Excellent points and my complements for making them! I myself see nothing wrong with taking pride in having Sir Winston as relative much less having him as a grandfather! Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®
-----Original Message----- From: Jonathan Sandys <churchillsbrit...@googlemail.com> Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 03:24:06 To: <churchillchat@googlegroups.com> Subject: [ChurchillChat] Re: Winston Churchill (Grandson) Death It is sad that this publication did not have the courage to address this issue prior to my cousin's death. Winston Churchill certainly faced challenges in OTHERS expectations of what THEY thought he should be. Yes, he signed his name 'Churchill', they fail to mention that there was a practical reason; Winston was officially 'Winston Spencer Churchill', why waste ink. If it was good enough for others to sign using only their surnames, why shouldn't Winston. 650 MPs, yes, but he was NOT alone in how he signed. As for the 'bumptious' remark, once again it is a coward taking a pot- shot at someone who is unable to respond. I believe we all have tendancies towards 'bumptiousness', Winston included, and yes, he did sometimes sound arrogant in conversations, but to label him as 'bumptious' and not state any sources, just merely saying 'it led some', is a very weak and insulting statement to make. It's easy to insult someone who is unable to respond, especially when that comment will draw readers. Incidently, I notice on the Telegraph website that they don't even credit the article. I'm betting the ill-informed cretin who wrote this had never even met, let alone got to know Winston personally. The headline in itself is insulting. Winston was very proud of his herritage. He did NOT spend 27 years trying to shake it off. The editor of the Telegraph has a responsibility to retract this "Editorial" and rewrite it with facts, not circumstancial evidence and irresponsible opinion. The comment on Randolph I am not even going to comment on. I hope readers will take this up with the Telegraph. What an insulting and unessesary article, for God's sake, the man isn't even cold yet! Where is the compassion? Why is truth so hard to find in the media these days. Is the Telegraph the new Sun? (For US readers, The Enquirer)? On Mar 3, 6:50 pm, stej...@aol.com wrote: > And I was curious about the following paragraph: > > "Churchill was at a disadvantage not only through his legacy but because his > preoccupation with it led some to consider him bumptious; alone of more > than 650 MPs, he insisted on signing Commons motions without using his > Christian name." > > I assume this has something to do with Early Day Motions or a similar > procedure. But what would he have written? Did he use "W. S. Churchill," > thus avoiding duplicating his father's famous signature? Did he use only his > surname in the style of a peer? The Honourable Member from Davyhulme? Or > something else? > > Best to all, > David Stejkowski > > -----Original Message----- > From: Antoine Capet <antca...@aol.com> > To: churchillchat@googlegroups.com > Sent: Wed, Mar 3, 2010 2:55 pm > Subject: Re: [ChurchillChat] Winston Churchill (Grandson) Death > > Many thanks for the link : > > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/politics-obituaries/735223 > <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/politics-obituaries/735223> ... > > A really complicated life! > > There is a passage in the obituary which I do not understand : > > "When Randolph Churchill died in 1968, Churchill wanted to take on the > biography of Sir Winston that his father had begun. But Lord Hartwell, > proprietor of the Telegraph, with whom the decision lay, engaged the > academic Martin Gilbert, who went on to produce a classic. " > > Why should the proprietor of the Daily Telegraph have a say on Randolph > Churchill's successor for the Official Biography? From where did he derive > this (heavy) privilege? > > Best wishes to all, > > Antoine Capet, > Rouen (France) > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "ChurchillChat" group. > To post to this group, send email to churchillc...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > churchillchat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/churchillchat?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ChurchillChat" group. To post to this group, send email to churchillc...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to churchillchat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/churchillchat?hl=en <http://groups.google.com/group/churchillchat?hl=en> . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ChurchillChat" group. To post to this group, send email to churchillc...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to churchillchat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/churchillchat?hl=en.
