NationStates Jolt Archive

Who do you think was the greatest British PM? I've left out Churchill because he would obviously win by a ridiculously large amount.

Margaret Thatcher. Converative Woman PM = Owns. ;)

Margaret Thatcher. Converative Woman PM = Owns. ;)
Agreed :D

Who do you think was the greatest British PM? I've left out Churchill because he would obviously win by a ridiculously large amount.
Kinda answered your own question, buddy.

Basically you want the SECOND greatest BPM?

Disraeli. He's still having an impact this long after his death.

Second place would have to be Iron Maggie, without whom, Labour would still have no issues.

Benjamin Disraeli - "You don't even know who I am.."

Clement Attlee, my favourite prime minister, for the welfare state, including the creation of the National Health Service, and for thus implamenting many of the recomendations of the Beveridge report.

I voted for Thatcher (and don't get me wrong, she was one of the greats), but only because Pitt the Elder wasn't one of the options. Now there was a man who knew how to make war against the French.

I voted for Thatcher (and don't get me wrong, she was one of the greats), but only because Pitt the Elder wasn't one of the options. Now there was a man who knew how to make war against the French.

Lord Palmerston!

/Obscure reference?

Kinda answered your own question, buddy.

Basically you want the SECOND greatest BPM?
Yes. :p

Well, maybe there are some who would choose someone else over Churchill. If I had included Churchill, however, I'm sure that the poll would be an entirely predictable 75% majority for him.

"Your Majesty, I am the blank page between the Old Testament and the New."


I can't believe anybody would vote for Thatcher over Disraeli.

Pitt the Younger. Much more in keeping with his times than Pitt the Elder was.

I was going to say pitt, but that's taken, so I am going to go for Walpole, since he was the first "prime minister". (though i believe it was an insult at that time).

I don't know, but Atlee and Wilson were the worst.

I don't know, but Atlee and Wilson were the worst.
Why? (And I want more of an answer than "they were socialists"!)

David Lyod George. Conservative at heart with a respectable liberal streak. Good war time PM, and ran a half decent coalition government post-war.

Ended up as a bit of a Nazi sympathiser, but in his hay day - demanded the Kaiser should be hanged after ww1.

Also slept with thousands of women, even when drawing up the Treaty of Versailles. Best thing to ever come out Wales and consolidated Britains position as the strongest naval power (early 20th cent). This leek eater would have thrashed maggie in debate, and probably slept with her after.

Benjamin D? No way. Great visionary and classic tory. But isnt he the guy that purchased the Suez Canal without even telling parliament??

Wilson - the man who destoyed our town centres and villiages building the most god-awful looking apartment blocks ever. His 'white-hot techonoligcal' dream was to make us a third world country me thinks.

Atlee was ok. Both socialists though so should keep em out of the running. Good!

Wilson - the man who destoyed our town centres and villiages building the most god-awful looking apartment blocks ever. His 'white-hot techonoligcal' dream was to make us a third world country me thinks.

Atlee was ok. Both socialists though so should keep em out of the running. Good!

Atlee was far worse that wilson. People have forgotten why though because, "A weak id's a jung time in poll-tactics", as harrased wilsods himself once observed.

Atlee's greatest achievment was probably nearly causing a revolution with directed engagements. Though his little labour camp set up and wholesale support of abducting children from their parents to send overseas to bolster the "white australia policy" is a close second.

That, and he really fucked up the economy. (Which was no mean feat considering the state it was already in.)

I think Bevin observed in 1946 something like, "In an island filled with coal and surrounded by fish, it is inconceivable that any government could fail to provide food and fuel for its citizens." Nevertheless, Atlee's administration proved it was more than up to the task. (of failing that is).

Churchill described them best: "Not fit to run a whelk stall."

Wilson just cannot compete with that, despite being removed for going senile. (literally).

Frankly, I am always a little sad that Dennis "Knacker" Healy never got the top job, because he probably would have given Atlee a run for his money.

i wouldn't have voted for churchill even if he was on the list. the man was a violent, sinister, classist, racist tory.

i voted for clement attlee, as he's made the most long-lasting and positive influence on the country.

I can't believe anybody would vote for Thatcher over Disraeli.
Well that would be because people have different opinions (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=opinion) over what makes a good Prime Minister

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies and statistics"

Voted Disraeli.

When I think of the best Prime Ministers, I rank them into two main categories:

1. LEGENDARY PRIME MINISTERS
a) Pitt the Elder: His method of using British naval power and its fiscal solvency to fight wars was incredibly effective, so effective in fact he increased the British Empire no bounds. He was probably the only voice of sense during a great deal of the American War of Independence, urging compromise throughout but alas receiving none. His death is also one of the greatest of British Prime Ministers - he collapsed speaking in the House of Lords, a politican to his last. He also had tremendous popularity among the public and was nicknamed the "Great Commoner" for his systematic abolition of siencures and his refusal to take titles and sinecures for himself (alas that was somewhat betrayed by his acceptance of the title Earl of Chatham in his later career). He was first and foremost a patriot - not a man of party but a man who wanted to serve his country.

b) William Gladstone (who I actually voted for): Gladstone was another hugely popular Prime Minister and it was his first ministry (1868 to 1874) that introduced the first true social reforms that would transform Britain into the compassionate society. He was a moral man and a deeply convicted Anglican - during the 1840s he actually wondered around the streets of London picking up prostitutes in an attempt to save them from the life of sin (as he believed) that they had undertaken. His economical and social policy became an enduring trait of British politics - today much of the Liberal Democrat manifesto is covered by what is called "Gladstonian liberalism". However Gladstone is one of the few Prime Ministers who never had to deal with war - he was a peacetime politican and so his greatness was never tested by war.

c) Winston Churchill: Well you couldn't vote for him and his record speaks for itself. His courageous, defiant attitude during World War Two forged the nation together and pushed people forward.

d) Margaret Thatcher: Her fierce anti communist rhetoric and stern nature brought Britain into a new world. Her leadership during the Falklands cirsis proved that Britain would not be kicked in the teeth by second rate powers any longer and so she led a renaissance of British pride. Her grasp of economics was so great that an entire economic doctrine is now know internationally as Thatcherism.

e) Clement Attlee: I am no socialist (far from it) but he was in many ways one of the most effective Prime Ministers. His deciding to mix socialism with conservatism, new with old produced such middle ground miracles as the NHS and also brought about the welfare state that made Britain a very much caring and compassionate country.

GOOD PRIME MINISTERS
a) Disraeli: Although I am a Tory, I am afraid I really dislike the way in which this man did his politics. Opportunistic, immoral and of a generally poor character, Disraeli was nevertheless a good Prime Minister. He brought the Tory Party forward, turning it into a modern political machine: his format of local societies under a central one was copied by all the other parties. His social reform continued to push forward Britain into a new age of social enlightenment and his imperial policy was excellent. Purchasing the Suez Canal was a master stroke that would serve British trade and commerce well for 70 years. His handling of the various Turiskh/Russian conflicts served him well - he managed, with his conference in Berlin, to stave off conflict between Russia and Turkey and in the process managed to gain Britain the stragecially important island of Cyprus. However he does not rank as a great Prime Minister because of his generally poor character and his actions during repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846.

b) Pitt the Younger: A financial genius of great renowned, Pitt's ministry only really succeeded in terms of reforming fiscal policy. He, like his father, was a patriot and sought only to serve his country. However his handling of the revolutionary Wars was not of the highest standard and indeed his policies led to continued failure on the continent. He also refused to go too far on parliamentary reform and the slave trade, both issues that desperately needed remedy. However his fiscal policies enabled Britain to fight against France continously for 22 years (1793 to 1815).

THE WORST ONES
a) Jim Callaghan
b) Anthony Eden
c) Lord Roseberry
d) John Major

Wilson - the man who destoyed our town centres and villiages building the most god-awful looking apartment blocks ever. His 'white-hot techonoligcal' dream was to make us a third world country me thinks.

Atlee was ok. Both socialists though so should keep em out of the running. Good!

Just because they are socialists, doesnt mean we should call them unsuccessful Prime Ministers. I am a Tory myself but I have tried to look objectively at all the Prime Ministers. I voted for Gladstone myself because he was a far more admirable man than Disraeli and actually iniated the social reform programmes that Disraeli simply added to.

Where it not for Attlee we would not have the NHS and we would be reduced to the level of Amercians - having to pay £25,000 so our wives can our children in a decent hospital.

THE WORST ONES
...
d) John Major

Why?

I must say the reasoning and thoughts of New British Glory are very good and very well thought out and reasoned. Congrats are in order for a fine opinion and well thought out answer

Where it not for Attlee we would not have the NHS and we would be reduced to the level of Amercians - having to pay £25,000 so our wives can our children in a decent hospital.
The vast majority don't.

I am surprised that there is no mention of Blair, even as a negative. I would have thought that New British Glory would have included him as amongst the worst, at least.

I am surprised that there is no mention of Blair, even as a negative. I would have thought that New British Glory would have included him as amongst the worst, at least.

Although I really dislike Blair and alot of the politics of the Labour Party, I am not inclined to put him in the sin bin of the worst Prime Ministers. Many Labour voters will undoubtedly see him as their version of Margaret Thatcher and even I can admit that the economy is in a good shape (although I follow the theories of several economists who actually believe Major initiated the good economy while Brown/Blair have simply pushed it forward and continued it). As I said, I am trying to be relatively objective in regards to this list. I would probably place Blair quite high, simply for the reason that he revived the Labour Party when it had been condemned to death by most and the fact that he has been in office for 3 terms.

Why?

As a Prime Minister, he was woefully ineffective in the way he conducted his business. His Cabinet was lacklustre, his Party were in constant conflict (a conflict he himself had brought about), the economic situation was not really improving and I really look badly upon him for those arms sales he did with countries like Iraq. He was not a good speaker or a good debater nor was he charismatic. His government achieved little.

This is coming from a Tory, so you can't really get much harsher.

Many Labour voters will undoubtedly see him as their version of Margaret Thatcher and even I can admit that the economy is in a good shape (although I follow the theories of several economists who actually believe Major initiated the good economy while Brown/Blair have simply pushed it forward and continued it).

Completely agree, brown goes on about longest period of economic growth etc, neglects to say that the first few years were under tory rule and that they inherited a fine blueprint to run a economy which they have nearly fucked up. I predict a recession in the next three years

Actually can anyone name all the PMs without books or websites? Thats a challenge and one I am willing to have a stab at

Horace Walople
Lord North
Henry Addington
Pitt the Elder
Pitt the Younger
Winston Churchill
Lord Roseberry
William Gladstone
Charles Grey
Lord Liverpool
George Canning
The Duke of Wellington
Robert Peel
Benjamin Disraeli
Lord Salisbury
Arthur Balfour
Henry Campbell-Bannerman
Lord Palmerston
Lord Russell
Herbert Asquith
David Llyod George
Stanley Baldwin
Neville Chamberlain
Margaret Thatcher
Ted Heath
Anthony Eden
Tony Blair
John Major
Jim Callaghan
Lord North
Clement Attlee
Lord Derby
Wilson

As a Prime Minister, he was woefully ineffective in the way he conducted his business. His Cabinet was lacklustre, his Party were in constant conflict (a conflict he himself had brought about), the economic situation was not really improving and I really look badly upon him for those arms sales he did with countries like Iraq. He was not a good speaker or a good debater nor was he charismatic. His government achieved little.

Speaking as someone that can'y stand the Tories: I believe that Major inevitably inherited the crisis in his party from Thatcher, rather than creating it himself - it would have come to a head sooner or later whoever was in the top position.

For me, though, Major had one great achievement - using his authority to open channels of communication with the IRA and thus enabling the ceasefires in Northern Ireland.

I'm not sure if she was the best, but Maggie was certainly the one with most balls.

(That's a compliment by the way)

Lord Palmerston!

/Obscure reference?

Is Barney Gumble about to punch someone in the face?

Actually can anyone name all the PMs without books or websites? Thats a challenge and one I am willing to have a stab at

Horace Walople
Lord North
Henry Addington
Pitt the Elder
Pitt the Younger
Winston Churchill
Lord Roseberry
William Gladstone
Charles Grey
Lord Liverpool
George Canning
The Duke of Wellington
Robert Peel
Benjamin Disraeli
Lord Salisbury
Arthur Balfour
Henry Campbell-Bannerman
Lord Palmerston
Lord Russell
Herbert Asquith
David Llyod George
Stanley Baldwin
Neville Chamberlain
Margaret Thatcher
Ted Heath
Anthony Eden
Tony Blair
John Major
Jim Callaghan
Lord North
Clement Attlee
Lord Derby
Wilson


Robert Walpole.

And you missed Ramsey Macdonald at least.

Speaking as a South African, I am inclined to disagree with Margaret Thatcher being the best prime minister of England. I am unfamiliar about the history of UK prime ministers, but the one thing I am sure of is that Margaret Thatcher's anti-communism policies impacted negatively on South Africa during the last few years of Apartheid. She supported the racist government simply because it was very much anti-communist as well even though the country was under the harsh, oppressive rule of the National Party. For this reason, I say that her actions border on crimes against humanity and that whatever progress occured under her leadership, it gets overshadowed by the wrong-doings that were committed.

I'm not sure if she was the best, but Maggie was certainly the one with most balls.

(That's a compliment by the way)

Agreed, her refusal to go against her principles was admirable, even to lefties (or so they tell me). I think tony benn said as much as well.

I voted Maggie but i am amazed she is actually winning the poll.

As a Prime Minister, he was woefully ineffective in the way he conducted his business. His Cabinet was lacklustre, his Party were in constant conflict (a conflict he himself had brought about), the economic situation was not really improving and I really look badly upon him for those arms sales he did with countries like Iraq. He was not a good speaker or a good debater nor was he charismatic. His government achieved little.

This is coming from a Tory, so you can't really get much harsher.

Major was a significantly better debater and Parliamentarian than Tony Blair. The conflict in the party came about because one-time Europhile Margaret Thatcher had let Britain drift into an ever more federal Europe with only a few attempts at securing vetoes against the worst of the EU's big government schemes. A great many eurosceptic conservative MPs who'd been afraid to challenge Thatcher were a lot less circumspect about challenging Major.

Given that his first proper term, where he actually had the mandate of an election victory, was run with a microscopic majority, it was very easy for a few people like John Redwood and Teddy Taylor to kick up enough fuss to make it almost impossible to govern.

Major did the best job he could under the circumstances. With the recession and the ERM disaster I don't see that a Thatcher, a Kinnock, or a Blair would have faired any better. He certainly did a better job of handling the Wars that happened when he was PM than Blair has following Clinton and Bush into unilateral conflicts.

When I think of the best Prime Ministers, I rank them into two main categories:

-snip-
NBG, that was a singularly excellent post. You really know your stuff. I am leaning towards Gladstone, I also liked his attitude to Ireland.

I am surprised that there is no mention of Blair, even as a negative. I would have thought that New British Glory would have included him as amongst the worst, at least.
I left Blair out of this as his term has not finished. Any comparison of him to previous PMs would be skewed by current events.

Just out of curiousity what are the restrictions on who can become prime minister?

Atlee was far worse that wilson. People have forgotten why though because, "A weak id's a jung time in poll-tactics", as harrased wilsods himself once observed.

Atlee's greatest achievment was probably nearly causing a revolution with directed engagements. Though his little labour camp set up and wholesale support of abducting children from their parents to send overseas to bolster the "white australia policy" is a close second.

That, and he really fucked up the economy. (Which was no mean feat considering the state it was already in.)

I think Bevin observed in 1946 something like, "In an island filled with coal and surrounded by fish, it is inconceivable that any government could fail to provide food and fuel for its citizens." Nevertheless, Atlee's administration proved it was more than up to the task. (of failing that is).

Churchill described them best: "Not fit to run a whelk stall."

Wilson just cannot compete with that, despite being removed for going senile. (literally).

Frankly, I am always a little sad that Dennis "Knacker" Healy never got the top job, because he probably would have given Atlee a run for his money.

I think this is probably the best thing I have ever read on these forums.

Don't forget atlee's woeful performance at the conferences with stalin and truman/roosevelt? He allowed Stalin to get a lot of eastern europe by stalin falsely promising stuff.

Just out of curiousity what are the restrictions on who can become prime minister?

As best as I can tell you must first be elcted as a member of parliament, and then appointed to the position of PM by the Queesn (usually as head of the party with the majority of seats, but not necessarilly):

So in order to become an MP -

To stand for election as a Member of Parliament, you must be a British citizen, resident citizen of another Commonwealth country or of the Irish Republic, aged 21 or over and not disqualified.

Disqualified people include undischarged bankrupts, those sentenced to more than one year's imprisonment, members of the House of Lords and holders of certain offices listed in the House of Commons Disqualification Act 1975.


The House of Commons Disqualification Act 1975:

Some of the prohibited groups at the time the Act was first proclaimed into law:

judges
serving members of the armed forces
civil servants
ordained ministers
members of legislatures of non-Commonwealth countries (other than the Republic of Ireland, see Ireland Act 1949)

This Act has itself been updated by subsequent legislation. In particular, since the House of Commons (Removal of Clergy Disqualification) Act 2001, no clergy except for Church of England bishops are now prohibited from serving.

I think this is probably the best thing I have ever read on these forums.

i'd agree with that

Speaking as a South African, I am inclined to disagree with Margaret Thatcher being the best prime minister of England. I am unfamiliar about the history of UK prime ministers, but the one thing I am sure of is that Margaret Thatcher's anti-communism policies impacted negatively on South Africa during the last few years of Apartheid. She supported the racist government simply because it was very much anti-communist as well even though the country was under the harsh, oppressive rule of the National Party. For this reason, I say that her actions border on crimes against humanity and that whatever progress occured under her leadership, it gets overshadowed by the wrong-doings that were committed.

As cruel as it may sound, i think communism has done more damage to humanity than apartheid. With this in consideration wasn't her policy completely justified

i wouldn't have voted for churchill even if he was on the list. the man was a violent, sinister, classist, racist tory.

i voted for clement attlee, as he's made the most long-lasting and positive influence on the country.

Most of Attlee's policies share much with that of the Nazis in germany and have thankfully been, on the whole, disbanded. The remaining beacon is that of the Nhs, which i can tell you will be gone by 2010 because its completely unsustainable inefficient and crap. If Castro dies we'll be the only country in the world with an entirely state-run health service.

Attlee ruined our country for the next 30 years for following the madness of that idiot beveridge. Read the Audit of war by Correlli-barnett for more information on the unrealistic nature of the welfare state in view of the pathetic economy after ww2

Most of Attlee's policies share much with that of the Nazis in germany and have thankfully been, on the whole, disbanded. The remaining beacon is that of the Nhs, which i can tell you will be gone by 2010 because its completely unsustainable inefficient and crap. If Castro dies we'll be the only country in the world with an entirely state-run health service.

Attlee ruined our country for the next 30 years for following the madness of that idiot beveridge. Read the Audit of war by Correlli-barnett for more information on the unrealistic nature of the welfare state in view of the pathetic economy after ww2

sorry really have got to keep ranting. Read road to serfdom, shows how cripps was an absolute totalitarian by nature. All the Labour Party were at that stage. They wanted to nationalise meat distribution before Churchill got re-elected, roads, coal, just about everything. Maggie solved it all their best member ever has been that pillock Blair and brown is a whisper of the past, an Old Labour elitist of tax and spend and knowing better than the individual.

i wouldn't have voted for churchill even if he was on the list. the man was a violent, sinister, classist, racist tory.

i voted for clement attlee, as he's made the most long-lasting and positive influence on the country.

Classist?? He was a liberal party mp before he was a tory. A key member of the Liberal party that first started us on the way to a welfare system with the introduction of pensions and the like. Classist really is a baseless accusation, sinister and violent? Those were the times he lived in, i'd prefer a violent Churchill to a violent Hitler or Stalin thank you very much.

I'd go with Pitt the Younger as well. The man was a genius. It was down to him, more or less alone, that GB emerged from the Napoleonic Wars in such a dominant position. That wasn't to do with his war-making skills, but his fantastic financial genius. His reforms set the foundations of the whole of Britain's 19th century success, in my view. GB was in a mess when he took over, having recently lost America and deep in debt, and he made it rich, even though it all didn't come to fruition until after he died in 1806.

It's just a shame that the job stressed him out so much he drank himself to death in his 40s. But he gave everything for this country. And it was amazing how he became PM at 24, immediately took control of the Commons when the opposition mocked his age and said he wouldn't last a year, and kept the egocentric Fox out of power. He also took a balanced and sensible attitude to the French Revolution when there was hysteria on either side of him, and if George III, fool that he was, hadn't blocked Pitt's idea of Catholic emancipation the history of Britain and Ireland would have been much happier than it has turned out to be, I suspect.

He was one of the last true non-party PMs, gaining his support from independents who supported him because they believed in him, and that is a measure of how well he was regarded in his time.

Actually can anyone name all the PMs without books or websites? Thats a challenge and one I am willing to have a stab at

Horace Walople
Lord North
Henry Addington
Pitt the Elder
Pitt the Younger
Winston Churchill
Lord Roseberry
William Gladstone
Charles Grey
Lord Liverpool
George Canning
The Duke of Wellington
Robert Peel
Benjamin Disraeli
Lord Salisbury
Arthur Balfour
Henry Campbell-Bannerman
Lord Palmerston
Lord Russell
Herbert Asquith
David Llyod George
Stanley Baldwin
Neville Chamberlain
Margaret Thatcher
Ted Heath
Anthony Eden
Tony Blair
John Major
Jim Callaghan
Lord North
Clement Attlee
Lord Derby
Wilson

As well as Ramsey MacDonald (already pointed out), I think we need Alec Douglas-Home and Harold MacMillan. Maybe one or two more, but I can't think of any.

Benjamin Disraeli. Or, failing that, William Hague. Just you wait and see. :-|

As well as Ramsey MacDonald (already pointed out), I think we need Alec Douglas-Home and Harold MacMillan. Maybe one or two more, but I can't think of any.

And now, fool that I am, I'm going to try to put them in order...

Robert Walpole

Pitt the Elder
Lord Roseberry
Lord North
Pitt the Younger
Henry Addington

Lord Liverpool
George Canning
The Duke of Wellington
Charles Grey
Robert Peel
Lord Derby
Lord Palmerston
Lord Russell
William Gladstone
Benjamin Disraeli
(Gladstone, Disraeli etc)

Lord Salisbury
Henry Campbell-Bannerman
Arthur Balfour

Herbert Asquith
David Lloyd George
Stanley Baldwin
Ramsey MacDonald

Neville Chamberlain
Winston Churchill
Clement Attlee
(Churchill again)
Anthony Eden
Harold MacMillan
Alec Douglas-Home
Harold Wilson
Ted Heath
Jim Callaghan
Margaret Thatcher
John Major
Tony Blair

I'm pretty sure I'm right from Chamberlain onwards, but I've gone wrong pre-1930s somewhere, and I think there must be a few 18th century ones missing. The early 1900s are particularly hazy for me. I've put gaps where I think we might be missing people.

Benjamin Disraeli. Or, failing that, William Hague. Just you wait and see. :-|
not going to happen!

I've left out Churchill because he would obviously win by a ridiculously large amount.

Even though he was the worst. Read The Lusitania by Colin Simpson, Illusion of Victory by Thomas Fleming, Churchill's War by David Irving, and The Churchill Legend, The Makers of War, and The Tragedy of Europe, A Commentary on the Second World War, 1938-1945, all by Francis Neilson.

Benjamin Disraeli. Or, failing that, William Hague. Just you wait and see. :-|

Can we have Hague? I thought this was Prime Ministers.

Can we have Hague? I thought this was Prime Ministers.
That is why they said 'just you wait and see'. He hasn't been PM yet but that person believes he will be in the future.

Wow, I didn't know that Churchill was Prime Minister twice! You can see why I wont get higher than an E in History, GCSE.

For 'Greatness' it will have to be Thatcher on the list. As much as it pains me to select.

not going to happen!

I don't know so much. The Tories have had 3 leaders in 2 elections, and Howards' leaving soon. Anyone could take up the job at this point, and I don't believe we've seen the last of old Baseball Cap.

My prediction:
Blair says he won't stand for a 4th term, and to be honest I belive him. Sometime between now and the next election he's gonna screw up and will be forced to quit. Probably by making one "back-me-or-sack-me" speech to many. Once that happens, belief in Labour will plummet, leaving either the Tories or the Lib Dems to take power. The Lib Dems, at this point, will invest most of their resources into taking the Scottish Parliment so that they can say "look at what we can do given a chance". This means that the Tories will get in, most likely with a Lib Dem opposition, and Labour licking its' wounds. Possibly.

Even though he was the worst. Read ... Churchill's War by David Irving,

Hardly the most credible of historians.

Hardly the most credible of historians.

More credible than the Marxist-Leninist gangsters that most historians are.

More credible than the Marxist-Leninist gangsters that most historians are.

Neo-Nazi racists and self-confessed fascists are more credible than most other historians?

Aside from that: the man has lied under oath in a court of law and holds that The Diary Of Anne Frank was a forgery and further to this believes that there was no policy of extermination of the Jewish people during WWII - exactly how incredible are the other historians?