The book arrived today and I think the following caption creates more questions than answers. Chapter 5 Standing Alone page 94 The only question that it raises in my mind is who his KGB handler was when he was at Cambridge... Where does that idea that the British were ordered to take no prisoners come from ? Every eye-witness account that I've read suggests that they couldn't wait to get prisoners back for intelligence de-briefing. The 2-Div Provost diary that I have a copy of tells that one of their first tasks on reaching the Dyle, before any contact with the enemy, was to establish a POW cage. Hardly what you'd expect if there was no intention to take any. ...and an unsubstantiated account of poorly-led and badly informed troops who probably had no A/tk capability running from armour. What does that prove ? The repetition of the 'perhaps 400' legitimate prisoners allegation is so bizare as to barely warrant comment. I've never read so much unsubstantiated poppycock in a single paragraph.