User talk:Michael Holzman

I see know reason to include the spoonerism. What was your reason?Michael Holzman (talk) 21:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re Burgess[edit]

Have you read the new Davenport-Hines work on the Cambridge Five? I've ordered a copy to see if it gives any further insights on GB. The WP article on the Five is in a pretty poor state and I'm wodering if I might try to imnprove it, later this year. Brianboulton (talk) 14:19, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, I haven't yet. I'm rather deep into MI6 files about Philby at the moment, but will probably get around to it. There's also a new book coming out on Maclean (claiming to be the first biography).Michael Holzman (talk) 14:28, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may find this file, at the (UK) National Archives, interesting: KV-2-4364. It is the Moscow/London correspondence of Burgess and Harold Nicolson.Michael Holzman (talk) 18:34, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning Burgess's traffic tickets in Virginia, West is not a good source. Wilfred Mann, who was there, stated that " The ambassador, Sir Oliver Franks, had a reputation for being tough on traffic offences . . . Just a few months later, Kim Philby himself used this well-known trait of the ambassador to trick him into sending Guy Burgess home in disgrace . . ." I think this becoming the consensus view.