Talk:Lord Richard Cecil

Date of death

to : Couter-revolutionary, Sussexman, Robert I, Olborne etc etc etc

You have given Lord Richard's date of death as 27 April 1978. I have always had my doubts about the accuracy of that date, although a reference is cited. For one thing, his obituary appeared in The Times on 22 April 1978 (see P. K. van der Byl reference number 57). Maybe The Times knew something that Lord Richard didn't?.

That apart, do you think that describing ZANLA as "terrorists" is entirely neutral?. I mean, it leads into this argument about one man's terrorist being another man's freedom fighter.

best wishes

Bob BScar23625 19:06, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

ps. I think he was actually killed on 20 April : Cecil

I quite agree with you on the issue of the date of his death. I also believe we can safely say that, at the time, those who killed Lord Richard were most certainly terrorists and most definitely rebels. May I ask why your comment was addressed to a plethora of users who do not even seem to have edited this page. Yours &c., --Couter-revolutionary 11:47, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Couter-revolutionary.

The Rory Peck Trust website places his death on 27 April. I am pretty sure that must be incorrect. But the 27 April date has been picked up and used by a few people. This illustrates how an error, once made, can become widely accepted as fact.

Whether or not ZANLA can be described as "terrorists and rebels" is open to debate. For one thing, the UDI regime they were fighting against was widely described as "rebel". Who were the rebels?. The use of the word "terrorists" indicates disapproval, which is not neutral.

As regards this matter of identities ... well, I have mentioned before that you are welcome to e-mail me. My e-mail address is on my user page.

best wishes

Bob BScar23625 13:18, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Use of the word "terrorist"

I really don't think the use of "terrorists" implies disapproval or bias. The IRA, for instance, would never be described as anything other than terrorists on Wikipedia. --Couter-revolutionary 17:11, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Couter-revolutionary. Is that so?. Take a look at Provisional Irish Republican Army or any of the associated pages. I don't see the IRA described as terrorists anywhere, although I might be overlooking something. As an aside, the people who ran the IRA in the 70s and 80s are now being ushered into the corridors of power to almost universal approval. Nobody calls them terrorists nowadays. Bob BScar23625 17:31, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

• Perhaps this is something that needs corrected, although it is described as "paramilitary", which is as good as and also is linked to the category of "Terrorists". The IRA are still very much seen as terrorists, and so are there former leaders, amongst those from a Unionist background. Just because some of their members are now politicians it does not justify their past terrorist actions, I believe the same is true of Rhodesia.--Couter-revolutionary 00:08, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Couter-revolutionary. Your final sentence confirms my view that use of the word "terrorist" implies disapproval. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the matter are, I don't think you will find much support among the Wikipedia community for describing particular participants in the former conflicts in Northern Ireland and Zimbabwe as terrorists. Bob BScar23625 06:48, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps you are right, but then again, that does speak volumes for Wikipedia.

Couter-revolutionary. Maybe Wikipedia just reflects a wider consensus?. See the August Telegraph article "David Cameron ... declared that Margaret Thatcher had been wrong to describe Nelson Mandela and the African National Congress as terrorists during the ... 1980s" Bob BScar23625 10:09, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't think there is any need for Wikipedia to become a populist voice, and nor do I think David Cameron reflects that Populous. Anyway this verbose badinage is academic, what I feel is crucial is that, at the time Lord Richard was murdered he was killed by terrorists acting against the government of Rhodesia.--Couter-revolutionary 11:06, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Couter-revolutionary. How can you possibly justify a statement that Lord Richard was "murdered"?. The chap was wearing an army uniform and carrying a rifle at the time of his death. He died an honourable death in battle - and the people who killed him were lawful combatants. This view is even accepted by his family, who have never claimed he was murdered (please correct me on that, if you can).

A journalist wearing uniform and carrying a weapon takes all the risks of a combatant, but lacks some of the supports which are available to members of the military unit that he/she is attached to. LR was either too contemptuous of the enemy to understand the risks he was taking, or he understood the risks and elected to accept them. Either way, he has no grounds for complaint about his fate. Bob BScar23625 12:08, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Article enhancement

to : Couter-revolutionary, Lightoftheworld, Sussexman, Robert I, Olborne, Isabella84, Christchurch etc etc etc

I have added some material to this article. Given that you are its creator I thought I should "touch base" with you. LR is an alumni of Eton College, and I am sure there must be a linkage that is appropriate here. Do you think I should consult Chicheley, who is the expert on Eton College matters?. Bob BScar23625 19:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

• There is a category for Old Etonians, I shall add it, and don't worry I know a fair bit about Eton myself! I think that is all we need. By the way, you have done some very good work. This is now a very good article!--Couter-revolutionary 20:38, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Couter-revolutionary. Thankyou for that. On another matter, I have just taken the liberty of reverting the recent changes you made to the Rhodesia article. I did so because those changes contained opinion and serious errors of fact. As indicated earlier, I am more than happy to have a chat with you about Rhodesia/Zimbabawe. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 08:08, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm afriad you are mistaken, I do not believe I have made any recent changes to the Rhodesia article. Why do you think I have?--Couter-revolutionary 08:10, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Couter-revolutionary. I thought I "recognised the voice". Sorry if I got it wrong. My offer of a chat remains open, if you care to e-mail me. Bob BScar23625 08:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I'm afraid I only ever edit under my log-in name. Could you also tell me why you have addressed comments to other users, such as User:Isabella84, who hasn't even edited wikipedia since December last year; I'm just interested to know. yours, --Couter-revolutionary 08:18, 27 October 2006 (UTC) PS, In fact, most of them seem to have stop editing or been banned.

Couter-revolutionary. There are a group of editors whose pattern of postings appears to be linked and whose voices all sound very similar. I have no problem with that. The internet community accepts that individuals may adopt multiple internet identities, so long as those identities are not used for improper purposes. In your case, my curiosity was aroused - I assure you nothing more than that. Bob BScar23625 08:29, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

• Trust me, the only Wikipedia name I have ever edited under is the one I now use. In fact I have rarely encountered these other users as most of the major debate surrounding them seemed to occur over the Summer when I was away. Yes we may say similar things, but so do lots of users on Wikipedia, it doesn't mean we are one at all.--Couter-revolutionary 08:35, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Couter-revolutionary. I am dealing with a gentleman and I will take your word for it. Sorry for the inference and I will not repeat it. Bob BScar23625 08:40, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Citations tag

Mowens35. I have added another 4 references to the article. For a short B-Class article, that is adequate. Unless you object, I will remove the tag. regards. Bob BScar23625 19:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

ps : as you have not replied, I have taken the liberty of removing the tag BScar23625 08:37, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Gravestone

Zippppo. You have added Interestingly his headstone bears the "Who Dares Wins" motif of the SAS. I have never visited his grave, but that just sounds a little "showy" and I wonder if his family would have allowed it?. Can you cite a source or can you show a photograph?. regards. Bob BScar23625 19:14, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

ps : As you have not replied, I have taken the liberty of removing your addition. If you put it back, please cite a source in the article or post a photograph. best wishes. Bob

Zippppo. Sure he is buried in Cranborne - but that is not a source of information of the kind I invited from you. At the time of his death he was not a serving British soldier and he had previously been a Guards officer. As far as I am aware, he never served with the SAS. So what is the logic behind this SAS motif on his grave?. What is the source of your information?. Have you seen the grave yourself?. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 10:16, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Zippppo/Couter-revolutionary. Lord Richard was a Grenadier Guards officer, an Old Etonian and his father was a senior member of the House of Lords. These people are dreadful snobs and he would never have allowed the motif of a rag-and-bone outfit like the SAS to be included on his headstone. That said, anything is possible - and if you can provide any evidence, then ... . As regards PK, he may well have labelled blacks as "savages" after the downing of the Hunyani, but he did so on numerous other occasions, not always when he was under the influence of drink. Whatever, I guess that PK's attitude to people of colour is not relevant here. I hope you had a good Christmas. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 15:29, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Zippppo/Couter-revoliutionary. You now say that the headstone bears the "Winged Dagger" emblem of the SAS. That is not the same thing as the Who Dares Wins motif. What is this winged dagger emblem and are you sure it refers to the SAS?. I remain unconvinced and still await some indication of your source of information. What is your source of information?. Another consideration is that the SAS would have objected to use of its official emblem unless the person concerned had died on active service with the regiment. His family would never have ignored such an objection. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 09:11, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Dear Bob, I have no opinion on his grave stone inscription as I have not yet seen it. With regards to PK he was terrificaly entertaining, people took his too seriously.--Couter-revolutionary 11:35, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Couter-revolutionary. I am going down there specially to take a look some time in the next two weeks. I will take a photograph of the headstone and post it to the article. I do hope you aren't just winding me up. Bob BScar23625 15:48, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Dear Bob, I never made any claim as to the inscription on the headstone. I do, however, await the photograph it shall be interesting to see. My best wishes to you in MMVII.--Couter-revolutionary 17:35, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

The church warden at St M & B assures me that there are no winged daggers or motifs on the headstone. It will be a few weeks before I can get down there to confirm this in person, but I will remove the relevant statement from the article shortly unless anyone can cite a credible source. Bob BScar23625 15:48, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Righto, I didn't think there would be myself. It would be rather odd!--Couter-revolutionary 17:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I have a photo of the headstone on my digital camera. There are no winged daggers.

I would like to put the photo in the article, but am not sure how, and the instructions seem a little obscure. Could some experienced Wiki users give me an idea, please? 62.3.235.96 (talk) 10:40, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Good man. E-mail it to me at BScar23625@aol.com, together with a statement that you "release the image under CC3 licence" and I will put it on for you. I keep meaning to go down there myself but have never made it. BobBScar23625 (talk) 16:55, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Counter Revolutionary is a many headed hydra? (though I suppose they all are, really)

Bob, most assuredly Counter-Revolutionary did not make the changes to Rhodie. I was at first interested in why you thought I was counter-revolutionary, and understood your attribution as one of description for a real counter-revolutionary. Had I known there was a actual user named Counter-Revolutionary I would have immediately presented myself as otherwise. I am currently an anonymous user for reasons that I am still trying to figure out how to properly utilize wikipedias user format.

As to suggesting that the changes made to Rhodie were rubbish, I would disagree with your personal opinion. Feel free to comment back on the Rhodie page. Thanks.

see response on talk:Rhodie and talk:Ian Smith BScar23625 15:04, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Frontline Rhodesia

Was there more than one of these? 30degreessouth.com is giving away a copy of 'Frontline Rhodesia' with every copy sold of a book caled 'Masodja'. Their material implies there was only one documentary. What is your source for saying there are more?

I would like to put a link to the documentary and edit the article to reflect some of the info in it. but am not sure of the facts here. I think the information would be of interest to readers of this article, so anyone who knows more about 'Frontline Rhodesia', please comment here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.191.135.66 (talk) 20:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

"TV Eye" was a 30 minute, weekly current affairs programme broadcast by Thames Television (a UK independent TV company) in the 1970s. TV Eye carried a series of short features (mostly 5 to 10 minutes long) produced by LR under the byline Frontline Rhodesia. After LR's death, these features were edited together to make a 50 minute film titled Frontline Rhodesia. It was released by Thames Television in 1979 with Nick Downie credited as writer and producer. Bob BScar23625 (talk) 22:39, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

TV Eye showed entire 25-minute documentaries, not short features. LR did nothing personally for Thames TV (only for ITN, in 1977). 'Frontline Rhodesia' was the title of the documentary made by Nick Downie for Thames TV in September 1978. It was also sold elsewhere. It later won for Nick Downie the second of his three Royal Television Society awards, and it was also the official ITV network nomination for the Monte Carlo TV festival. In the autumn of 1978 he edited a 50-minute version, with the same title. The copy supplied with 'Masodja' is being done so without Nick Downie's permission. He is currently in discussions with the company. (I am Nick Downie writing this.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.26.149.64 (talk) 20:47, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Nick. Great to hear from you on this and your contributions concerning the day of LR's demise are most valuable. One small point. The Wiki community does not generally welcome autobiographic material. You should ask someone else to add material that relates to you personally.BScar23625 (talk) 16:40, 6 November 2008 (UTC)