October, 2007 7:44:00 AM
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The real 9/11 culprit - Winston Churchill?
did i sleep through a lecture back wien i was in school, or something?
because i don't remenber about a loud outcry in favor of capitulation
during the blitz. and where defeating nazi germany is concerned
In June and July 1940 there were plenty of practical-minded appeasers
like Lord Halifax and Rab Butler at the top of the British Conservative
Party who were thinking about asking Hitler for terms. We owe Churchill
a lot.
The Russians may have done most of the fighting and shed most of the
what does that have to do with the blitz? but since you bring up the
'30s. . . .
churchill was one of those voices. he disagreed with opposing
japanese conquest in manchuria. he had no shortage of complimentary
things to say about hitler and especially mussolini.
On 10/18/07, Dawie Coetzee
On 10/18/07, Douglas Woodard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In June and July 1940 there were plenty of practical-minded appeasers
like Lord Halifax and Rab Butler at the top of the British Conservative
Party who were thinking about asking Hitler for terms. We owe Churchill
a lot.
of course there
Meeting Mountbatten a few months after partition, Churchill assailed
him for helping Britain's enemies, Hindustan, against Britain's
friends, the Muslims. Little did Churchill know that his expedient
boosting of political Islam would eventually unleash a global jihad
engulfing even distant New
One can find Churchill's fingerprints on just about every Western
historical artifact, both good and bad, for the roughly the past 120 years.
Keith Addison wrote:
Meeting Mountbatten a few months after partition, Churchill assailed
him for helping Britain's enemies, Hindustan, against
I think Winnie was a pretty mixed bag myself.
A better question might be why the British were so anxious to go *back*
into Iraq? I think it was Stanley Maude ? who went stomping into
Mesopotamia around 1916 and I don't think the Brits were out until '56
or so. No guarantee on those dates.
Hello Mike
One can find Churchill's fingerprints on just about every Western
historical artifact, both good and bad, for the roughly the past 120 years.
Maybe, but that doesn't explain it away. Mishra makes some good points.
Ugly racism aside, what excuse is there for sheer ignorance?
I think Winnie was a pretty mixed bag myself.
First you said good and bad, now you say mixed. If you can't remind
me of something good about him, how about something that's not
outright bad?
A better question might be why the British were so anxious to go *back*
into Iraq? I think it was
Good:
Early in his political career he worked hard to implement a minimum wage
in England.
But probably the one thing he's rightly remembered well for is his
refusal to capitualte to Hitler, although I think David Lloyd George
probably got that ball rolling. His speeches rallied Britain during
did i sleep through a lecture back wien i was in school, or something?
because i don't remenber about a loud outcry in favor of capitulation
during the blitz. and where defeating nazi germany is concerned, the
soviets deserve at least 50% of the credit, maybe even two thirds.
On 10/17/07, Mike
11 matches
Mail list logo
