Winston Churchill was a racist, anti semetic and an admirer of Hitler

[Abu Juwairiya]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...at-led-to-the-deaths-of-millions-9999181.html

Excerpts from the story include-

“I hate Indians,” he later stated as the resistance movement strengthened. “They are a beastly people with a beastly religion.”

Comment: I suspect from the above he believed all Indians belonged to the same religion [whatever that was]

"He didn’t believe Native Americans had been wronged when they were invaded between 1776 and 1887…

Nor the Aborigines of Australia. Speaking to the Palestine Royal Commission in 1937, he wrote: “I do not admit... that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America, or the black people of Australia... by the fact that a stronger race, a higher grade race... has come in and taken its place.”

Comment: History has shown neither the Red Indians nor the Aborigines were a singular race or group of people when Europeans first arrived on their land and this remained so for several generations afterwards. In respect to the Red Indians, there were as many as 250 different groups who spoke as many distinct and separate languages as Europe does today, held a variety of religious creeds and even had dissimilar ethnic populations in addition to several hundred governments.

The Aborigines have also since proved different groups arrived in Australia and its sister islands in different migrations from different places over several millennia. They neither looked the same, spoke the same language or shared the same ancestral linage. Almost everything was as different between the migrants as it is between different nations today.

"Churchill’s blunt refusal to supply food to Bengal arguably led to the deaths of 3 million people…

British officials in the Indian region begged the Prime Minister to send aid to the Indian region, which was hit by wide-spread famine in 1943. Churchill said it was their own fault for “breeding like rabbits”. He said the plague was “merrily” culling the population."

Comment: Specialist historians and others who have investigated the 1943 famine in depth have concluded that had the person responsible [Churchill] and the country he ruled [UK] been another and had instead been almost any one else, the reading of the incident would have been justly recorded for what it was; Genocide.

"He “disliked Hitler’s system” but “admired his patriotic achievement”…

In his 1937 book Great Contemporaries, a collection of 25 essays about famous people, he wrote: “If our country were defeated, I hope we should find a champion as admirable to restore our courage and lead us back to our place among the nations.“

Comment: As hard as it is to believe today, but it was not just Churchill who admired Hitler among British and European circles in the 1930s and early 1940s, but a full stream of politicians, members of think tanks, the intelligentsia, newspapers, the upper and middle classes, celebrities and others.

The reason; the manner in which Hitler [with no financial training, academic excellence or special education] had transformed a virtually dead society with no future and hatred from all sides into the most healthy and progressive economy in Europe [but not the strongest] in a matter of years when other countries were still reeling from the effects of the Depression.

He touted Jewish conspiracy theories not unlike that of Hitler’s in some of his written works…

In an article for the Illustrated Sunday Herald in February 1920, titled 'Zionism versus Bolshevism', he wrote: “This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States)...

this worldwide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the 19th century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.”

Comment: While it is true, Zionism is not Anti Jewish, it is the touchstone of the Jewish State and official ideology of Israel to this day. It is also true to say not every Jew or Israeli is a Zionist; some among both oppose it and protests by Jews continue to persist in the Jewish State and the US. However Jews the world over en masse insist to criticise Zionism is to be Anti-Semetic, hence on that principle 'for official purposes' [and not my personal opinion which opposes this view] I have cited Churchill's words to be so.

To conclude one supporter said the following-

"Like much of Britain in the Thirties and Forties he adds that Churchill 'shared the low-level casual anti-Semitism of his class and kind”.

Comment: The UK was the first to envisage a Jewish Homeland as early as 1917 and created Israel in 1948; so it seems the same State that was responsible for its existence opposed and despised the same people, the Jews. It was not restricted to the government alone; the upper and middle classes in addition to the the common rank and file among the British people felt the same way for two decades, the 1930s and the 1940s. That is truly ironic!

 

[Abu Juwairiya]

“I do not understand the squeamishness about the use of gas,” he told the House of Commons during an address in the autumn of 1937. “I am strongly in favour of using poisonous gas against uncivilised tribes.”

The above quotation from the same source as the original article in the 'Independent' requires some explanation. In 1899 an international convention banned the use of all biological and chemical weapons by all nations during either minor conflicts or full scale wars, both by the signatories and everyone else. This included Mustard Gas and Chlorine Gas. Despite the agreement, both were used in the First World War by at first the Germans alone in 1915 and in revenge by the UK and France sometime afterwards.

After the war, while no new agreements were added to the 1899 Convention, there were no immediate differences or hostility to the original plan of abolishing chemical weaponry worldwide, but there was little in effect of sanctions and legal redress for using them and no international courts to try offenders among the nations that decided to breach the rules.

It was in 1920-21, very soon after the First World War, an insurrection occurred in Iraq, then under British colonial rule [officially a mandate, but in reality it was a colony]. The British response was aerial bombardment of the towns and the cities by the RAF. There was no coordination of specific targets, no strategic planning involved and no overall central policy. The thoughts behind the operation was to quell the rebellion through aerial assaults and heavy bombing alone. There was no separation between civilian or military targets at the time and it was not deemed necessary. Everyone in Iraq was a legitimate enemy as long as they were there.

The difference or moral/legal issue was not collateral damage, but the use of poison gasses; namely Chlorine Gas in particular. The insurrectionists in 1920-21 Iraq against British rule were a familiar and recognisable ethnic group; the Kurds. He was at the time in the cabinet and I believe a senior member of the War Ministry or perhaps even the Minister of War himself. He was however overruled by the Liberal Government under David Lloyd-George. It was against the Kurds Churchill made his speech first in the 1920s during the insurrection and later when the topic arose again with different circumstances in 1937.

By then however, another country [Italy under Mussolini] had also used chemical weapons (and with British and French assistance) to annex another nation [Ethiopia] in a two year war [1935-37] and four years later the Russians would do the same to Nazi Germany when their own country was invaded.