliff the “brilliant” insights of an individual (himself) could be submitted to popular approval on two conditions: one; that they agreed with his proposal in double quick time, and two; that if they did not agree he won anyway." 


Someone evidently had a good teacher.


Update 2 January 2014: "Arthur Harris's eventual rank on retirement has no bearing whatever on my arguments about the bombing of German civilians. Pedantry must be its own reward."

I shall let Comrade Hitchens wallow in his self-righteous ordure:

 "Now that we have a memorial at last to the thousands of men who flew and died in Bomber Command, can we please cart away the ugly statue of that unpleasant man Air Chief Marshal Sir Arthur Harris, GCB, OBE, AFC?"

Takes one to know one.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

So if the rank of Bomber Harris has no effect on his arguments why doesn't he rectify his error in good grace? Seems awfully insecure to me.