ZGram - 9/24/2001 - "Churchill in the historical revisionist light"

[Ingrid Rimland]

Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland

ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny

September 24, 2001

Good Morning from the Zundelsite:

One of the by-products of the September 11 tragedy is that it helps to
percolate to the top all kinds of revisionist comparisons.

Now that the war drums are droning over all the networks and polls tell us
that more than 80 % of people polled are roaring to go to war, perhaps this
writer below can give us a moment's reflection.

Here are ZGram columnist Ian Macdonald's comments:

[START]

Ingrid - this is my response to some Churchill quotes on the aol message
board today ("we shall fight on the beaches" etc as if  9/11 were
equivalent  to the Battle of Britain)

Dear Phyllis - I see that you are an admirer of Winston Churchill.  Good
Old  Winnie was once my Hero but I now realize that, aside from his highly
quotable oratory, he contributed nothing of value to Western civilization,
in  fact was the chief architect of its demise.  He betrayed his country
into  third class status (and ultimate oblivion) when he rejected Germany's
offer of an honourable peace in 1940 thus condemning millions of worthy
Christian  servicemen and civilians on both sides to unnecessary death and
hardship and  precipitating the loss of Britain's overseas assets
accumulated over  centuries of enterprise, investment and sacrifice.

 Much worse, by advocating and continuing the war against our natural ally
Germany when clearly Stalin was the real enemy, Churchill facilitated not
only the victory of atheistic communism over all of Eastern Europe, China,
Indo-China etc but also the Zionist conquest of Palestine - major tragedies
for the millions who lost their freedom, property and in many cases their
lives, as a result.

 Furthermore, it was Churchill who ordered the terror bombing of civilian
targets in Germany, incinerating almost a million innocent Christian women,
children and elderly persons on the sordid pretext that the barbaric
slaughter would demoralize the soldiers at the front (most of whom were
struggling courageously to defend Europe from the most bloodthirsty tyrant
who ever walked the earth, namely Stalin).

 It would be comforting to think that Churchill had acted in good faith and
sincerely believed in what he was doing, however it is well known from his
public statements in the 'twenties and 'thirties that he recognized
communism as the major threat to Western democracy. Why he actively
campaigned for war against Germany may be explained by his close
relationship  with Bernard Baruch, the Jewish American tycoon and
Presidential advisor who  rescued Churchill from bankruptcy and loss of his
family estate.  The Jews, having  been expelled from Germany, had already
declared war on their former hosts  and were thirsting for revenge,
prefersably without risk to themselves, if  it could be arranged.  It is
not inconceivable therefore that the financial  bailout had some serious
strings attached.

 In retrospect the best that can be said of Churchill is that he was a
magnificent orator who  inspired his listeners to  acts of self-sacrifice
and  courage, albeit in a lost cause. The worst that can be said is that he
was a  self-aggrandizing megalomaniac and charlatan who consciously
betrayed his  country in the service of an alien anti-Christian minority
and was thus a  traitor to all the values he pretended to defend.  He is
credited with  winning the war when in fact we lost virtually everything we
sought to  preserve, not  least of all our peace and security, as recent
events clearly confirm.

[END]

=====

Thought for the Day:

"It appears from the TV coverage that Americans go blank when others are
being bombed and cannot believe it when they are."

{Letter to the Zundelsite)

hought for the Day:
acdonald'si