Portillo's State Secrets,BBC2,1830 Monday

ftvftv Posts: 31,668
Forum Member
✭✭✭
Michael Portillo travels through the national archive to dig out stories from previously classified documents. This week he looks at UFOs,Hitler's medical files, the war on the Rolling Stones and why Britain didn't boycott the 1936 Olympics. I like his train journeys and this sounds like fascinating stuff.
«13

Comments

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 9,517
    Forum Member
    Thanks for that. It sounds interesting

    I didn't realise there was any doubt about us competing in the Berlin Olympics. We continued to play football against Germany until 1938, and our players were made to give the Nazi salute when we played them
  • Gavin_DGavin_D Posts: 2,005
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
  • starrystarry Posts: 12,434
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Could be interesting, though the government no doubt has an influence on what stories they do lol. Does anyone really doubt that?
  • A.D.PA.D.P Posts: 10,383
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    One featured is the one about the man running up and down Downing Street shouting loudly...

    The government us mad...the government is mad.


    He got a fine for breach of the peace, and ten years for revealing a state secret.
  • i4ui4u Posts: 54,983
    Forum Member
    starry wrote: »
    Could be interesting, though the government no doubt has an influence on what stories they do lol. Does anyone really doubt that?

    Yes me. :)

    He's not exactly revealing secret documents, they are publicly available at the National Archives. There will be interesting material some of which has only recently been made generally available.
  • Doghouse RileyDoghouse Riley Posts: 32,491
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    i4u wrote: »
    Yes me. :)

    He's not exactly revealing secret documents, they are publicly available at the National Archives. There will be interesting material some of which has only recently been made generally available.

    Much of it I bet, has been covered in other documentaries. But I'll record it and give it a go.
  • Prince MonaluluPrince Monalulu Posts: 35,900
    Forum Member
    starry wrote: »
    Could be interesting, though the government no doubt has an influence on what stories they do lol. Does anyone really doubt that?

    Yes, I'm sure Henry VIII's shopping list will have huge swathes of it redacted with black felt tip.
    What is this Portillo and the 39 Steps :)
    I can't see Diane Abbot running across the Scottish Highlands myself.
  • starrystarry Posts: 12,434
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    i4u wrote: »
    Yes me. :)

    He's not exactly revealing secret documents, they are publicly available at the National Archives. There will be interesting material some of which has only recently been made generally available.

    I don't think you get what I'm talking about at all. It's about more publicity to things, yeh things are 'generally available' but that doesn't mean you hear about them.

    It would seem naive to think the government doesn't have influence on broadcasters. Why hasn't there been some fashion for shows exposing the tax loopholes and huge frauds of the super rich and their lifestyles and habitats instead of making programs on other groups of people who the government sees as being a useful diverting tactic or scapegoat? The public are always so gulible.
  • Chris1964Chris1964 Posts: 19,796
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Im sorry but this show stands no chance if it doesn't immediately change its title to "Portillos Great British State Secrets" (or at least contain the word "great") ;-)
  • Prince MonaluluPrince Monalulu Posts: 35,900
    Forum Member
    starry wrote: »
    I don't think you get what I'm talking about at all. It's about more publicity to things, yeh things are 'generally available' but that doesn't mean you hear about them.

    It would seem naive to think the government doesn't have influence on broadcasters. Why hasn't there been some fashion for shows exposing the tax loopholes and huge frauds of the super rich and their lifestyles and habitats instead of making programs on other groups of people who the government sees as being a useful diverting tactic or scapegoat? The public are always so gulible.

    What you want to get into has got nothing to do with this thread/program about recently released or interesting snippets from the Archives.

    Tax loopholes, I've never heard of these tax loopholes, the BBC, Reuters or AP never mention Tax loopholes, where do I find more about this hidden and unreported subject?
    There's already been a thread about why there are so many shows with Benefit in the title, nothing to stop you creating another thread though.
  • Bulletguy1Bulletguy1 Posts: 18,429
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I suppose having "State Secrets" as part of the programme title makes it more appealing! However it's bound to be worth watching as Portillo is an excellent presenter.

    The 1936 Olympics will be interesting to see what the "secrets" said over that, particularly concerning the black athlete Jesse Owens. Because i've read Owens account.
  • Doghouse RileyDoghouse Riley Posts: 32,491
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Chris1964 wrote: »
    Im sorry but this show stands no chance if it doesn't immediately change its title to "Portillos Great British State Secrets" (or at least contain the word "great") ;-)

    I'm surprised it isn't titled, "Michael Portillo's Search For Great British State Secrets." An often used title for programmes that find nothing particularly new if anything of interest at all.
  • GibmanGibman Posts: 621
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I'll give this a whirl...will either be fascinating or, more likely, reveal nothing as poster above suggests.
  • BryanandLucBryanandLuc Posts: 1,056
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Why do we have to wait so many years to learn the truth about many events
    Our great great great grandchildren may learn something about what went on chez Windsor especially over Diana. Why did Harold Wilson suddenly resign
  • Doghouse RileyDoghouse Riley Posts: 32,491
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Why do we have to wait so many years to learn the truth about many events
    Our great great great grandchildren may learn something about what went on chez Windsor especially over Diana. Why did Harold Wilson suddenly resign

    I'm not so sure we ever learn the "whole truth," after all, there will have been decades for the information to have been "sanitised"
    Those who might be able to attest to this could probably be long dead.
  • GibmanGibman Posts: 621
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Very true...the jucier the information, the less likely we will *ever* get to hear about it!

    Were it not for Ed Snowden, do you think GCHQ/NSA would have released what they were really up to now in 100 years time, let alone 40.
  • Boz_LowdownlBoz_Lowdownl Posts: 3,232
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Why do we have to wait so many years to learn the truth about many events
    Our great great great grandchildren may learn something about what went on chez Windsor especially over Diana. Why did Harold Wilson suddenly resign

    In later years he suffered from dementia and it is rumoured he resigned as he was aware of the early onstage of it. Whether this is true though is another matter.
  • FayecorgasmFayecorgasm Posts: 29,793
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I will give it a go just because micheal Portillo is such a good presenter and an engaging interviewer.oh and to see his funky shirt trouser and blazer combos
  • ilovewallanderilovewallander Posts: 42,020
    Forum Member
    I will give it a go just because micheal Portillo is such a good presenter and an engaging interviewer.oh and to see his funky shirt trouser and blazer combos

    Pink blazer with yellow trouser combo is a particular favourite of mine :)
  • Bulletguy1Bulletguy1 Posts: 18,429
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I'm not so sure we ever learn the "whole truth," after all, there will have been decades for the information to have been "sanitised"
    Those who might be able to attest to this could probably be long dead.
    The current Westminster Paedophilia scandal being a classic example of this. The general public have simply been drip fed a list of ageing tv celebrities in order to appease them in the hope it would throw everyone off the scent. It didn't and the celeb list has almost run out now. There are far bigger fish to fry. Just a pity they went for the minnows first instead of the sharks.

    Gibman wrote: »
    Very true...the jucier the information, the less likely we will *ever* get to hear about it!

    Were it not for Ed Snowden, do you think GCHQ/NSA would have released what they were really up to now in 100 years time, let alone 40.
    The GCHQ/NSA business i doubt anyone will ever get the absolute truth about. We have our laws regarding state security, America has theirs. GCHQ is run by and responsible to the UK. Menwith Hill is run by the NSA, built and operating on UK land leased to the US. It's undoubtedly the most sophisticated and powerful intercept station in the world.

    Because we consider America as 'our friend' GCHQ will most certainly have an 'unwritten arrangement' with the NSA which at times may have taken them outside the jurisdiction of UK laws.
  • Bulletguy1Bulletguy1 Posts: 18,429
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Pink blazer with yellow trouser combo is a particular favourite of mine :)
    I was staggered to see him turn up in St Petersburg in that pink jacket when he did the Continental Railways series. :o

    I wondered if he was just seeing how far he could push the envelope, or simply being extraordinarily naive! :confused:
  • Doghouse RileyDoghouse Riley Posts: 32,491
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I don't mean this unkindly, but he makes a good presenter of the railways series, as often, he knows sod-all about the subjects and accepts that. This means that the people he interviews get a chance to express themselves, whereas an "in your face presenter" would have a lot to say, even though they too, might know sod-all.
  • ilovewallanderilovewallander Posts: 42,020
    Forum Member
    Bulletguy1 wrote: »
    I was staggered to see him turn up in St Petersburg in that pink jacket when he did the Continental Railways series. :o

    I wondered if he was just seeing how far he could push the envelope, or simply being extraordinarily naive! :confused:

    I think he was being daring myself :D:D
  • FayecorgasmFayecorgasm Posts: 29,793
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I don't mean this unkindly, but he makes a good presenter of the railways series, as often, he knows sod-all about the subjects and accepts that. This means that the people he interviews get a chance to express themselves, whereas an "in your face presenter" would have a lot to say, even though they too, might know sod-all.

    I thik hes genuinely interested in people and he makes them the star rather than himself. I also like th way he always says hello Im Michael rather than assuming everyone knows him .He has really grown on me and i watch all the railways programes despite never having had any interest in them before
  • lundavralundavra Posts: 31,790
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Gibman wrote: »
    Very true...the jucier the information, the less likely we will *ever* get to hear about it!

    Were it not for Ed Snowden, do you think GCHQ/NSA would have released what they were really up to now in 100 years time, let alone 40.

    I doubt whether it will make any difference. The name Snowden will just be remembered with all the other traitors like Philby, Burgess, MacLean etc.
Sign In or Register to comment.