GarryB wrote:I agree regarding memoirs... wasn't it Churchill himself who said that history would look kindly upon him because he intended to write it himself... and that is exactly what he did.
Too true GaryB, too true. The degree to which Churchill stooped to "alter' history is almost beyond imagination. The son of a syphilitic alcoholic father, Winston was paranoid about succumbing to the evils of the vices that his father fell too [and with very good reason – he was an alcoholic and womaniser] and felt that he was in a race against time, to fulfil his destiny. Here’s an article of mine you might find interesting.
Churchill – The Man Who Wrote HistoryIntroduction
It is hard to imagine a personage so distorted by history than Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill, KG, OM, CH, TD, PC, FRS (Born 30 November 1874 – died 24 January 1965). Those of us brought up in the Commonwealth of Nations have been imbued with the stories of this great statesman, fearless bulldog, saviour of the world and man of destiny.
When I was growing up, I too totally believed the many stories about Churchill, he was my hero – idol worshiped as the statesman and orator that he was. All publications emphasised the good Churchill did – his heroics in war, his prophecy of war and campaign against appeasement, his standing up for the free world and the galvanising of nations against the evil of Fascism. What a role model!
Fortunately now, with the release of many previously secret documents from Britain, Germany and other European states, made available after 50 and 60 year embargos have been lifted, the true story of Churchill can be recounted. However, the damage done by the sheer volume of distorted publications may well render history distorted forever.
The realisation of the evil in Churchill, is hard to convey in a short article like this. I would recommend that anyone whose appetite is whetted by this precise of the many books and articles that I have read on the subject, take the time to read some of the publications listed in the “references” to this article. In them, a detailed and true picture of the man will emerge.
There is much that I wanted to include in this article – but for fear of being labelled a sensationalist kook, I have omitted. For brevity, I also skip the long and somewhat tedious “history” of Churchill – there are many publications which can account for this in much more detail that whatever I could. So I cut to the chase.
The cult of personality
Churchill was a war monger. He gloried in war and conflict. When not engaged in armed conflict, he would seek out verbal discourse (argument) and an extremely quick and cutting wit he possessed – as many could testify to their discomfort at his comments. He sought out conflict – physical or verbal and thrived on the thrill of the event. He was in India, served with Lord Kitchener at Khartoum and was decorated (a shame the Arabs rifle miss-fired, or history may well have been much different), went to the Boar War, served in the First World War and started the Second World War. In 1955, he mused to a secretary “The last enjoyable war was the Boar War”. Truly, he felt most at home in times of conflict and sought conflict as a salve for his soul. He was reckless and given to believing his own creations, bombastic in his deliverance of “his ideas”, which by the time he delivered them – were in his mind (at least) fact.
Churchill had a propensity for alcohol – that’s putting it mildly! Boarding on the alcoholic, he made many ill fated decisions while grossly intoxicated and because of his autocratic rule [dictatorship], no-one was there to countermand him: often with the result that Allied lives were lost because of his drunken stupor.
Churchill was a political butterfly – really, a miss-fit, changing parties as a naughty girl might change underwear. He became somewhat of a political pariah; an embarrassment to a party, but one that would want to be kept at least close least you loose track of what mischief he is up too. Such were his ramblings between wars. He professed a great admiration for Mussolini and this from a man who would lead a nation to fight fascism! He commented to Italian journalist: “If I had been an Italian, I would have been entirely with you from the beginning to the end of your victorious struggle against the bestial appetites and passions of Leninism. Your movement has rendered a service to the whole world”. In this statement, however, we do see the basis for his starting WWII – his loathing of Leninism.
He was a most prodigious writer and covered the whole gambit of writing – Newspapers, Journals, short-stories, novels, historical papers and documents, speeches and condensing Classics. However, in doing all this, he engaged a large team of researchers and writes, taking the time to float his pen over their works and make corrects and notes as he saw fit. As an employer per sae, he was arrogant, obnoxious and quite ungrateful. One of his longest serving writers, who after some 30 years left his employment was seen off with the comment to the effect that he was of little good anyhow.
Because of the sheer volume of his writings, we have now essentially been left with the history according to Winston Churchill – and Churchill lies! For example, his personal “Report” on “The Dardanelles Campaign”, so distorted facts and events that the Admiralty could only explain that it was “a pack of lies”. What he would write, contained his idea of events and history – to the point whereby he outright lied, doctoring many incidents to paint a different picture and portray himself in a better light than otherwise should be noted. His entire volume set “The Second World War” is of value mainly in establishing dates.
Churchill was a man possessed by a desire to complete something – what?: he wasn’t sure, but was convinced he was a man of destiny. [Remarking during the war that this was his destiny being fulfilled]. The degree to which he helped destiny, you can judge later. His arrogance and events propelling him to be dictator of the Commonwealth during the war years – his most memorable and rewarding years.
Churchill was consumed by the motion that he would die before he could do whatever it was he was to do – to die early like his farther. Almost a morbid fear of passing away too early, before he could do what he had to do; before he could imprint history and fulfil his destiny.
Red Sky In The Morning
Like some voice in the wilderness, Churchill needed a cause to fight for and in the period mid 1920’s early 1930’s he found it in “the struggle for India”. In this however, he was alone. His Parliament and closest fiends turning against him. He made some very stout enemies. Sam Hoare being one, Lord Halifax being another, but there were many: indeed, he became a very lonely little figure. The leaders of the main political parties distancing themselves from him, he finally gave up on India, early 1930’s.
Dangerous is a man like Churchill, without a cause, and he was soon to find one in the form of Adolph Hitler, although initially it was Germany that he attacked. [I cannot fathom what inspired Churchill to start this crusade against Germany because it was contrary to the vast public opinion, political will and the persuasion of Royalty]. Almost as though he had a masochistic or self-destruct mechanism – failed over India, against the vast general opinion and now another crusade also against the flow of opinion. Perhaps he saw in this, his opportunity to “fulfil destiny”. Another figure was waiting in the wings – convinced by the occult that he too was a man of density – how events would transpire to unite them!
Whatever, he threw himself feverishly into the fight against Germany and initially was jeered and derided in Parliament. However, he had as an ally his immense oratory skills and an imagination that would be feed by an entrepreneurial ex Major of the Intelligence Service who would supply Winston, clandestinely, completely spurious and fanciful intelligence briefs on Germany’s “war efforts”. This self-serving gentleman was later to receive a Knighthood from a most appreciative Winston. However, it seems the cordial and friendly relationship was not mutual as the ex Major remarked that “he wouldn’t even go to his funeral if he died”. For whatever reason Winston was feed this “illicit” information – it was totally at odds with the Government’s own analysis’s and subsequently, totally at odds with later captured German records [which were more in line with the Government assessments], we do not now know. Nor do we know who sponsored the ex Major to initially make contact with Churchill. What we know for certain is, the information was totally bogus, but Winston loved it – it fully supported his conviction of a coming war of which he was the prophet. Beware the ides of March!
His speeches in Parliament increased in number and in intensity and urging, on the coming menace. He bombarded newspapers with articles and took whatever chance he had to speak on the subject –home and abroad [America was a very sympathetic audience, who just seemed to love his oratory]. It is easy for us now, to look back and say, “hell, he was right, didn’t we end up with war?” What we have to judge history by, is the events and the forever recoded messages of Winston. But this is very much contrary to the public position – the position of the Government and the Royal Family. What has happened is that post war, the government of the day, has been derogatorily labelled “appeasers” and the public opinion of the time totally silenced and forgotten. The Royals, shamed into silence.
Many very influential people were fully supportive of Hitler and the German nation, there was much more support than we have previously given credit. To list them all out would be a near impossible task for me.
However, there were many in Britain who did not wish for war with Germany either – who in fact, shared a similar “dream” as Hitler. Lord Rothermere, [Harold Harmsworth, the son of an English barrister, was born in London in 1868.] newspaper mogul, wrote to Hitler on 29th April 1935 and was most flattering toward Hitler and critical of Churchill. Such entreaties toward Hitler from many within Britain – including Royalty, firmly established in Hitler’s mind, that Brittan would ultimately be Germany’s ally. Lord Rothermere had lost two sons in the Great War and this no doubt influenced his strong anti-war sentiments and appeasement attitude. Unlike Churchill, he saw no glory in war.
Lord Rothermere’s letter contained the following:
“My Dear Fuhrer, as one who may occupy the first place in all European history”. He said that he was not taking to heart the current disruption in Anglo-German relations adding “The sentiments and views of parliamentary demagogues [referring to Churchill] were capable of quick and unexpected changes”. The people’s friendship towards Germany was steadily growing, adding that 7 out of 10 people writing to his Daily Mail were in favour of Germany’s claims being entirely acceded to.
In reply, Hitler urged Lord Rothermere “not to head the parliamentary demagogues – 9/10th of the blood that flowed in the last three centuries had flowed in vain. At least for the interests of the peoples involved. Britain had been shrewd enough to keep out, and her mighty empire was rewarded” .
Lord Rothermere appealed to Hitler in reply, saying that he had held this dream and conviction for the last 16 years and this was not just something recent. His previous audiences at speeches in Germany would vouch for this. He then repeated his long held dream – “An Anglo-German entente would form in Europe and thus in the world a force for peace and reason of 120 million of the most superior people. Britain’s sea power and unique colonial talent would be united with the world’s first solider-race. Were this entente extended to embrace the American nation, then it would, indeed, be hard to see who in the world could disturb the peace without wilfully and conscientiously neglecting the interests of the White race… The Gods love and favour those who seem to demand the impossible”.
A copy of his 8 page letter was sent to Churchill – it doesn’t seem to find reference in any of Churchill’s personal memoirs – Churchill having by that time, firmly set himself against Hitler – convinced by his own rhetoric and lies. Churchill rebuked Lord Rothermere over the letter stating “that if we should come to an understanding with Germany to dominate Europe, I think this would be contrary to the whole of our history”.
This was not a singular incident – Lord Rothermere had much correspondence with Hitler and visits to Germany –
Lord Rothermere, The Daily Mail (10th July, 1933)
I urge all British young men and women to study closely the progress of the Nazi regime in Germany. They must not be misled by the misrepresentations of its opponents. The most spiteful distracters of the Nazis are to be found in precisely the same sections of the British public and press as are most vehement in their praises of the Soviet regime in Russia.
They have started a clamorous campaign of denunciation against what they call "Nazi atrocities" which, as anyone who visits Germany quickly discovers for himself, consists merely of a few isolated acts of violence such as are inevitable among a nation half as big again as ours, but which have been generalized, multiplied and exaggerated to give the impression that Nazi rule is a bloodthirsty tyranny.
The German nation, moreover, was rapidly falling under the control of its alien elements. In the last days of the pre-Hitler regime there were twenty times as many Jewish Government officials in Germany as had existed before the war. Israelites of international attachments were insinuating themselves into key positions in the German administrative machine. Three German Ministers only had direct relations with the Press, but in each case the official responsible for conveying news and interpreting policy to the public was a Jew.
Lord Rothermere, the Daily Mirror (22nd January, 1934)
Timid alarmists all this week have been whimpering that the rapid growth in numbers of the British Blackshirts is preparing the way for a system of rulership by means of steel whips and concentration camps.
Very few of these panic-mongers have any personal knowledge of the countries that are already under Blackshirt government. The notion that a permanent reign of terror exists there has been evolved entirely from their own morbid imaginations, fed by sensational propaganda from opponents of the party now in power.
As a purely British organization, the Blackshirts will respect those principles of tolerance which are traditional in British politics. They have no prejudice either of class or race. Their recruits are drawn from all social grades and every political party.
Young men may join the British Union of Fascists by writing to the Headquarters, King's Road, Chelsea, London, S.W.
Lord Rothermere wrote an article for The Daily Mail where he argued that Germany should be given back Tanganyika, the Camerons and Togoland (21st March, 1934)
Though this proposal may not be popular, I am convinced that it is wise. We cannot expect a nation of "he-men" like the Germans to sit forever with folded arms under the provocations and stupidities of the Treaty of Versailles. To deny this mighty nation, conspicuous for its organizing ability and scientific achievements, a share in the work of developing backward regions of the world is preposterous.
G. Ward Price described how the Black Shirts dealt with anti-fascist demonstrators in The Daily Mail (8th June 1934)
If the Blackshirts movement had any need of justification, the Red Hooligans who savagely and systematically tried to wreck Sir Oswald Mosley's huge and magnificently successful meeting at Olympia last night would have supplied it.
They got what they deserved. Olympia has been the scene of many assemblies and many great fights, but never had it offered the spectacle of so many fights mixed up with a meeting.
Adolf Hitler, letter to Lord Rothermere (7th December, 1933)
I should like to express the appreciation of countless Germans, who regard me as their spokesman, for the wise and beneficial public support which you have given to a policy that we all hope will contribute to the enduring pacification of Europe. Just as we are fanatically determined to defend ourselves against attack, so do we reject the idea of taking the initiative in bringing about a war. I am convinced that no one who fought in the front trenches during the world war, no matter in what European country, desires another conflict.
Lord Rothermere, telegram to Adolf Hitler (1st October, 1938)
My dear Fuhrer everyone in England is profoundly moved by the bloodless solution to the Czechoslovakian problem. People not so much concerned with territorial readjustment as with dread of another war with its accompanying bloodbath. Frederick the Great was a great popular figure. I salute your excellency's star which rises higher and higher.
[http://http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk]
It is most important to note that such feelings were well understood by Hitter and played a most important part in his overall scheme of things. I have recently completed reading several books on the Spanish Civil War and the position of the League of Nations, but Britain and France particularly, were totally supportive of the Fascists. The concept (policy) of “Non Intervention” was nothing more than total support for the fascists, short of actual military involvement. Using the Royal Navy to blockage Spain and deny arms and materiel from being delivered to help a democratically elected government (Socialist, mind you) stave of a coup attempt by fascists, had Hitler’s undying thanks. “Of course Hitler was assured of the support of Britain and the tacit support of the League of Nations!” On this point – notice also that it was only the communists in Britain who actively condemned Mosley and his black shirt fascists. Even the Police attempted to assist the fascists in their parades and it was only the determined effort of the Communists who turned Mosley’s major parade – “The Real Band Of Brothers – The Spanish Civil War” by Max Arthur.
German Air Force General Erhard Milch noted in his diary after his meeting with foreign Secretary Sir John Simon; “February 1935 – “We are banking on Britain. Against Russia”.
While the majority of Britain favoured acceptance of Hitler, Churchill was hell bent on his personal crusade. Indeed, he really was a singular voice in this regard. However, it is curious to note that he had come a full circle in his “beliefs” in the space of just 15 years – more of his “butterfly” antics, or carpetbagging politics.
Churchill had published a vitriolic attack against Jews, in a newspaper article wherein he called them: “the principle inspiration and driving power [behind Bolshevism] and he stated, “ the prominent, if not indeed the principle, part of the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commissions for combating Counter-Revolution has bee taken by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses”. [Here Churchill was referring to the Notorious Che-Ka.’s. In his 1920 article he had written of the “evil prominence” obtained by Jews in Bela Kun’ recent brief “rule of terror” in Hungary].
Now it would seem, Churchill’s benefactors were Jews – the wealthy and influential flocked to become his friends. The gold mining industrialist Sir Henry Strakosch, furnishing him with incredibly inaccurate information about Germany’s rearmament expenditure – put by him at one thousand, six hundred million pounds since 1933~!
It is hard not to draw the conclusion that Zionists had been instrumental in recruiting a disillusioned and down Churchill into their struggle against Germany. By support, monetarily, politically and moral support [along with false friendships], Churchill had become their mouth-piece.
Boosted by falsehoods, Churchill went from strength to strength in his one man crusade. German ministers noting that wherever Churchill went there was a tirade of abuse against Germany and falsehoods aplenty.
On 5 November 1935, the Air Staff issued a secret memorandum stating that Germany only had 594 front line planes [unbeknown to Churchill at the time, this was accurate information obtained by secret code breaking of the German codes]. Churchill wrote a letter to the Committee of Imperial Defence: “It is to be hoped that this figure will not be made public, as it would certainly give rise to misunderstandings and challenge”. Was this a threat? Whatever, it was effective and the findings were never made public.
The German Prospective
At this point, we should pause and consider the German position.
Hitler was not the idiot manly portrayed by our propaganda – he was an intelligent man, a man of vision and a natural leader. He had turned a destitute and morally broken country, in the depths of depression, into a world superpower in the space of a decade. He was the undisputed leader of the nation and whether they want to admit it or not – the people’s choice of the German nation.
Hitler was a man of vision and clarity – he saw and understood quite clearly what the Zionist had done to his country while he was at war. How the social fabric of the country had been broken, the banks and institutions fermenting unrest and hardship which ultimately broke the will of the people to continue the war. He knew, as did the Germany Army, that the Army had not been defeated! The war had been lost because of the Zionist. [See my article – WWI to Modern Terrorism – Pravda forum] .
His attacks against the Zionists was portrayed as a general attack against Jews. However this needs to be contrasted against actual events - where Jews were not of Zionist nature or culture, they were accepted by the Reich. Consider the position of Air force General Erhart Milch – his father was Jewish. His mother “produced” a Blood Certificate indicating that his father was actually a non-Jewish German [essentially, saying she had an affair]. When this was questioned, Göring famously said, “I decide who is and who is not a Jew”. [This was later stated again at the Nuremburg show trails]. It is now impossible, because of the vast amount of propaganda and programming that we have sustained over 60 years to sort fact from fiction now – but events such as this, clearly indicate that Hitler’s attitude towards all Jews was different to that is currently accepted.
Hitler saw Joseph Stalin as a role model of a leader – he admired Stalin immensely- studying him from afar and while there was admiration for Stalin, there was also the certain knowledge that he was going to be an adversary. Stalin, like Hitler had turned a country around in very short time, the actual degree of progress was surprising to Hitler – it was also worrying for his future plans. Stalin was the stumbling block for Hitler’s expansion into Europe and ultimate control of the European Continent. Keep you friends close – but your enemies closer!
Hitler’s mentor(s) were Karl and Heinz Haushofer; it is on his geopolitical theories that Hitler formulated Mein Kampf – with Rudolph Hess. [This can be looked-up quite easily]. It is from the many meetings with his mentor that Hitler formulated his concept of the Third Reich. His very strong occult beliefs leading him to the conclusion that he was a man of density. A clairvoyant telling him that he would come to power, be in a conflict and that he would die if a certain event happened – it did.
Hitler’s plan was to replace the Zionist NWO with The Third Reich - and to usher in a thousand years of peace. To achieve this there would be a grand alliance between Britain and Germany – with an invitation to America to participate. Under this grand alliance, Germany would be the land power in Europe and Britain and colonies would control the sea and shipping lane, facilitating world wide trade. America, would be offered the Americas and Japan/East Asia/Pacific. Under such an alliance, Hitler said that no country would be able to stand against or to seriously challenge it – thus ensuring world peace. Russia and the close Eastern countries were to be the living space needed for the German peoples. The Russians/Slavs [untermenchen] were to be the new work-force for the future prosperity of the Reich.
This can clearly be seen in the dispositions of the German military. Hitler was “scared’ of the sea – it was not his environment; besides, he had a firm conviction that Britain could not be seriously challenged on the sea. His Kriegsmarine was not built with a view to challenging Britain, but in operating in tandem with Britain in securing the shipping lanes. [It wasn’t until into the war that it’s focus became that of a blockading navy – but note that at no time was there ever any attempt to challenge the British fleet]. The large capital ships that were built were not in the concept of “convoy raiders” as Churchill coined, but rather to operate as convoy and shipping lane protectors, in conjunction with the Royal Navy – securing the world’s waterways for the Reich. The Air Force was designed as a ground support/interdictory air force. There were no long range strategic bombers, as would be needed for a war against Britain, for example. The small twin engine bombers were for interdictory raids, beyond the reach of heavy artillery, in the depth of enemy lines so as to disrupt supplies etc. The other aircraft were for ground attack in the Blitzkrieg strategy of ground warfare. The Wehrmacht being a mechanised force with air support designed to quickly over-run positions and out-flank an enemy. All of this is hardly a force put-together with a plan of single-handedly ruling the world – it simply is too deficient in composition. Historians fail to draw this connection when considering the question as to what was Germany’s goals in the war. We are constantly told that they were after world domination – part of the story, only! Any logical analysis of the German forces give total credence to the fact that they were designed and equipped solely as a continental ground force; thus reinforcing the notion of Hitler’s grand alliance.
Haushofer was very well connected in British society – including connections to Royalty. There was a “great intrigue” played out between prominent people and parliamentarians in Britain and Hitler thought his proxies. [In his book “The Hitler Hess Deception” Martin Allen makes a sound and unequivocal link supporting the whole messy business – one that I do not intend to troll thought here]. Britain was on the brink of a coup – to destroy Churchill’s position in politics and wrestle control from the dictator, into the hands of the “appeasers”. By extremely cleaver manipulation (to what extent he has to thank the Zionists – I am unsure), Churchill skilfully out manoeuvred the vast array of those – including Hitler – who were out to do him down. When Churchill took over as PM, he was then privy to the code braking of Enigma and held total control over such transcripts. He used Enigma to his own ends. While Hitler still held out hope against hope, that Britain would “see sense” and join her: Churchill was hell bent on seeing that the public was prepared for his war.
Consider the period regarded a “The Phoney War”. Truly an apt name – generally historians cannot reason the event – however, it simply was because Hitler was involved in extremely complex and delicate intrigue to secure Britain as an Ally; plain and simple. This period say a flurry of diplomatic (clandestine) activity as each side wanted to preserve their face and public image – but both tried to hobble together a grand alliance. There simply was no other reason for the phoney war.
Hitler stopped his forces at Dunkirk - no leader wishing to win a war/battle would ever have contemplated such a move; even to this day, ill-informed historians and military strategists ponder and pontificate over the Dunkirk conundrum. If they applied the “big picture” it really is quite simple. Hitler did not want to crush the British Forces – for a start, he wanted them as intact as possible in the event that they would help against Russia and secondly, a crushing defeat of the British at Dunkirk would most definitely harden British resolve against Germany. All of this Churchill knew from the code braking, yet he played the whole situation up, to his advantage – with his oratory and rousing speeches, he turned the population.
Quite by error – the pilot was lost – a lone bomber strayed up the Thames and dropped it’s bomber on the Eastside docks. This was absolutely contrary to Hitler’s express orders. Churchill knew full well that Hitler was not going to bomb the cities – this he knew from the coded intercepts, yet he used this singular event [incidentally, Hitler was absolutely furious to learn of the mistaken bombing] to his advantage to tip the scales into his war. By a small retaliatory strike against Berlin, he forced Hitler’s hand into a escalating the war against Britain. Churchill took the gamble of world war – a gamble that he hoped would see the two evils he opposed – Germany and Bolshevism wipe each-other out and the merging of two Zionist controlled states - Great Britain and America.
For Hitler, desperate times, required desperate actions – None more so than what he then contemplated. With his most trusted friend Rudolf Hess and the combined input from the Haushofer’s and some other trusted contacts; they agreed on a personal approach direct to British Royalty and the possible coup leaders. [Remember, that for the British, this was high treason at a time of war – the subsequent failure meant that both Churchill and plotters had grounds to be silent – Churchill to conceal his secret, the plotters to avoid treason charges]. Hitler and Hess agreed on their very last meeting, that in the event of anything unforeseen happening – Hess would be denounced as a lunatic. [Notice how Hitler still protected and supported the Hess’s family after the event – hardly likely to have done so if he believed all he said about Hess]. This flight was a last ditched attempt to sway events from war – the removal of Churchill was seen by all parties as the key to peace – with Churchill removed the two governments could easily patch differences, turn public opinion and form the grand alliance – The USSR was waiting.
Rather like Maggie Thatcher torpedoed the Belgrado and ensured the Falklands War, Churchill torpedoed every attempt Hitler made for peace with Britain. Hess flew to Britain at the request of the “coup group” and Royalty, to convey the highest possible credence to Hitler’s overtures and promises regarding the alliance. Churchill was able to use the Secret Service to interfere in this endeavour – Hess was taken by the Secret Service and held in solitary confinement the duration of the war – drugged and broken mentally; rendered totally implausible. At Spandu Prison, he again was held in solitary confinement and his family threatened if he ever should “regain his mind” and want to speak out. Hess’s failed flight on 10th May 1941 signalled all out war.
A month later, Hitler revealed his plan – Operation Babarossa – the attack on the Soviet Union – his primary objective all along. Failure to secure an alliance with Britain left Hitler with no choice but to “go alone”. Hitler had been deceived and out-played by Churchill. The world got a war it did not need.
The Soviet position
During all of this manoeuvring, Stalin had been very interested in the activities. He was well aware of the entrée’s being made by Germany towards Britain and he knew that it was to form a grand alliance against him. [Remember that Stalin had spies on the very top level of British Secret Service and was also reading Enigma transcripts, almost in real time, because of his informants in the code braking department]. Stalin, like Hitler, needed time! Alliances were made [Molotov/Ribbintrop] in much the same manner as a prostitute engages a John – simply a means to an end. Churchill’s avowed enmity against Leninism gave Stalin no grounds for comfort in Britain as an Ally.
In the West, Stalin is painted as a paranoid despot – Stalin had very good grounds to be paranoid; given Churchill’s life long stated hatred for Leninism, his love and admiration for fascism, the manoeuvrings between Germany and Britain [of which Stalin did not know the full story] and Churchill’s linking Judaism as supporting communism – why wouldn’t he distrust the man? I don’t know how he could sit and eat and drink at the same table with him!
Stalin desperately tried to buy time with Hitler – the war came a year too soon for Stalin.
The Contagion of War
There can be non more evil in this world that that or a warmonger – a person so warped in mind as to glory in the death and misery of millions. The wanton destruction and total waste caused by war is hard to imagine by the sane minded.
Churchill was a warmonger.
I do not intend to go into the morality of a war against the Soviet peoples as opposed to a war against the German peoples – such ethical debate is perhaps for a different time.
What is clear, is Churchill condemned the world to total destruction, participated in the genocide of a nation and wagered his empire against defeating the German empire for no other reason that his own personal hatred of Leninism and his own alter-ego.
History’s despot, who wrote history – his way.
The man who started a war and destroyed two empires; one of them his, the other one Germany - Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill.
References:
“Encyclopaedia Britannica 1963” - For reference items., dates et al.
“The Gathering Storm” – Winston S Churchill – Part 1 of 5 part volume.
“The Historical Encyclopaedia of World War II” – MacMillan reference Books.
“Operation Cicero” – L C Moyzich – (recommended).
“Full Circle” – Biography of Admiral Sir Bertram Home Ramsay.
“The Gehlen Memoirs” – General Reinhard Gehlen – 1972 edition.
“The Ultra Secret” F W Winterbottom. (Recommended).
“The Hitler/Hess Deception” – Martin Allen: (Highly recommended).
“Churchill’s War Vol 1” – David Irving: (Highly recommended).
“The Real Band Of Brothers – The Spanish Civil War” by Max Arthur. (Great Reading)
Sundry articles and internet searches.
Last edited by Kysusha on Sat Oct 02, 2010 11:39 pm; edited 4 times in total (Reason for editing : Formatting - removal of a link)
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
[62%] 
