Was Churchill a Villain?

Absolutely.

Unlikely but true stories dominate this volume: How Churchill clawed his way back into power, how he was used by the Jews and used them, how he started the saturation bombing war, how he innocently but often exposed himself to young girls and statesmen alike; how he sank the Bismarck and sold out the British Empire to the Americans.
Click to expand...
The unpalatable picture that emerges of this war leader in Real History is unchallengeable – that he willingly fomented, prosecuted, and indeed prolonged the war against Hitler, not in pursuit of any fundamental British empire interest, for Britain and her empire were never threatened by Hitler’s Germany; but to acquire money and power after years in the wilderness and poverty; and that he was undismayed to see the British empire ruined in the process.
Click to expand...
Churchill was one of the worst leaders of all time.
 
He seems to have had some based insights and words very early on … At some point he apparently decided he’d sell his soul to the highest bidder. I seem to recall he (and his increasingly degenerate behavior) was eventually funded by a group called ‘the focus’ - they of course had their own agenda.
 
Drinking and degenerate behavior like he exhibited is often as a result of "giving up" and being depressed about it. He sold himself and his country out; and he knew it, hence his behavior. He was a deplorable human being. It's one-thing to sellout when you're just an average Joe looking to cash-in and peace-out of society but it's a whole different kind of betrayal to sellout your whole country and everyone in it.
 
I've never understood this puritanical attitude of "liking booze makes you a bad person" -- it just makes you British! And after all, it's not like Churchill drank himself to death: he lived to be 91
 
Last edited:
I heard he was actually jewish, his dad was a Rothschild and also he was a gay meth addict! Funded by Japan! I heard he sent many peace offerings but Adolf declined.
 
A lot of the Churchill-haters (who are not so coincidentally usually Hitler fanboys as well) seem to be unaware that he was not the Prime Minister when the War began, and that Britain's path to the conflict was mostly a result by Chamberlain's failed attempt to appease Germany until Hitler broke the Munich Agreement. Nor did Churchill come up with the idea of bombing civilians from the air -- by the time he had become PM the Germans had already heavily bombed Warsaw and Rotterdam, and for that matter the Luftwaffe had already bombed civilian populations in Spain as far back as 1936
 
↑View previous replies…
We should be able to hate on Churchill without allegations of being a moustache man apologist. In fact, the current moment seems to be about finally breaking out of the Boomer Truth Regime (i.e., ‘everyone I disagree with is Hitler, the most evil man who ever lived, thus, the enemy of mankind fit to be destroyed).
 
↑View previous replies…
I'm pointing out that a great deal of the Churchill hate is rooted in a desire to invert the history of World War II to make the Allies look evil and Germany look like the innocent victim of their aggression (I'm not saying that the opposite is the truth, of course -- all the major players in WWII had some guilt to bear). Obviously Churchill is not beyond criticism, but that criticism has to be based on historical fact rather than on the desire to make him into a new bogeyman
 
I've always thought a turning point was in 1936 with the Reoccupation of the Rhineland. The Germans were still very weak militarily at that time, and Hitler ordered that if the French made any move against the reoccupation that the army was to withdraw immediately. If the French had sent even a couple of companies of Infantry into the Rhineland the Germans would have pulled back and Hitler would have looked like a fool, I doubt the war would ever have happened. The only reason the French didn't do shit is because of the appeasement fever in the West, and that eventually got us into war and 10 of millions killed, half of Europe enslaved by Communism and the world order practically overturned. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
 
That being said, the provisions of the Treaty of Versailles were deeply unjust and explicitly designed to humiliate the Krauts, so Hitler's reoccupation of traditional German territory was one of his most defensible actions -- especially given the depredations of French colonial troops against German women
 
@ChevChelios

Oh, I totally agree. I've heard many people say, and I agree, the Treaty of Versailles (and others like, say, the treaty of Trianon) didn't end the war, it just put it on pause for a generation. And that was one of the arguments of appeasement, the Germans are just taking back traditionally German territories, and it was a defenceable one. By the time we got to the occupation of Czechoslovakia (not the Sudetenland) it was probably to late to stop the war. But WWII was set up at Versailles. It wasn't a certainty, but the odds were good.
 
I imagine those who believe ‘Hitler was the good guy of WWII’ come to that conclusion similarly to those who believe that the earth is flat. Somewhere along the line, they discover they’ve been lied to by ‘the experts’ or those in power. They begin to question everything, to the point of adopting its opposite. They uncritically consume media that reinforces those beliefs. I can sympathize, though we must keep our heads. Believing Hitler was a hero is retarded - videos like, Europa: The Last Battle, is full of distortions, lies, and propaganda. However, accepting the mainstream historical account of the war is equally retarded. It is still possible to find books on these topics which attempt to shed light on the truth. Churchill was not a war hero. The war didn’t unfold or persist for the reasons we were told. It’s been hard to question any of it until now but the truth seems to be getting out.
 
Typically, viewing history in the context of good vs. evil and one man represented good or evil will always come to the wrong conclusion. Hitler was by no means good in all ways but he also wasn't the epitome of evil our soyciety likes to claim.
 
Believing Hitler was a hero is retarded - videos like, Europa: The Last Battle, is full of distortions, lies, and propaganda. However, accepting the mainstream historical account of the war is equally retarded. It is still possible to find books on these topics which attempt to shed light on the truth.
Click to expand...

Well said. Can you recommend some books or sources to read? Also on the Europa lies/distortion? I am only recently starting to learn about this.
 
↑View previous replies…
What books would you like recommended considering the bad guys have owned all the publishing houses for almost a century?

Are you even prepared for the mental adaptation to know all the mainstream media sources you grew up blindly trusting are in fact malicious propaganda for the most part?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5811.png
    IMG_5811.png
    1.1 MB · Views: 7
@Leovinus

What books would you like recommended considering the bad guys have owned all the publishing houses for almost a century?
Click to expand...
Doesn't have to be off amazon buddy, just anything that people here have read on the subject and find credible.

Are you even prepared for the mental adaptation to know all the mainstream media sources you grew up blindly trusting are in fact malicious propaganda for the most part?
Click to expand...
I've know this since 2016, but thanks for the concern and the highly pixelated 4chan image with a dead link to the source.
:psalute
 
@Daru sorry this website sucks and you’re looking at it on your phone which downsamples everything.

And I notice you sidestepped my question. Where would you recommend I find books given all publishers are compromised more than a century?

Fine. Since we know (((you))) won’t answer. Here’s a couple off the top of my head. You won’t read them, but maybe someone bright inquiring spark might.

You Gentiles - by Maurice Samuel

200 Years Together - Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Gulag Archipelago - Also Solzhenitsyn

On the Jews and their Lies - by Martin Luther (yes, THAT Martin Luther).

the protocols of the elders of Zion

That’s a start. And for those playing the home game and watching this character sleaze his was around, read the attachment too.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3335.png
    IMG_3335.png
    67.9 KB · Views: 8
@Leovinus
gaypost.png
asks for sources to read about WW2
gets called a jew
you won't read the sources anyways
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Lol you make a lot of assumptions. Was the answer (((you))) were looking for "the internet"? I'm on PC btw.

I've read Gulag Archipelago, but I'll check out the others, thanks. Hope (((you))) get help (mentally) and fix (((your))) jewdar.
:ps
 
Check out The New Dealers War by Thomas Fleming. It’s easy to find and a good read. Briton’s Blunder, by Peter Nicoll is also an excellent polemic against the accepted narrative, though hard to find. Academic Agent has some worthwhile videos on Churchill and WWII. I’ve found the Pete Quinones series with Thomas777 interesting to listen to as well. Regarding the Europa distortions - just watch it yourself with a critical mind (there’s lots of worthwhile bits in there as well, just beware). Lots of mispronunciations throughout initially raised my guard. I can’t recall specifics, but I remember having to pause and double-check assertions based on veritable facts and noting inaccuracies or exaggerations. I haven’t read it, but I think Keith Woods did a Substack series ‘fact-checking’ some of the claims a little while back (you should find it with a quick search).
 
@WHlTE_W4LKER: Any documentary or book defending a particular ideology is going to leave out important details and context. It's like the Communists saying that Stalin was a great man because he electrified the USSR and built all those really nice subway stations in Moscow -- yeah, but what else was going on at the time?
 
@ChevChelios Any documentary or book defending a particular ideology
Click to expand...

Which is literally ALL mainstream history books on WWII. If your high school history teach recommends it, then it's a book defending Judeo-Western ideology.

Reed is definitely up your alley though.

He (Douglas Reed) was also staunchly anti-Communist, and once wrote that Nazism was a "stooge or stalking horse" meant to further the aims of the "Communist Empire."
Click to expand...
Reminds me of the idea that Hitler was actually working for the jews.

I still think you hate the Nazis too much. I dislike National Socialism because I think any wealth redistribution is theft and leads to a dysgenic society. However, the authoritarianism of the Nazis is no worse than modern Western societies and the authority the "democratic" governments wield. I also think had the Nazis won, White people would be significantly better off than they are today. Europa is obvious though highly speculative and merely paints an alternative theory but not necessarily an accurate one; however, no history painted is necessarily accurate, so in this regard it's equally as valid as anything else though I would agree some of it is likely more far-fetched than even some of the mainstream history (if we're being honest).
 
@ChevChelios Strong dominating the weak isn't "bullying". Christianity is a slavish religion. Bullying is an unjust action but if the strong are justified in their dominion then by all means, the inferior weak people would stand to benefit from being dominated by superior strong men.

It's a better outcome than modernity where the mediocre majority (democracy) bully the superior people by oppressing them to unjustly elevate themselves.
 
Does anyone really care?
 
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Put your head in the sand if you like, but don’t go inciting others to share in or validate your Ignorance.
 
I agree buddy, but here's the thing, we are already repeating history, worse than Churchill. Things are fucked. No one is learning these days. You can call me ignorant, sure, no one gives a fuck though.
 
Nink said:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g52R7NnhtL8
Click to expand...
Nink
Yes. Absolutely. He might have started off ok but he was literally born into an England that was totally jewish controlled. Every step he took up the hierarchy to power as guided and screened by evil jews. He was their pawn. Why do you think he abused substances so much.

He knew what he was. It was also why his Son wanted nothing to do with the inheritance. IMG_7571.jpeg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top