Talk:Special Operations Executive: Difference between revisions

Military history: Intelligence / British / European / World War II C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles C This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale. This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Intelligence task force British military history task force European military history task force World War II task force

The list of agents on this page is of such a length that I feel it would benefit from being divided into the various SOE Sections. At present I don't have sufficient data to do this myself, but whoever has added all of the names which do not yet have their own pages may well have it. Petermanchester 11:44, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I am currently undertaking the addition to this page of as many books and films as I can recall and/or discover on the subject of SOE operations, as well as agent biographies that I am able to add. Petermanchester 22:05, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

As of this writing, the link titled "Special Operations Executive Records Release 8th Feb 2002" in category "external links" seems broken.
The current URL

http://www.pro.gov.uk/releases/feb2002-SOE/list.htm 

says 404.
Hope this helps maintain this impressive article.
Alain Becker (FR) 03:42, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Yup, it's broken, and it doesn't look like it's going to come back. The whole site seems to have moved to http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk, and lists of releases before 2003 have been cleansed. Their online catalogue (PROCAT) is dead, so I can't search for the missing info. As a consolation prize, I added a link to the nearest thing I could find, a list of 2003 document releases relating to SOE. --Heron 10:52, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

They do seem to have been making changes. However, there's a search page active, for the moment, at ,http://www.catalogue.nationalarchives.gov.uk/search.asp CVA 19:07, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I think Roger Courtney has a role here, with the SBS, but can't figure out how. Guttlekraw 06:49, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've added details of two books by MFD Foot and a description of Mackenzie's book. As a personal opinion I'm not sure why we have books and films on a joint list. I feel films generally are very inaccurate and tend to "glamorise" the subject. I'd like to suggest we have separate "books" and "films" lists. There are now so many books (of varying quality) some of the very reliable ones are in danger of being "lost" in a ever lengthening list. What do contributors think of the idea of dividing the bibliography into three sections : official publications/academic histories ; autobiographies of those who actually took part ; biographies / popular books written by authors without personal experience ? Cefas 26 Mar 06

Have not received any comments so have amended article on lines suggested above. Cefas~~ 14 April 06

FANY "The SOE included a number of women (who were often recruited from the First Aid Nursing Yeomanry); its F Section (France) alone placed 39 female agents in to the field, of whom 13 did not return. " I always understood that female SOE agents were placed in FANY after recruitment because female members of the British Armed Forces were not allowed to carry arms. FANY had a more relaxed attitude to rules and regulations. It was thought that if capture they might get some protection from being members of a uniformed force. Of course it did not help. FANY did supply personnel to staff SOE UK radio stations but that was probably because they were considered very trustworthy because of their backgrounds. --jmb 23:38, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I included a section on this in Women's Auxiliary Air Force as most were WAAF's attached to FANY--Pandaplodder (talk) 13:22, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase "The F Section, under British control, recruited agents who were not prepared to accept the leadership of General De Gaulle" could be better expressed. Some people not liking De Gaulle wasn't the only reason for the two sections. If anything I thought F section came first & RF was started because De Gaulle didn't want to work under British control. -- SteveCrook 09:18, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saw a set of TV series on the Military Channel which detailed many failures of SOE and why SIS thought SOE is strictly an amateur operation. It seems the general opinion that all the failure of Section F was due to the incompetence of section chief Maurice Buckmaster whom someone said was not intelligent enough to be in the intellegence work. He repeatedly ignored warning notice from France and warning signals from British agents. He also retained highly suspicious and compromised personnel in key positions. The failures of Section F resulted in the capture and death of hundreds of French and British agents. ~

The Danish Resistance was able to mount few covert actions before the end of the war. Most of the actions conducted were railroad sabotage to halt German troop movements from and to Norway. However, there were examples of sabotage on a much larger scale especially by BOPA. In all over 1000 operations were conducted from 1942 and onwards. The Danish resistance also saved nearly all of the Danish jews from certain death in German KZ camps. This was a massive overnight operation and is to this day recognized among jews as one of the most significant displays of public defiance against the Germans. They did assist SOE in its activities in neutral Sweden. For example, SOE was able to obtain several shiploads of vital ball-bearings which had been interned in Swedish ports.

One of the two striked through parts cant be right

Tha slughy 22:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Neville Chamberlain article states "he had a key role in the formation of the Special Operations Executive", yet this article doesn't mention him at all. --J Clear 12:00, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• In M R D Foot's SOE The Special Operations Executive 1940-46, the forerunner of SOE was agreed in March 1939 for sabotage and leaflet work in the Czech borderlands and Austria. It says that Chamberlain did not object. Then in 1940 - By a curious irony, the last details had already been handed over by Churchill to be settled by a personage whom Dalton particularly detested. The forging of a weapon intended to create the utmost difficulties for Hitler was undertaken by the man who is commonly derided as having been too soft in his treatment of Hitler at Munich: Neville Chamberlain. --jmb 18:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FRANCE "SOE's operations in France were directed by two London-based country sections. F Section was under British control, while RF Section was linked to General de Gaulle's Free French government in exile."

>>

This is not true (see "A Life in Secrets" -Sarah Helm). de Gaulle's group was in no way linked with the SOE. In fact de Gaulle was at direct odds with SOE's F Section. He believed the British were carrying on illegal operation in France because they were not linked with his Free France (supposedly the exiled government). At the end of the war de Gaule went to the point of ordering some SOE agents off French soil. SOE (F) also allowed agents to do field recruiting which meant many native French worked with SOE on the ground.

SOE preferred not to work with the UK-based Free French as it was notoriously leak-prone, and had a reputation for being very un-security conscious. This went back to normal military operations such as the Invasion of Madagascar when FF personnel were heard openly discussing the forthcoming landings, in pubs and nightclubs. After this, the British stopped informing de Gaulle about forthcoming operations and naturally, he resented this. The relationships between SOE and the French Resistance personnel on the ground however, were on the whole, excellent, despite some political differences, some groups being Communist.

SOE also initially co-operated with the American OSS when it arrived on the scene but after a number of operations in Occupied France where the OSS operatives inexperience caused a number of Resistance and SOE people to be arrested by the Gestapo, this stopped. After that, SOE refused to co-operate with the OSS unless they would co-ordinate their activities under the umbrella of SOE, which they declined to do, and the OSS were then forced to organise their own operations in isolation. US personnel were at a disadvantage operating undercover in Occupied France, as simple things such as the way a person held their knife and fork could be noticed in places such as the pavement cafes and restaurants that abounded in places like Paris and most French towns. The French eat-out far more than many countries, especially in the evenings, and surprisingly, cutting one's food first and then using only the fork afterwards (a way of eating common among Americans but unusual in Europe) was a dead give-away to the Gestapo and Milice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.40.253.120 (talk) 13:36, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

... and another thing, at the time many American men (even many non-Jewish ones) were circumcised, which was also a dead giveaway as all the Gestapo had to do was to get a suspected person to drop their trousers and underpants - if the person was circumcised that meant he was a Jew.

By the time the OSS was present in Occupied Europe, All the circumcised males had already been sent off to Auschwitz-Birkenau, Dachau and the-like, for the gas chambers, so being a circumcised male in Occupied Europe was not likely to result in a long, and peaceful existence - just think of the pissoir. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.57.101 (talk) 22:49, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"SOE included a number of women (who were often recruited from the First Aid Nursing Yeomanry); F Section alone sent 39 female agents into the field, of whom 13 did not return."

>>

Actually while some were recruited while in FANY (First Aid Nursing Yeomanry... Im not joking that was the initials used) - SOE mainly used FANY as a cover for their women spies. England's laws did not permit women to take part in combat or field operations (other than drivers and nurses etc.). So to get around this the women enlisted in SOE were also enlisted in FANY to give them a cover. This also allowed SOE to get money and such for the women.

"The memorial's Roll of Honour lists the names of the 91 men and 13 women members of the SOE who gave their lives for France's freedom."

>>

This is a quick statement but should be fleshed out a bit. "gave their lives for France's Freedom" is not accurate. The main point of opperations was to prepare for D-Day. The agents where giving their lives for their country (mostly British citizens though born in other countries).

Also these people were almost all murdered in hitler's concentration camps in very gruesome ways.

Many problems with this article but I need to stop here for now, Mike

I read this article to find out more about the SOE after reading this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7585387.stm

It states that the SOE was closed during Clement Attlee's stint as PM. Any chance of checking this and expanding the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.40.46.101 (talk) 08:54, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image File:Cichociemni may 1943.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I dispute the following statement in the article: "Some SOE liaison officers in the field were executed by undisciplined ELAS groups". I submit that the statement is false in its entirety. If the contributor denotes Greek people liaising to the SOE, then this would be too general and should be deleted. Yes, there were numerous killings amongst Greeks during (and after) WWII and a lot of them could be characterized as killings of people liaising with the British (the SOE). But it is misleading to label the people kileld as "SOE liaison officers". However, it the contributor denotes British officers, I do not know of any such case! The contributor references for this (novel) claim the book The Bitter Sea by a Simon Ball, published in 2009. I do not know of this work, nor of the author, and would appreciate an extensive quote of the relevant claims therein. Note please that the book, in the same wikipedia entry, is (tellingly) placed under the category "Books by authors without personal SOE experience"... In any case, this is the first time I come across such a claim. There is no mention of any British officers getting killed by ELAS partisans, "undisciplined" or not, in any memoir by any author who had personal SOE experience. Nor by any historian, for that matter. -The Gnome (talk) 07:51, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ball's book was published recently. It is not a novel. Full details (including its isbn) are given; it should be easy enough to obtain from bookshops or libraries. One well-attested murder by ELAS troops was that of a New Zealand officer named Hubbard. (OK, not a British officer, but serving under British command; the New Zealand government did not have any independent links with guerrilla forces.) The murder took place in or shortly before October 1943. The incident is mentioned also in the autobiographies of liaison officers John Mulgan and Nicholas Hammond. I do not have these sources immediately to hand, but will add them to the bibliography once I have re-studied them. Both Myers and Woodhouse also mention the incident, although only in passing. The statement (in so as as at least one SOE liaison officer was killed) is indisputable. HLGallon (talk) 08:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC) Also described in Denys Hamson, We fell among Greeks, published in 1946. This is another first-hand account. Again, source not readily to hand, will be added to the article once I have got hold of a copy. HLGallon (talk) 11:09, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is rather weak, as evidence goes, I'm afraid. (By the way, I did not imply that Ball's book is fiction. The word "novel" was used in the sense "new; recent".) Only one book, by one author explicitly mentions the killing of one New Zealander --of whom we only know the surname. It is clear that an amendment must be made until such time as someone, e.g. you, offers a better piece of evidence. Wikipedia is hopefully used as a means of learning. It is, therefore, counter-productive and not up to Wiki standards to state "Some SOE liaison officers in the field were executed by undisciplined ELAS groups". Such a statement can exist in the article when we have some credible evidence, from people who have been in Greece at the time, e.g. Woodhouse, that (a) more than one British SOE officers were killed (so far you bring up one surname), (b) they were indeed killed and did not die under other circumstances, and (c) they were killed by ELAS troops. Calling people "ELAS irregulars" is a very broad term and can be made to include any Greek on the mountains at the time who was carrying a gun! To cut to the chase, the overwhelming historical evidence, by every first-hand source or historical account, shows that ELAS troops and auxiliaries, under strict orders from its leadership, treated the British officers cordially (and certainly did not mistreat them in any way, let alone murder any of them!). The Greeks reserved the killings and the other atrocities for amongst themselves. If there was an isolated incident (of which, moreover, next to nothing is known until Wikipedia brought it forward) about one liaison officer, the generalisation being attempted here is arbitrary and un-historical. ~-The Gnome (talk) 10:52, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, New Zealanders were particularly popular amongst the Greek population after the gallantry shown by the New Zealand soldiers in the Battle of Crete. The allegation that a New Zealander was "killed by ELAS" seems all the more preposterous for this reason. The subject deserves a much more thorough research. What are this man's (Ball's) credentials as a historian? Could you, please, quote the relevant paragraph in his book? -The Gnome (talk) 10:52, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Damn! Ball's book has gone back to the local lending library. However, I'm still trying to get hold of Hamson, Hammond etc. The killing took place shortly after the outbreak of fighting between ELAS and EDES. Hamson, so far as I recall, stated that an ELAS unit claimed that Hubbard and the rest of his party, who were mistreated but not attacked, were betraying them to EDES. The unit was probably acting without the knowledge of EAM/ELAS's central committee (hence "undisciplined"). By all means remove the assertion; but it will go back in once I have hold of the sources I mentioned and suitably referenced them. HLGallon (talk) 11:56, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm removing the allegation and will stay on the subject. You just cost me $12 because I ordered Ball's book, to check it out :-)... -The Gnome (talk) 22:21, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We can lay this to rest, it seems. I bought the book cited as the source of that claim in Wikipedia, originally, namely “The Bitter Sea” by Simon Ball. (The author, according to his short bio, teaches history at the U of Glasgow.) On p. 249, here are all the passages where the name “Hubbard” is mentioned : “ When Wilson got back to Cairo from Tunis, the immediate crisis he had to deal with was the news that a young New Zealand liaison officer in Greece, Lieutenant Hubbard, had been murdered by Communist insurgents, ‘who were like half-crazed beasts’. … Even before the death of Hubbard, Wilson had taken steps to ‘militarize’ the effort in Greece. … The incoming commander [of special forces] was on a tour of inspection in Greece at the time of Hubbard’s murder…” The sole source for the alleged murder, as cited in that book, is “HS5/689, ‘’Death of Lt. Hubbard’ 13 October 1943, (Report Not Sent)”.

We see that (a) the Ball book is the only one alleging an assassination of an SOE officer by Greek partisans, (b) the source cited for that allegation is a report which was never sent, (c) the heavy-handed “politicalising” of every event at the time by both sides led often to distortion of facts, and (d) this incident was not mentioned inn the report of the incoming special forces commander while on tour in Greece (the book cites his report but the report does not mention any death of a Lt. Hubbard). In view of the above I can say that we can confidently delete from the entry any mention of “British SOE liaison officers assassinated by ELAS partisans”. The plural is clearly wrong but even the one alleged incident is very dubious in its authenticity. At best, it’s an isolated incident, without premeditation from the partisans, and thus irrelevant to the history of SOE’s history in Greece. -The Gnome (talk) 15:22, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article states : "With aid from these two organisations [ELAS and EDES], Myer's [sic] party destroyed the Gorgopotamos railway viaduct on 14 November, 1942." However, firstly, Eddie Myers and the SOE operatives never had the numerical or operational capacity to carry out this act on their own and use Greek partisans only for "aid". The operation was carried out by ELAS and EDES detachments under the planning and guidance of SOE, as described in the relevant Wiki entry. Secondly, the date givn is wrong. Thirdly, the SOE party which planned the sabotage act and participated in its execution was led by Eddie Myers (not Chris Woodhouse, as the Gorgopotamos entry implies). Therefore, the two entries should be reconciled, in that the above-quoted sentence in the current article should be amended to read "On 25 November 1942, as part of 'Operation Harling', 150 Greek partisans and a party of SOE officers, following a plan drawn up by Eddie Myers, blew up the railroad bridge at Gorgopotamos, cutting off the enemy-controlled route linking Thessaloniki and Athens." -The Gnome (talk) 22:51, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are various ratings (written by Wiki contributors) for the books cited in the References section, which seem to be crossing the line into POV territory, e.g. "Best book on the subject", etc. Unless there's a Wiki policy exempting books from such statements of personal points of view, I move to remove all the "blurbs", honest as they might be. -The Gnome (talk) 09:15, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

overlooked (as usual) french spec ops against the japanese in indochina from 1944 to 1945 (former Jedburgh and CLI/Gaur commandos dropped in Laos by Force 136), evidence here, but you can find more in french language and in english using google and google books. who searches finds. Cliché Online (talk) 18:33, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An Information request:

Between the years of 1940-1943 the SOE run intelligece operations in Syria and Lebanon that were under the Vichy regime.

Under the framework of the cooperation between the SOE and the Political department of the Jewish Agency, a network of jewish agents was estblished.

These operations were conducted by dozens of jewish agents thet served in the "Syrian Department" of the Palmach (the elite fighting force of the Haganah).

Their mission required a uniqe military preperation that included: reconnaissance, sabotage, utilization of various wepons, operating communicators and military tactics trainings.

The chief instructor of the Course was the SOE officer - Nicholas G. L. Hammond.

Does anyone have a farther information about these operations and actions? In general and from the SEO side?

(The informaton that I gave is from the information center of the Palmach - that I transelated from hebraw) נקפדון (talk) 05:39, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by נקפדון (talk • contribs) 08:31, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply] 

	An image used in this article, File:Kreipe Abduction Team.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Media without a source as of 10 June 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:34, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote too books about SOE operations in Portugal. First concerning Operation Longshanks in Marmagoa Harbour in 1943;a second one about John Beevor clandestine network organized from Lisbon in 1941. It is my firts time here in Wikipedia so I do not know how to share more details about my reserach. José António Barreiros joseantoniobarreiros@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by José António Barreiros (talk • contribs) 22:34, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A translation of the French WP article « Liste des moyens aériens du SOE » would be useful.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 04:57, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"* Arthur Christie. Mission Scapula SOE in the Far East ISBN 0-9547010-0-3.

A true story about an ordinary soldier seconded into MI5 and sent on a mission to Singapore just before it fell. With Freddy Spencer-Chapman". This book has been written by his son Maurice A. Christie: "The wartime memories of Arthur Christie, written in the first person by his son Maurice A. Christie. Arthur Christie credited as author on cover." London: M. A. Christie, 2004.

(copac) fuller details are needed and it might not qualify for that section.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 07:16, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please could I suggest a couple of ammendments? I notice that Colonel Maurice Buckmaster is not mentioned in this article, although he was prominent in the leadership of the French section of SOE, as it says on his wikipedia page.

Also, in the bibliography section, there is no mention of Captain Peter Churchill's books on his training, operational career and capture.

217.36.4.10 (talk) 13:24, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Major "Jo" Holland was present at the inception of SOE, as GS (R), later MI (R). Although this is noted in your article, there is no mention that he was responsible for bringing his friend Major Gubbins to the fledgling operation. (They had served in Ireland together in 1919/20). I have found considerably more detail about Holland at the beginning of M.R.D. Foot's book: "SOE: An Outline History of the Special Operations Executive 1940-46."Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). I have also read that Holland founded the commandos. One of the first tasks put to them by Lord Gort (with Gubbins and Millis Jefferis) was to produce pamphlets on guerilla warfare. Conceived through extensive research by Holland in worldwide subversive techniques and written by Gubbins, they were produced in the spring of 1939 and distributed all over Europe and beyond. In the midst of clashing personalities at the beginning, these three men worked well and productively together. As a general note, Holland was awarded the DFC in WW1 and ended WW2 as a Major General and Companion of the Bath. I feel he deserves more mention.

24.222.253.66 (talk) 13:39, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Elsewhere on Wikipedia, I read that the average length of time of service for a planted SOE wire transmitter in France was 3-6 months before capture. I came to this entry expecting to find this data but it's not here. Any idea what entry on Wikipedia would have this piece of information? I can't think of another topic that would cover this same area. 69.125.134.86 (talk) 03:26, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Where else did you read it? In which article? Did they cite any references or was it just one of those "Wikipedia Facts" without any references? -- SteveCrook (talk) 13:41, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]