|
Winston Churchill was a cigar smoker and thus displayed typical smoker symptoms.
Eric Margolis, "West Has Bloodied Hands" (Toronto Sun, 1 April 2007) ("the first high government official to authorize use of mustard gas against rebellious Kurdish tribesmen in Iraq [was] Winston Churchill") See also "Winston Churchill's Secret Poison Gas Memo" (1919, etc.)
Prof. Christopher Catherwood, Churchill's Folly: How Winston Churchill Created Modern Iraq (New York: Carroll & Graf Pub, 2004). The book also covers oil issues (pp 34-35, 64-68, 78 etc.); politicians fancying selves as Bible experts vis-a-vis restoring Israel without awaiting the Messiah (pp 38-39); Christian orientation of the Ba'ath Party, to prevent (by coalition with secular politicians) Fundamentalist Islamics from persecuting Christians (p 60); Churchill's plan for gas bombing Iraqis (pp 85 and 186-187); Churchill's pro-appeasement activity (p 99), etc.
Donald Chapman, "Following Churchill’s Folly In Iraq" (24 August 2007). "A map of the region before Churchill convened what he called his “40 Thieves” in Cairo in April 1921 to draw up new national boundaries shows not countries, but tribal areas - the Ibn Saud clan ruling the Nejd on the Arabian Peninsula and the rival Hussein clan ruling the neighboring Hejaz along the Red Sea, to name the largest two. They often skirmished, and the Sauds also had their eyes on what would become Kuwait. . . .Churchill had never actually visited what was then called Mesopotamia when he arbitrarily drew up the borders for a new land called Iraq, doing so in Egypt. . . . Churchill was well aware of Sunni-Shia differences in the region, he ignored them as well as tribal boundaries. Thus Churchill, the classic colonialist, brought a Sunni from outside Iraq to rule a country that was two-thirds Shia. . . . Iraq was never a nation of ideals, or dreams, or unified core beliefs or ethnicity. . . . nations drawn up by outside forces are never successful for very long."
For background on smoker Churchill's psychiatric state, see, e.g., Anthony Storr, Churchill's Black Dog, Kafka's Mice, and Other Phenomena of the Human Mind (Grove Press, January 1989). Churchill was defeated in 1922 for Parliament by a Labour-Prohibitionist coalition of Edwin Scrymgeour and Edmund D. Morel.
Bernard Wasserstein, D.Phil., D.Litt., writes, "During the first two years of the war [1939-1941], when the German authorities bent their efforts to securing the exodus of the Jews from the Reich and from Nazi occupied territory, it was the British Government [under the anti-semite Winston Churchill] which took the lead in barring the escape routes from Europe against Jewish refugees."—Britain and the Jews of Europe, 1939-1945 (London: Clarendon Press, 1979), p 345.
Britain under smoker Winston Churchill obstructed Jews fleeing to safety, aided and abetted the Holocaust. Britain under Churchill, despite knowing the natural and probable consequences, foreseeable genocide, returned Jews seeking to flee Germany during the Holocaust, says Menachem Begin, The Revolt: Story of the Irgun (New York: Schuman, 1951, revised ed., Dell, 1977), p 17, and Chap IV, esp. pp 63-73.
Menachem Begin, later Prime Minister of Israel, quotes a member of Britain's Sixth Airborne:
| “Oh, Gee, oh Gee, Hitler killed 6,000,000 Jews. The Sixth Airborne will kill 60,000,000 if you don't bloody well behave yourselves,” p 94. |
Prime Minister Begin gives a perspective of what six million killings mean, “more than a third [40%] of all the [16½ million] Jews in the world . . . same [ratio] applied to . . . Great Britain would give a death-roll of some sixteen millions . . . These facts are accepted as platitudinous by many today. Their awful significance is grasped by very few,” p 84.
See also
Konne Zilliacus [1894-1967], M.P. (Great Britain), Mirror of the Past: A History of Secret Diplomacy (New York: A. A. Wyn, 1946). (Cites the bottom-line, politician contempt for the public: “As for the peoples, they were nothing at all . . . except cannon fodder. No government ever . . . hesitated to deceive them [; each government] took it for granted that they [average citizenry] would let themselves be butchered in unlimited quantities when the game of power politics [included] war.”)
Francis Neilson, Chapter 37, My Life In Two Worlds (C. C. Nelson Pub Co, 1953)
Francis Neilson, The Churchill Legend (Appleton, Wisconsin: 1954)
Francis Neilson, "The Labyrinths of Diplomacy," in American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 18, No. 1 (Oct., 1958), pp. 1-14 ("self-delusion of diplomatists has contributed largely to the world wars and the chaos that has resulted from them")
John Charmley, Churchill: The End of Glory (1993)
R. Raico, "Rethinking Churchill," in J. V. Denson, The Costs of War (1997)
Ingrid A. Rimland, "Churchill's Unsettled Legacy" (7 December 2001) (he was "an
unabashed racist . . . favored white supremacy in Britain . . . disparaged racial mixing
. . . wanted English-speaking whites -- whom he was not ashamed to
proclaim as a superior breed -- to rule the entire world . . . Anglo-Saxondom Uber alles! . . . when Churchill himself held power as prime minister, he carried out a policy of appeasement far surpassing that of his predecessor. . . . Churchill not only cynically sanctioned Stalin's brutal hegemony over central and eastern Europe, helping him dispose of the fates of many millions of people against their will, he also collaborated with the Soviet ruler on issues of military strategy. . . . Britain went to war ostensibly to honour an alliance with Poland. Yet the war ended with Poland redesigned at a dictator's whim, albeit Stalin's rather than Hitler's, and occupied, albeit by Russians rather than Germans. In reality Britain went to war to maintain the balance of power. But the European continent in 1945 was dominated by a single overbearing power hostile to everything Britain stood for. Britain, hopelessly in hock to the United States, had neither the power nor the face to hold on to her empire. . . . Churchill mused: 'Historians are apt to judge war ministers less by the victories achieved under their direction than by the political results which flowed from them. Judged by that standard, I am not sure that I shall be held to have done very well.'")
David Irving, Churchill's War: Triumph in Adversity (Vol. II) (London: Focal Point, 2001) ("no man among the Allied wartime leaders better deserves to be judged by the results that flowed from his victories than Britain's legendary wartime premier." And: During a dinner with close associates in early 1945 -- as his private secretary confided to his diary -- a "rather depressed" Churchill was "saying that Chamberlain had trusted Hitler as he was now trusting Stalin (though he thought in different circumstances)." And: "The well-entrenched idealization of Churchill is part and parcel of a drastically misleading view of the Second World War that Americans have been fed for decades. . . .
Along with most Britons (and Americans) of his era, he was also an unabashed racist. Blacks he dismissed as "niggers" and "blackamoors," Arabs were "worthless," Chinese were "chinks" or "pigtails," and dark races were "baboons" or "Hottentots." Indians, in his view, were "the beastliest people in the world, next to the Germans." Churchill not only favored white supremacy in Britain, and disparaged racial mixing, but, as Irving points out, wanted English-speaking whites -- whom he was not ashamed to proclaim as a superior breed -- to rule the entire world. "We are superior!," he exclaimed during a White House luncheon, to which vice president Henry Wallace responded sarcastically: "So you believe in the pure Anglo-Saxon race. Anglo-Saxondom über alles!" Given such views, it is not surprising, as Irving records, that Churchill and other high-ranking officials were distressed over the impact on British society caused by the wartime arrival of thousands of black U.S. servicemen.
"Churchill is often praised for his outspoken criticism of his government's policy in 1938 and early 1939 of "appeasement" of Hitler and Third Reich Germany. . . . But when Churchill himself held power as prime minister, he carried out a policy of appeasement far surpassing that of his predecessor. The foreign leader whom Churchill (and Franklin Roosevelt) appeased was not Hitler, though, but rather the Soviet premier Stalin -- a dictator who, by any measure, was a far more ruthless ruler then Hitler, and whose victims, by all accounts, vastly outnumber those of the German leader. Churchill not only cynically sanctioned Stalin's brutal hegemony over central and eastern Europe, helping him dispose of the fates of many millions of people against their will, he also collaborated with the Soviet ruler on issues of military strategy. Although Churchill spoke out against the Soviet Union before and after the war, during the war years he spoke cordially of the Soviet dictator. On several occasions he praised Stalin, repeatedly calling him his "friend." [See note] Alexander Solzhenitsyn, the great Russian writer who was a prisoner in Stalin's "Gulag" camps, has commented: "In their own countries, Roosevelt and Churchill are honored as embodiments of statesmanlike wisdom. To us, in our Russian prison conversations, their consistent shortsightedness and stupidity stood out as astonishingly obvious . . .")
Lawrence James, Churchill and Empire: Portrait Of An Imperialist (Widenfeld & Nicolson, 2013) (Review: "Britain was a world power, Churchill correctly insisted, only because of its empire. In the Hobbesian world of nineteenth century international relations, that was sufficient justification for imperialism. . . . On racial questions, there is no question that Churchill’s mode of expression never moved beyond the norm of a late-Victorian regimental mess. His spectrum of derogatory epithets is literally unquotable today. . . . World War II challenged that paradigm—and led to Churchill’s greatest miscalculation. He saw the US as a natural collaborator in this world-historical civilizing enterprise. His faith in the “special relationship” ignored, however, its fundamentally instrumental nature as a product of the desperate circumstances of 1940 to 1943. Roosevelt and his postwar successors might not have regarded dismantling the British Empire as a primary objective, but they were committed to establishing a world order favoring the US. After 1945 an aging Churchill watched helplessly as imperialism gave way to decolonization, and Britain embarked on a path that eventually led to defending America’s informal empire—most recently in the Middle East—with ever-declining resources.")
Joseph Goebbels, Ph.D., "Winston Churchill," Die Zeit ohne Beispiel (Munich: Zentralverlag der NSDAP., 2 February 1941), pp. 380-384. Quotes Churchill in prior wars, example: ""There is only one way to break the resistance of the Boers: the most severe suppression. In other words, we must kill the parents to teach the children respect for us." "We [English] went systematically from village to village, destroying the houses, ruining the wells, breaking the towers, felling the larger shade-giving trees, burning the harvest, and destroying the water reservoirs. . . After fourteen days the valley was a desert and our [English] honor was satisfied." Cited: "The English Labor leader [George] Lansbury wrote about him in the "Daily Herald" on 12 July 1919: 'He has no scruples other than concern for himself and no interests but those of the ruling class. In all his endeavors, he has always managed to find a corner for himself at the feeding trough of the state, and usually one of the best paid and most pleasant corners at that.'" And: "This [Churchill's] face has not a single good characteristic. It is marked by cynicism. The ice-cold [psychopathic] eyes are free of any emotion. This man strides over corpses to feed his blind and limitless personal egotism. The cigar butt in his mouth is the last sign of a lifestyle that has outlived its time."
|