A Bodyguard of Lies
- Thread starter MTAB
- Start date
Blackadder1916
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 2,638
- Points
- 1,160
MTAB said:
Much of Cave Brown's research was from declassified documents which were released in the 70's. Other books of the same vintage which also present much the same story of Coventry being sacrificed to save compromising an intelligence source are "A Man Called Intrepid" (Stevenson) and "The Ultra Secret" (Winterbottom).
While it is the generally accepted version of the event, not everyone is ready to paint Churchill as such a cold calculating individual. An alternate version of the event is here http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=690
Thanks.
While it is the generally accepted version of the event, not everyone is ready to paint Churchill as such a cold calculating individual
I read that and there seems to be some inconsistencies. I re-read the chapter on Coventry and then read the part about El Alamien; far be it for me to judge the likes of a great like Mr. Churchill but I can't help but wonder if Browns claim has any validity. It appears that Mr. Churchill didn't seem to hesitate in acting when it was discovered that Italy was sending another re-supply convoy to Rommel in which the ships were sent from five different locations on "fog shrouded" seas; IMHO it was a master stroke when British CI folks sent the traffic alluding to a breach originating with the Italians. To risk everything to prevent re-supplies from reaching Rommel but not to prevent the destruction of a major industrial city, to me, does not seem consistant. I cannot imagine Mr. Churchill not taking action to protect Coventry. In the grand scheme of things was Ultra more important in the beginning and the sacrifice deemed acceptable? I wonder what would have been the effects on future operations had Ultra been compromised so early.
V/R
MTAB
While it is the generally accepted version of the event, not everyone is ready to paint Churchill as such a cold calculating individual
I read that and there seems to be some inconsistencies. I re-read the chapter on Coventry and then read the part about El Alamien; far be it for me to judge the likes of a great like Mr. Churchill but I can't help but wonder if Browns claim has any validity. It appears that Mr. Churchill didn't seem to hesitate in acting when it was discovered that Italy was sending another re-supply convoy to Rommel in which the ships were sent from five different locations on "fog shrouded" seas; IMHO it was a master stroke when British CI folks sent the traffic alluding to a breach originating with the Italians. To risk everything to prevent re-supplies from reaching Rommel but not to prevent the destruction of a major industrial city, to me, does not seem consistant. I cannot imagine Mr. Churchill not taking action to protect Coventry. In the grand scheme of things was Ultra more important in the beginning and the sacrifice deemed acceptable? I wonder what would have been the effects on future operations had Ultra been compromised so early.
V/R
MTAB
