BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate

03 Dec 15 - 03:11 PM (#3755471)
Subject: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jack Campin

Expected his tailor to work for free:

http://newsdaily.com/2015/12/uk-wartime-leader-winston-churchill-refused-to-pay-his-tailors-bills/

Pretty much in character for someone who got Larry the Lamb to read his broadcasts when he was too sloshed to function and had his books ghostwritten by Arthur Bryant.

---

03 Dec 15 - 03:29 PM (#3755474)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: EBarnacle

After all, they were in trade. I would bet that his gambling debts to other gentlemen were promptly paid.

---

03 Dec 15 - 03:29 PM (#3755475)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,HiLo

What is the source of this information .

---

03 Dec 15 - 03:50 PM (#3755484)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Hey Jack, did chairman Mao, Zhou Enlai or Stalin pay theirs? Just wonderin'.

---

03 Dec 15 - 04:20 PM (#3755496)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,#

"Despite the arrears, the tailor had continued to make clothes for Churchill, said James Sherwood, a historian who has examined Poole and Co's archives."

That's from the article. Obviously, they didn't feel quite as POed about it.

---

03 Dec 15 - 07:28 PM (#3755529)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jack Campin

I suppose the equivalent is "think of the exposure you're getting" from people who want to use copyrighted music for nothing.

I first heard of this kind of behaviour as done by Madonna - she doesn't pay for her clothes either.

---

03 Dec 15 - 07:37 PM (#3755532)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

I prefer to remember him as the man who shot down the striking miners of Tonypandy.
Jim Carroll

---

03 Dec 15 - 08:22 PM (#3755545)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: BanjoRay

Wasn't he the brains behind the Gallipoli debacle?

---

03 Dec 15 - 08:25 PM (#3755549)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,HiLo

Shot down. Tell me about that Jim.

---

03 Dec 15 - 08:40 PM (#3755551)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,#

http://www.bbc.com/news/10294530

Uh huh.

---

03 Dec 15 - 08:52 PM (#3755552)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Hilo

Thanks for the info but i did all of that. But i not heard that miners were shot down. That is what i was asking about.

---

04 Dec 15 - 01:12 AM (#3755578)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Megan L

It is easy to tear down the reputations of the long dead who were of their time I wonder how history will judge any of us mind you I don't see anyone here who will ever have risen high enough to even be remembered.

---

04 Dec 15 - 02:24 AM (#3755581)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Ebbie

Wheeooo, Megan. That's harsh.

---

04 Dec 15 - 02:34 AM (#3755582)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Ed

It's not harsh at all. I entirely agree with Megan.

---

04 Dec 15 - 03:14 AM (#3755586)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Teribus

Jim Carroll - 03 Dec 15 - 07:37 PM - Just more Made Up Shit

---

04 Dec 15 - 03:16 AM (#3755587)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Teribus

Another person who didn't pay their tailor was Robert Burns.

---

04 Dec 15 - 03:22 AM (#3755589)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

At college as an apprentice colliery electrician, a tutor once told us that Churchill when Home Secretary personally ordered soldiers to fix bayonets and rush a picket line.

I don't actually know how apocryphal that story is, but I have seen film footage of him around the same time being out with the army and police giving orders to quell a riot in London.

As the strike isn't yet 100 years old, you can still find out the truth before the sanitising of awful reality, as we have seen with WW1, where bloodthirsty incompetence by leaders is being rehabilitated by shameful tame historians with scant evidence.

---

04 Dec 15 - 03:31 AM (#3755594)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Keith A of Hertford

That incident (3.22am) was the balcombe street siege.
It involved armed activists, not strikers.

---

04 Dec 15 - 03:46 AM (#3755596)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jack Campin

It is easy to tear down the reputations of the long dead who were of their time

That's just stupid. The vast majority of people in Churchill's time were not vicious, selfish, reactionary opportunists. Moral standards don't change. He was an evil thug by the standards of his own time just as he is by ours. (And the people who cheered him on in his lifetime would cheer Donald Trump on now).

---

04 Dec 15 - 04:00 AM (#3755599)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Teribus

GUEST - 04 Dec 15 - 03:22 AM - hello Musktwat long on stories and rumours - only trouble is it is always so very short on detail, fact or truth.

Cannot think why you keep referring to WWI - you lot keep getting completely hammered any time you try to peddle your myths, misrepresentations and lies about it.

This the man we are talking about?

"Sir Winston Churchill has been named the greatest Briton of all time in a nationwide poll attracting more than a million votes.
Participants in the survey voted the second World War leader top of the list of the country's 100 most significant individuals, with 447,423 votes."

I ask because since your glorious leader - Tony Blair - started banging on about "Education, Edyoukashun, EhjooKayShun" and the history syllabus in schools has been destroyed in the interests of God knows what - most under 25s in Great Britain mainly associate the name Churchill with a dog that is used to sell insurance ont Telly - that is how far we have fallen with you clowns applauding all the way.


Oh and Camping Jack - As to speeches and books - one thing that is beyond doubt - from his mid-teens at Harrow Winston Churchill's command of the English language was superb.

---

04 Dec 15 - 04:04 AM (#3755600)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Will Fly

As a point of fact, there were no miners shot by troops in Tonypandy - this is quite clear from examining several sources. The commander in charge of the troops acted with more thought and forbearance than the local police chief constable.

---

04 Dec 15 - 04:05 AM (#3755602)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Stu

" I don't see anyone here who will ever have risen high enough to even be remembered."

That's because those who truly rise to the heights don't bray about it. There will be people on this board who have performed incredible acts of selflessness and bravery. They might single-handedly look after relatives with long-term illnesses, be A&E doctors working ludicrously long shifts in inner city accident units or working in warzones and deprived communities where life is short, brutal and defined by appalling suffering. They might have been children caring for parents and loosing their childhood to a burden of responsibility we can't even imagine.

They could look after disabled people, suffer long-term illnesses that causes them distress and hurt behind endurance, they might spend their lives fighting for the myriad of lost causes that our modern corporate world squashes like insects without a thought as it destroys the wonderful diversity of life and culture that have taken countless millennia to form.

Churchill was a racist and imperialist of the worst order and not a nice person (he was Colonial Secretary and unleashed the Black and Tans on Irish innocents). He galvanised our nation in a way very few, if any could as we stood alone against the Nazis, and this meant with our combined effort we took a beating but turned them back. However, he didn't do the fighting; our relatives did that and died and suffered in high numbers. He was a man whose own particular type of imperialist brutality suited a moment when perhaps nothing else would save us; he was a man of war and violence to the core.

Churchill was terrible peace-time PM and by the time he was PM for the second time the world and moved on, and people had had enough of conflict and wanted to forge a new world; the postwar period is when the UN, NHS and welfare state were established and the nation was more compassionate. Suffice to say those who admire Churchill most are the ones with contempt for those very institutions. In that regard, his spirit lives on.

---

04 Dec 15 - 05:52 AM (#3755607)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

"As a point of fact, there were no miners shot by troops in Tonypandy "
True - Will - there were reports at the time that 2 miners were shot but these were never confirmed.
The miners trades unionists in their literature later referred to it as 'The Tonypandy massacre' and letters to the press repeated the accusations when that grotesque statue of Churchill (looking like the Shakespearian caricature of Richard III) repeated the accusation.
Urban myth maybe - or maybe another cover-up.
Jim Carroll

---

04 Dec 15 - 06:46 AM (#3755615)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,achmelvich

stu - that looks like a fair summing up of churchill. and i very much agree with your assessment of the heroics of many extraordinary ordinary people. churchill was an effective and popular war leader (unfortunately war does tend to make leaders popular. for a time) however, there is never any excuse for bad manners or aggressive bigotry. so not a great man.

shane mcgowan wrote some fantastic songs and when on form is a top live performer.

---

04 Dec 15 - 07:31 AM (#3755620)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: MGM·Lion

So, achmel, you would rubricate the aggressive and unmannerly Arthur Wellesley, Duke of Wellington, "not a great man", would you? Or Alfred Lord Tennyson of the notoriously creaking braces? Or Gladstone, whose manners ["He addresses me as if I were a public meeting!"] Queen Victoria hated? Not sure everyone would agree that a smooth & courteously polite mannerliness constitutes an earnest or essential of 'greatness', however defined -- another of those weasel words, to be sure!.

Churchill had the fortune to be one of those (like the contentious Cardigan, eg, or the truculent and adulterous Nelson) who had the fortune to be at hand when his particular strengths happened to be available at the very moment they were needed — the fortune thus being shared by the nation as a whole; IMO outweighing for posterity his/their manifestly less lovable or praiseworthy characteristics.

≈M≈

---

04 Dec 15 - 08:13 AM (#3755625)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jack Campin

you would rubricate the aggressive and unmannerly Arthur Wellesley, Duke of Wellington, "not a great man", would you?

His contemporaries did. His war record didn't stop him becoming the most despised public figure in Britain by 1830. (They named a bridge in Edinburgh after him in 1815, but he was so universally loathed they changed it first to the Regent Bridge and then the Waterloo Bridge within a few years).

---

04 Dec 15 - 10:07 AM (#3755646)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

"His contemporaries did. "
They did indeed
There's still a local legend told in a pub he was said to frequent, The Grenadier - not far from Hyde Park Corner, which backs onto the Wellington Barracks, in the Park
They say he was so unpopular that he couldn't walk out at night for fear of being beaten up that he had a tunnel built from the barracks into the cellar (have seen what's left of the entrance)
It's said to be haunted by the ghost of a soldier who was flogged to death for attacking him.
The 5th Duke of Wellington, Arthur Charles Wellesley, was one of the Fascists who organised an 'alternative Government' in the hope that Hitler would win the war.
He died cursing "the Yids" from his deathbed.
Funny lot, the upper classes.
Jim Carroll

---

04 Dec 15 - 11:02 AM (#3755661)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Stu

"who had the fortune to be at hand when his particular strengths happened to be available at the very moment they were needed"

You mean when he was shooting people in the Sudan, oppressing the Irish or admiring the success of concentration camps? The reputation of the British has been tainted for years my the exploits of Churchill and his like.

No-one doubts his ability to strengthen the resolve of a nation through his impressive speeches was a major part of the fact we held the Nazis back, but so did the efforts of our families who were out there fighting, dying and suffering for the cause. In their millions.

---

04 Dec 15 - 12:01 PM (#3755684)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jack Campin

The 5th Duke of Wellington, Arthur Charles Wellesley, was one of the Fascists who organised an 'alternative Government' in the hope that Hitler would win the war.
He died cursing "the Yids" from his deathbed.

In which he was following the family tradition - the original Duke (MGM's hero) got the Jewish Emancipation Bill defeated in 1833.

---

04 Dec 15 - 12:01 PM (#3755685)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

What is a Musktwat? Why is the person writing as Teribus referring to my post and ascribing things that seem as confused as they are trolling and vicious?

I repeat. At college, we were told that Churchill told soldiers to fix bayonets on striking miners. I have no idea if this was apocryphal or not.

How that statement got such an irrational response is totally beyond me. I suspect it isn't my intellect that is at fault for that matter. If he is confusing me with someone else on the basis of what I say, how can anything he writes he taken seriously?

---

04 Dec 15 - 12:13 PM (#3755689)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: MGM·Lion

What on earth can have led Jack to name old Duke W as my "hero"? Where have I expressed or implied any such opinion? He's not usually so silly, & doesn't make a point any the stronger by being so.

≈M≈

---

04 Dec 15 - 12:22 PM (#3755691)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: akenaton

I have a lot of gripes with Winston, but during the war he held this country together.
Before my time, but reading back he seemed to be respected and admired by all classes.

At least he wasn't a "liberal" in the mould of Mr Blair, our latest "war leader.

---

04 Dec 15 - 12:23 PM (#3755692)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: akenaton

I bet Tony pays all his bills!!   :0)

---

04 Dec 15 - 12:24 PM (#3755693)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jack Campin

Churchill did order troops with fixed bayonets into Glasgow, supported by tanks and howitzers, to suppress the Forty Hours Strike in 1919. To this day, still the only time a British Home Secretary has ordered armoured vehicles and artillery to attack the British people on the British mainland.

Churchill's actions at Tonypandy seem to have been amplified by folklore. On the other hand, his role in the repression of the Clydeside workers seems to have been progressively forgotten.

---

04 Dec 15 - 12:26 PM (#3755694)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

Oh, cut him some slack..he got you through the war, and led Britain into and through its 'Finest Hour'....a lot more than his babbling detractors could ever do!

GfS

---

04 Dec 15 - 01:10 PM (#3755702)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Churchill was only a 'good war leader' in respect of his resolve and public presence. The chap mostly running the war, the Chief of the Imperial General staff Sir Alan Brook, said that Winston had ten new ideas to help win the war, only one of them was any good and he doesn't know which it is.

He totally supported 'Bomber' Harris's campaign to bomb German cities at a time when the bombing was so inaccurate that it was largely just a waste of resources and men's lives. Harris wouldn't release long range maritime patrol aircraft to cover Atlantic convoys and Churchill supported him in this.

Churchill talked about Italy as the soft underbelly of Europe. My dad could have assured him it wasn't.

It's a pity so many people bought into the Churchill myth.

---

04 Dec 15 - 01:17 PM (#3755703)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

Well, unlike here, in the U.S., at least he had the good sense to appoint capable and competent people to his staff...you probably just don't like his politics...or in other words YOUR political bent is supposed to not like him, and like a good little sheep, you just follow the 'party line'...but be of good cheer, he's dead.... and..be of 'not so good cheer'..you're a terminal whiner!

GfS

---

04 Dec 15 - 01:36 PM (#3755707)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,#

During a visit to America, Winston Churchill was invited to a buffet luncheon at which cold fried chicken was served. Returning for a second helping, he asked politely, "May I have some breast?"

"Mr. Churchill," replied the hostess, "in this country we ask for white meat or dark meat." Churchill apologized profusely.

The following morning, the lady received a magnificent orchid from her guest of honor. The accompanying card read: "I would be most obliged if you would pin this on your white meat."

---

04 Dec 15 - 01:46 PM (#3755709)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Wesley S

If you dislike Winston Churchill use him as a shining example of what NOT to be. Lead a better life than he did. Accomplish more. Lead a war torn country for yourself. Pay your bills without fail. Be kind to women and children. Tip your waiter. And above all - get off your computer and go DO something.

That will show him.....

---

04 Dec 15 - 02:27 PM (#3755722)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Steve Shaw

So, Wesley, because I'm a lousy footballer and am too old to play anyway, I am not allowed to express an opinion about how my team's doing, eh? Well we can't all be Stevie Gerrards or Winston Churchills, can we? As for "accomplish more", there are thousands of people working in care homes on the minimum wage wiping old people's bottoms who could have shown Winston a thing or two about leading a good life and being kind. And, unlike the great war hero, they actually get their hands dirty.

---

04 Dec 15 - 02:40 PM (#3755727)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

because I'm a lousy footballer and am too old to play anyway
NONSENSE
Jim Carroll

---

04 Dec 15 - 02:57 PM (#3755728)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jack Campin

FDR was a reasonable example of how to be a leader capable of defeating Hitler without being an unmitigated shitbag. But the American Right would rather airbrush him out of history since Churchill was more their sort of guy.

---

04 Dec 15 - 03:40 PM (#3755739)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Anyone notice that Akenaton calls anyone he is below in intellect a "liberal" yet says Churchill wasn't?

Churchill is perhaps the only person Akenaton has ever referred to on these threads who ever did stand as a Liberal. 👬

---

04 Dec 15 - 04:20 PM (#3755753)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Wesley S

"FDR was a reasonable example of how to be a leader capable of defeating Hitler without being an unmitigated shitbag"

And yet he cheated on his wife. Another example of a politician who wasn't perfect. Lets not sit around waiting for perfect people to show up and get the job done. Unless y'all are willing to step up.

---

04 Dec 15 - 04:36 PM (#3755756)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Ebbie

This is why I deemed Megan L's assessment as harsh: "There will be people on this board who have performed incredible acts of selflessness and bravery. They might single-handedly look after relatives with long-term illnesses, be A&E doctors working ludicrously long shifts in inner city accident units or working in warzones and deprived communities where life is short, brutal and defined by appalling suffering. They might have been children caring for parents and loosing their childhood to a burden of responsibility we can't even imagine.

"They could look after disabled people, suffer long-term illnesses that causes them distress and hurt behind endurance, they might spend their lives fighting for the myriad of lost causes that our modern corporate world squashes like insects without a thought as it destroys the wonderful diversity of life and culture that have taken countless millennia to form." Stu 4:05 am

We'll never know, will we.

---

04 Dec 15 - 06:09 PM (#3755767)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Joe_F

"One may sneer as one will at its narrow-mindedness, its repressions, its dullness, butlet it be remembered that it was the middle-class who first practiced, if it did not invent, the virtue of financial honesty, the first class to be scrupulous about paying bills and taxes. The aristocracy paid its gambling debts but not its tailors' bills; the poor stole."
-- W. H. Auden, _A Certain World_, s.v. Middle-Class, English

---

04 Dec 15 - 07:11 PM (#3755774)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

"Joan of Arc was a being so uplifted from the ordinary run of mankind that she finds no equal in a thousand years. She embodied the natural goodness and valour of the human race in unexampled perfection. Unconquerable courage, infinite compassion, the virtue of the simple, the wisdom of the just, shone forth in her. She glorifies as she freed the soil from which she sprang." ~ Sir Winston Churchill

---

04 Dec 15 - 08:03 PM (#3755781)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Teribus

My goodness Jom the shit that you believe

Churchill ordered the shooting of striking miners did he? Who did it? Not "Special Groups of Military Policemen" trying to keep their hands in the First World War having ended? Again I bet these miners who were shot have no names and thousands of old miners swearing blind that they witnessed the shootings.

"There's still a local legend told in a pub he was said to frequent, The Grenadier - not far from Hyde Park Corner, which backs onto the Wellington Barracks, in the Park
They say he was so unpopular that he couldn't walk out at night for fear of being beaten up that he had a tunnel built from the barracks into the cellar (have seen what's left of the entrance)
It's said to be haunted by the ghost of a soldier who was flogged to death for attacking him."

EHmmm Jom first find out when Wellington Barracks was built, then find out what job Wellington was doing at the time. Then work out the difference in location between Horse Guards and Wellington Barracks, then come back and explain to us all why that "legend" is a crock of shit - so big a crock that not even you could have made it up. Don't think Wellington would have been the pub-going sort - not his scene at all - he did however walk freely about London without any sort of "security detail". Wellington's unpopularity? He was a ardent campaigner for the abolition of slavery, championed catholic emancipation and Irish Home Rule and deliberately crashed two Tory Governments so that the issues of the day could be decided by the people - Country First Not Party.

---

04 Dec 15 - 09:01 PM (#3755789)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,HiLo

All correct teribus. But one should not disagree with Jim on matters of history. Even if he is dead wrong? He is right.

---

05 Dec 15 - 01:41 AM (#3755807)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

This pretty much sums it up.....""If you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you're not a conservative at forty you have no brain." -Winston Churchill

GfS

---

05 Dec 15 - 03:49 AM (#3755815)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

All conjecture, if you must quote our cap doffing lackey in chief.

---

05 Dec 15 - 04:44 AM (#3755823)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,HiLo

I believe that Jack and
Jim must have attended the same school of history!

---

05 Dec 15 - 04:44 AM (#3755824)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

I'm fully aware of the veracity of both the miners' shooting being an unreported miners story - I am last aware that it might just be based on fact - it certainly is not beyond the realms of possibility - one miner was reported to have been battoned to death by a policeman (maybe one of your historians can show that this didn't happen)
I am also aware that the Duke of Wellington Story is an urban myth (I actually researched the story) - but it is an indication of the unpopularity of a despicably arrogant man, which is why I put it up - and, as someone has pointed out, his heirs were no better - it seems to be a family trait.
What I am most aware of is that whenever any whiff of criticism of "our betters" come sup on this forum, you will leap up like a cat with a flea up its arse to tell us that they ever did it.
I suggest that you would do this far more efficiently if you didn't try to talk down to people from the holes you persist in digging for yourself.
On the other hand, it is useful to have a living example of the contempt those you defend hold the rest of us in, in your own behaviour.
Keep it up
Jim Carroll

---

05 Dec 15 - 05:05 AM (#3755826)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,HiLo

There is virtually no evidence to support your claim Jim. None, zero , nil. This is how you have always abused history, trying to manipulate it in order fit your version pf things. But you have no credibility on the subject of hostory as your posts on this thread clearly show.
    Being critical of what you refer you as " our betters" is not the problem Jim. The problem is your ignoring of any facts that do not support your agenda.

---

05 Dec 15 - 05:21 AM (#3755829)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Teribus

HiLo has hit the nail fairly and squarely on the head - It is not to the defence of anyone that I leap, it is to correct the things that people state that are incorrect.

What's the bet in 12 months time if Churchill is mentioned on another thread from Jom we will get:

He's the man who ordered the shooting of the Tonypandy miners - EVEN ALTHOUGH HE IS PERFECTLY AWARE OF THE FACT THAT NO MINERS WERE SHOT BY ANYBODY. That is the trouble with Jom - he simply just does not listen and he does not investigate to check that just on the off chance he may be wrong.

---

05 Dec 15 - 05:22 AM (#3755830)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Raggytash

"One miner, Samuel Rhys, died of head injuries, said to have been inflicted by a policeman's baton.[8] Authorities had reinforced the town with 400 policemen, one company of the Lancashire Fusiliers, billeted at Llwynypia, and the squadron of the 18th Hussars"


Taken from Wikipedia

---

05 Dec 15 - 05:35 AM (#3755833)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Teribus

Well done Raggytash:

1: The miner who died had a name
2: The person responsible for his death was known - and guess what it wasn't a soldier.
3: The miner was not shot
4: Where he died is known
5: The soldiers were "on hand" and available to be used if needed - THEY WEREN'T.

---

05 Dec 15 - 05:52 AM (#3755835)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: akenaton

This what I have against "liberals", they live in a land of political myths....they expect to be "granted" everything with no input from themselves, or thoughts on the costs or effects of their "wants".   most are well heeled professionals or upper class students easing their consciences.

Of course they have persuaded themselves that they are socialists up for the revolution.....in reality they are the biggest impediment to social and political progress.

---

05 Dec 15 - 06:10 AM (#3755838)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Dave

Akenaton, the biggest impediment to social progress is the corporate kleptocracy.

---

05 Dec 15 - 06:18 AM (#3755840)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Raggytash

About those soldiers who WEREN'T used:

"At 1:20 am on 9 November, orders were sent to Colonel Currey at Cardiff, to despatch a squadron of the 18th Hussars to reach Pontypridd at 8:15 am.[4]:[p122] Upon arrival, one contingent patrolled Aberaman and another was sent to Llwynypia, where it patrolled all day.[4]:[p122] Returning to Pontypridd at night, the troops arrived at Porth as a disturbance was breaking out, and maintained order until the arrival of the Metropolitan Police"

---

05 Dec 15 - 06:29 AM (#3755843)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Derrick

The shootings of Miners at Tonypandy story seems to have come from a documentary novel written by a trades union organiser.
The piece below comes from Wikepedia at

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonypandy_riots


Purported eyewitness accounts of alleged shootings persisted and were relayed by word of mouth. There are no records of any shots being fired by troops. The only recorded death was Samuel Rhys. In the autobiographical 'documentary novel' Cwmardy, contemporary communist trade union organiser Lewis Jones presents a stylistically romantic, but closely detailed, account of the riots and their agonising domestic and social consequences. In the chapter Soldiers are sent to the Valley, he narrates a fictional incident, in which eleven strikers are killed by two volleys of rifle fire in the town square, after which the miners adopt a grimly retaliatory stance. In this account, the end of the strike is hastened by organised terror directed at mine managers, leading to introduction of a minimum-wage act by the government – hailed as a victory by the strikers.[9]

A more official version states that "The strike finally ended in August 1911, with the workers forced to accept the 2s 3d per ton negotiated by William Abraham MP prior to the strike ... the workers actually returning to work on the first Monday in September",[2] ten months after the strike began and twelve months after the lock-out which started the confrontation.

---

05 Dec 15 - 06:33 AM (#3755844)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: akenaton

Dave....corporate capitalism is of course anti social, but as we do not appear to wish to address the effects of the capitalist system in decline, we are stuck with it.

Any alternative ideas?

---

05 Dec 15 - 07:16 AM (#3755848)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Teribus

"Purported eyewitness accounts of alleged shootings persisted and were relayed by word of mouth. There are no records of any shots being fired by troops."

That sounds very similar to something else that was being discussed in another thread - you're wasting your time though if you think Jom will believe it.

---

05 Dec 15 - 07:28 AM (#3755850)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Stu

"YOUR political bent is supposed to not like him, and like a good little sheep, you just follow the 'party line"

I can see how it might look like that to someone lacking the initimate and extensive knowledge of handed-down first-hand accounts of family who fought the first of the blitz whilst Nazi bombes rained down on them, were nearly killed by German fighters strafing civilians, who can remember the sounds of anti-aircraft guns at the end of the street and the drone of doodlebugs as they sputtered overhead. Perhaps you don't understand the sacrifices made those who died in the cold waters of the North Sea whilst our island stood alone. We know the contribution Churchill made, we were the families who acted on it and paid the price.

So grow up.

---

05 Dec 15 - 07:28 AM (#3755851)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,HiLo

Re the accusation thatChurchill had all of his books ghost written by Arthur Bryant...Absolute rubbish. Where did That come from? I have read all of ABS books and all of Churchills, no comparison whatever. I never cease to wonder where people get this kind of tosh. What is your source for this Jack ?

---

05 Dec 15 - 07:45 AM (#3755855)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

I'm more than happy to accept the explanation Derrick gives of the origins of the story - but the fact that it was circulated and continues as a myth shows an awareness on the pert of people that the powers that be were prepared to any force considered necessary to suppress action judged to be detrimental to the interests of the state.
Suppression of workers action with violence has been a well-established part of our history since the formation of Trades Unions - right up to the Miners Strike where Thatcher showed she was happy to use the Police Force as her own private army to suppress the miners action - and that has been the case with all right wing politicians in Britain.
Thatcher's most telling moment was her defence of mass-murderer Augusto Pinochet, who she described as a hero of democracy after his having overseen the torture, rape and murder of thousands of his opponents - her message was loud and clear - she would have done similarly if she thought she would have gotten away with it.
The British people fought hard to win the rights and the protection from the excesses of the system we live under, but, as we have seen by the loss of many other rights that have been won - they are quite likely to be swept aside if people take their eye off the ball - and there are always those among us ready to support the taking away of them as 'the State can necer be wrong'.
Jim Carroll

---

05 Dec 15 - 08:15 AM (#3755861)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,HiLo

Jim, you have been proven wrong in your statement regarding the shooting of miners, you have been proven to accept myth as fact regarding Wellington. you simply cannot accept any history that does not agree with skewed view of the past.
   Margaret McMillan, Avery well respected Canadian historian, has written an excellent book ,TheUse And Abuse of History. I recommend it to you in the hope that you will learn something from it.

---

05 Dec 15 - 08:43 AM (#3755866)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

Lilo
I have accepted what Derrick says about the shooting of the miners and am happy to do so as it was put reasonably and with evidence to back it up, and not in the sneery manner you and yours choose to make your argument - personally, I come here to learn from what people have to say - that's why I take part in these discussions.
I have explained my foreknowledge of the Wellington story - you choose to use it as a ploy to avoid what I have said - how about you responding to the points I have made about the proneness of the establishment to use the army and the police on workers when it suits them -
I seem to remember you're a Thatcherite, - how about explaining her take on 'democracy' when it comes to worker's rights
Won't hold my breath - promise
Jim Carroll

---

05 Dec 15 - 08:52 AM (#3755868)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,HiLo

I am not and never was a Thatcherite, you remember incorrectly. I do not know what you mean by you and yours, and I do not believe that I make comments in a sneery manner. I have not avoided what you have said, I have disputed the efficacy of it, nothing more.
I did not respond to your comments about the "establishment" using the army on workers because the topic of this thread does not embrace that issue. Nor does it include the views of Margaret Thatcher. What IS evident here, is that you were wrong about the shooting and wrong about Wellington. You don't listen Jim and you don't appear to come here to learn. It seems you come to impose an erroneous version of history. Again, I recommend MS MCMillan to you.

---

05 Dec 15 - 09:02 AM (#3755869)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

What is your source for this Jack ?

I believe the source of all of Jack's opinions and positions is from the Socialist Worker's Daily or some such other propaganda rag.

---

05 Dec 15 - 09:20 AM (#3755872)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jack Campin

Re the accusation thatChurchill had all of his books ghost written by Arthur Bryant...Absolute rubbish.

Not all of them (I think his first was published before Bryant was born) - the history of WW2 specifically.

---

05 Dec 15 - 09:21 AM (#3755873)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Dave

And yours is where, GUEST, the Mail or the Telegraph?

---

05 Dec 15 - 09:24 AM (#3755874)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

you simply cannot accept any history that does not agree with skewed view of the past. Perhaps this applies to Teribus and Keith.

---

05 Dec 15 - 09:25 AM (#3755875)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,HiLo

What is the source for your information Jack ?

---

05 Dec 15 - 09:41 AM (#3755878)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

"I do not believe that I make comments in a sneery manner."
You wrote this
"his is how you have always abused history, trying to manipulate it in order fit your version pf things. But you have no credibility on the subject of history as your posts on this thread clearly show.
Being critical of what you refer you as " our betters" is not the problem Jim. The problem is your ignoring of any facts that do not support your agenda."
It is both sneery and grossly inaccurate - I have never at any time "abused history", though I may have been wrong and when it is pointed out, have been happy to be corrected.
I leave the abusing of history to those who don't read, have admitted that they don't and are not even interested in the subject at hand, yet persist in their arguments.
Happy to respond to any examples of my "abusing" history if you care to provide them though
In my opinion, Thatcher and her abuse of democracy is relevant to a discussion on a statesmen who showed the same disregard for peoples' rights
Jim Carroll

---

05 Dec 15 - 09:41 AM (#3755879)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,HiLo

No, it does not Guest. They both present reasonable views of history.Keith is mostly attacked for being Keith, not for bad history. Teribus also presents well researched history. Jim and Jack do not, as proven by this thread. I suspect Guest, that you have a flimsy knowledge of the subject yourself.

---

05 Dec 15 - 09:59 AM (#3755885)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,HiLo

If you wish to discuss Mrs. Thatcher Jim..start a new thread. Disagreeing with you is not being sneery. There are two Glaring examples of your abuse of history in this thread.
You are often off topic Jim. And you seem unable to recognize when you are wrong. It would be good of you to stick to THIS thread.

---

05 Dec 15 - 10:13 AM (#3755886)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Hilo, Neither Teribus or Keith accept any history that does not conform to their pre-judged positions. Keith in particular has dismissed historians as not living, left-wing, not published in major bookshops to name but three of the numerous reasons he has given. There are many more. He has quoted Jeremy Paxman and Ian Hislop to support his arguments although neither are noted historians.

---

05 Dec 15 - 10:20 AM (#3755889)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

You have no right to decide what is off topic - you are entitled to express an opinion - no more, jut as I am entitled to disregard it if I disagree.
Repeating the accusation without qualifying it "butters no parsnips" as the saying goes.
Wot Guest has just said - couldn't agree more and plenty of evidence of abuse of history on thread running at present - historians are for those who read.
Jim Carrol

---

05 Dec 15 - 10:20 AM (#3755890)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,HiLo

Keith is attacked for being Keith, not for his knowledge of history. I cannot comment on your knowledge of the subject as you have presented none. Teribus presents very solid and well researched historical debate.

---

05 Dec 15 - 10:32 AM (#3755892)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,HiLo

Miners were shot on the orders of Winston Chrurchill. Untrue, abuse of History. Mythical story of Wellington, untrue, abuse of history.

---

05 Dec 15 - 11:23 AM (#3755904)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

"Miners were shot on the orders of Winston Chrurchill. Untrue, abuse of History."
Not true - an acknowledged mistake.
This is the umpteenth time you have used this as part of your argument.
If there's one thing I dislike more than someone who never apologises , it is someone who ignores the fact that a mistake has been acknowledged and continues to use that mistake as a substitute for honest argument.
You did so over my Wellington story earlier despite the fact that I had fully explained my position on it.
Once can be considered a mistake, twice simple stupidity, continual distortion simple dishonesty.
"Keith is attacked for being Keith,"
Keith is attacked for his blatant and continuing abuse of history - you are attacking me for making a mistake I have apologised for yet defending somebody who had developed an abuse of history via historians he has not read into an art form
I suggest we let this lie and let the discussion on dear old Winnie continue and his democratic ways continue.
Jim Carroll

---

05 Dec 15 - 11:43 AM (#3755911)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Reasons for dismissing historians: Dead, personal axe to grind, very right wing, revolutionary activist, old school, they have to be living, they have to be living and working today, not published in the past twenty years, have to be available in real bookshops, only available on-line, fraudulent, vulgar, not a leading historian, out of date. Need I go on.

---

05 Dec 15 - 11:57 AM (#3755918)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

Stu: (quoting GfS) ""YOUR political bent is supposed to not like him, and like a good little sheep, you just follow the 'party line"

Stu: "I can see how it might look like that to someone lacking the initimate and extensive knowledge of handed-down first-hand accounts of family who fought the first of the blitz whilst Nazi bombes rained down on them, were nearly killed by German fighters strafing civilians, who can remember the sounds of anti-aircraft guns at the end of the street and the drone of doodlebugs as they sputtered overhead. Perhaps you don't understand the sacrifices made those who died in the cold waters of the North Sea whilst our island stood alone. We know the contribution Churchill made, we were the families who acted on it and paid the price.
So grow up."

So, you were hoping the Nazis won????
Figures!! "...political party of the mass movement known as NATIONAL SOCIALISM. Under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, the party came to power in Germany in 1933 and governed by totalitarian methods until 1945."--Encyclopedia Britannica

You 'So-called liberals' are a pain in the ass!!!!!

Think about it.....if capable..

GfS

---

05 Dec 15 - 01:21 PM (#3755932)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Interesting mental leaps from Guest from Sanity.

He wouldn't be a foreigner perchance?

Thought so. Explains it.

---

05 Dec 15 - 03:20 PM (#3755946)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

Who?

GfS

P.S. That's how much sense you made.

---

05 Dec 15 - 04:34 PM (#3755961)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Stu,in the ether

So, you were hoping the Nazis won????

That's pretty low and insulting by anyone's standards. I'm sure the mods will let this stand, though.

---

05 Dec 15 - 05:39 PM (#3755971)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Olddude

I admire and respect him

---

05 Dec 15 - 05:58 PM (#3755978)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Greg F.

Hilo, I think we see through your hate filled divisive comments and we are tired of them and disgusted that you would belittle other members of this forum to put forward your own petty views. You contribute nothing here, you snipe, belittle and denigrate , nothing more.

---

05 Dec 15 - 06:26 PM (#3755984)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Steve Shaw

I'm not in Greg's or anyone else's team and I speak for myself, but, if Joe Offer can privately tell ME that I'm a troll fer chrissake, I reckon it's time that this HiLo person, whoever it is, is called out. His posts have no content and he snipes extremely negatively at anyone who doesn't align with his own narrow set of values, whatever they are. That is not good enough on what is supposed to be a discussion forum. I'm trying very hard to couch this in terms of factual statement and not a personal attack, hard though it is.

---

05 Dec 15 - 06:34 PM (#3755985)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Les from Hull

It was in Liverpool that 2 strikers were shot, although not personally by Mr Churchill as far as I know.

He did however want to take charge at the Seige of Sidney Street, ordering up infantry and artillery, and ordering the fire brigade not to rescue anyone from the burning building. This was much derided by the working class - 'couldn't even catch Peter the Painter'.

He was an excellent writer, both of speeches and books, but would never acknowledge any help he got, such as the young team of researchers who helped with his 'History of the English Speaking Peoples'.

He always considered himself a 'great man', and often looked down on others. Today he would be considered a racist and a bigot, but that was then. In my mind he doesnt qualify as Britain's Greatest, unless the category is Drinker.

---

05 Dec 15 - 07:47 PM (#3755998)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,HiLo

Hi Greg, Up to your usual high standards of debate I see ,

---

05 Dec 15 - 07:50 PM (#3755999)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,HiLo

Fly in the Chardonnay is there Steve ..or is it a bee in the bonnet?

---

05 Dec 15 - 07:50 PM (#3756000)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Steve Shaw

I rest my case.

---

05 Dec 15 - 07:59 PM (#3756001)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Christ, Shaw, you are a case.

---

05 Dec 15 - 08:06 PM (#3756004)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Greg F.

Hi Greg, Up to your usual high standards of debate I see ,

Ah, but Hi- I'm quoting YOU!

---

05 Dec 15 - 08:09 PM (#3756005)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Steve Shaw

Did you mean "antichrist Shaw?" Try not to confuse your fellow deludees.

---

05 Dec 15 - 10:10 PM (#3756023)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

Stu: "'So, you were hoping the Nazis won????'"

"That's pretty low and insulting by anyone's standards. I'm sure the mods will let this stand, though."

Not at all...Germany was defeated...can't say the same for the Nazis...you know, 'The National Socialist Party'.....but don't feel alone, the U.S.S.R., though at war with Nazi Germany, were allegedly socialists as well...as in United SOCIALIST Soviet Republic....but then you'll say, "Well those were a different type of socialism, than the RIGHT one!..my kind!!"

...and besides, if it wasn't for Churchill, and up to Chamberlain, you'd all be English speaking Nazis.Is that really your beef with Churchill??

GfS

---

06 Dec 15 - 03:52 AM (#3756053)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Dave

The UK was saved in WWII by Operation Barbarossa, not Churchill. The sacrifices of the people of the USSR were very great, and they saved our bacon. Not much thanks did they get for it afterwards though. Had it not been for Operation Barbarossa, and to a lesser extent Pearl Harbour, both actions of the Axis powers, we would have been overwhelmed. And it would have been Churchill's fault for not listening to Chamberlain, who understood our weakness and wanted peace.

---

06 Dec 15 - 04:41 AM (#3756059)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Keith A of Hertford

It was Chamberlain who declared war on Germany (though not on Hitler's ally Stalin) in 1939.
Was it a mistake?

---

06 Dec 15 - 05:00 AM (#3756061)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Stu

"Is that really your beef with Churchill??"

Didn't you read my posts? Are you really that ignorant of history and absolutist in outlook? This discussion is obviously too nuanced for you and the history too complex and you're making yourself look an idiot. Time to read up on some British and European history.

---

06 Dec 15 - 06:23 AM (#3756073)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

"It was Chamberlain who declared war on Germany"
It was also Chamberlain who came back with a bit of paper from Munich declaring "Peace in our time"
The mistake was in appeasing fascism until there was no other choice.
Jim Carroll

---

06 Dec 15 - 07:13 AM (#3756077)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: akenaton

I am no expert of history, but from what I have read it was the German Communists who were fighting the rise of Fascism, just as it was in London. I had a friend who lived in London's East End in the 1920's and 30's, he was a Communist who used to fight running battles with Mosley's people. He said that public opinion at that time was delicately balanced......Facism had wide support in much of the media.

Fascism was being supported by business interests in America and Britain, chiefly as a defence against the spread of Communism.

If that is wrong please give me the true story?

---

06 Dec 15 - 07:20 AM (#3756079)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Stu

Whilst I don't think Churchill himself was a fascist, he was a right-wing racist once saying "the Aryan stock is bound to triumph" in regards to the empire's activities in the Middle East (he made this comment when he was an MP).

Fascism certainly had it's admirers here, including amongst the royal family.

---

06 Dec 15 - 07:27 AM (#3756080)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: The Sandman

akeneaton you are right.

---

06 Dec 15 - 07:29 AM (#3756082)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

".Facism had wide support in much of the media. "
DAILY MAIL
Jim Carroll

---

06 Dec 15 - 11:29 AM (#3756118)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Keith A of Hertford

The mistake was in appeasing fascism until there was no other choice.
Nothing to do with Churchill then.

---

06 Dec 15 - 11:47 AM (#3756122)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

"Nothing to do with Churchill then."
Wha???
This was your statement - surely you're not going to squeal "thread drift against yourself!!
"It was Chamberlain who declared war on Germany"
Jim Carroll

---

06 Dec 15 - 11:57 AM (#3756124)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

Funny, how the 'so-called liberals' all seem to defend fascism, and then criticize Churchill..then blame him for being a Fascist....Hey, if Churchill was a Fascist, why wasn't he allied with Hitler?
That's almost like criticizing Obama for being a Muslim sympathizer, while pretending to oppose them.....while blaming guns...and not knives, like the terrorist the Brits seem to prefer!!

Oh, and 95% of all forest fires are caused by trees....(liberal logic).

That being said, I'm not in favor of guns or any weapon of war....it is just plain insanity, that with mankind's ability to invent, we seem to invent and innovate new reasons to kill each other, and spend the rest of the time just fabricating reasons to do so.
Thank you, politics!

GfS

---

06 Dec 15 - 12:12 PM (#3756128)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Fascism isn't the opposite of socialism. I do sometimes wonder how in these days of comprehensive education, people see the word fascism to mean the antithesis of communism.

Control of others as a systemic tool is fascism. The communist ideal as set out by Marx was fascist and he warned that this would be the case if his principles were tried out in practice.

The Soviet model, beloved of misguided fools in an open society of The UK was fascist full stop. The Ayrian supremacy that Churchill and Hitler both favoured was fascist.

---

06 Dec 15 - 12:32 PM (#3756136)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

"Fascism isn't the opposite of socialism."

Absolutely correct!!...matter of fact, they're pretty much the same thing!

Freedom IS the opposite of either!

So, do ya' think our 'so-called liberal' friends will finally openly admit that they're Fascists in sheep's clothing??
...of course not....they'll make lame excuses...but keep up the practices of Fascist mind control for everybody!!

GfS

---

06 Dec 15 - 12:56 PM (#3756150)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

I'm a liberal in whatever sense you wish to say. And proud of my stance.

By definition, I cannot be a fascist, you ignorant bloody foreigner.

Redneck idiot.

---

06 Dec 15 - 01:06 PM (#3756156)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

"I'm a liberal in whatever sense you wish to say. And proud of my stance."

Then, you and Hitler seem to be on the same page.


GfS

---

06 Dec 15 - 03:06 PM (#3756192)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

"Then, you and Hitler seem to be on the same page."
Ake rides again!!
Jim Carroll

---

06 Dec 15 - 03:39 PM (#3756198)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

Ake???...

Here, just for starters, how is the 'so-called liberal' stances different than Hitler's on, Jews (Israel)?...
Gun control?
The Mid-East(Arabs)?
Socialism?
Freedom of speech(or thought, for that matter)?
Government owned industry?
World domination to Fascist control?
Treatment to those who don't agree?

...and please, pray tell, is the STRUCTURAL difference between a corporate regulated business, that provides benefits for their employees, union control, and/or Socialism, and/or a 'collective'????

You will find not any differences at all.....and that's just for starters!

Welcome to find out you've been duped....if you even care...maybe you're just dyed in the wool Fascists....but are too 'politically correct' to call it what it is!!

Freedom, on the other hand, allows the individual to choose, whatever way he or she wishes to support themselves, AS LONG AS YOUR WILLS, DON'T INTRUDE ON THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS!!!

Sieg Heil, Comrade!!

(Sieg Heil is a German phrase, which literally means "Hail [to] Victory." During the Nazi era, it was a common chant at political rallies.)

Sincerely,
GfS

---

06 Dec 15 - 03:48 PM (#3756201)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Greg F.

Please don't engage Goofus - you'll only encourage him. Also, please don't feed the animals.

Say Good-Night, Goofus.

---

06 Dec 15 - 03:56 PM (#3756203)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

What's the matter, Greg...can't answer the questions??

Just his usual tactics of saying nothing!

GfS

---

06 Dec 15 - 03:57 PM (#3756204)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

First there was WW1, then, WW2, then along come W and starts WWW (if it weren't so tragic it'd be funny)

---

06 Dec 15 - 04:05 PM (#3756207)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

One glaring example of the fascistic tactics of our armchair socialists is the stifling of conversation by screaming Islamophobe whenever someone dares to have critical views of some aspects of Islam.

---

06 Dec 15 - 04:46 PM (#3756215)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Steve Shaw

"Please don't engage Goofus - you'll only encourage him."

I never read his posts.

---

06 Dec 15 - 04:53 PM (#3756219)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

Pshaw: ""Please don't engage Goofus.."

Especially if you're a brainless ideologue.

..and by the way, both Greg and Steve are trying to get the thread shut down(AGAIN), with changing the topic and atmosphere with hostility.
They do it all the time when they have nothing intelligent to say or rebut........another silly tactic.

Stick to Churchill, and what he did or didn't do, and 'why'.

GfS

---

06 Dec 15 - 05:20 PM (#3756226)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Stick to Churchill the way you haven't been doing perhaps, Guest Insanity?

---

06 Dec 15 - 06:04 PM (#3756247)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

But I have...including WWII ideologies in conflict, and how the 'so-called liberals' are idolizing the same policies as the Nazis, and those same ideologues are alive and well in Mudcat, as you can plainly see by their responses....now instead of attacking me, or anyone else who prefers freedom over Fascism, why don't you offer your two bits worth,,,instead of your usual slurs and attempts to squelch any opposition, that happens to be telling the truth!!

Now, Churchill....

GfS

---

06 Dec 15 - 06:40 PM (#3756262)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Teribus

"GUEST,Dave - 06 Dec 15 - 03:52 AM

The UK was saved in WWII by Operation Barbarossa"

Rather odd then isn't it "Dave" that in 1941 it was the UK that went to Russia's rescue - not the other way round.

There was no way on God's earth that Germany could have successfully invaded Great Britain:

"Hitler knows he must defeat us in this island or lose the war"

Well he didn't defeat us in this island and he did lose the war - the mistakes that he made in attacking Russia and declaring war on the USA merely accelerated was was always going to be the predictable outcome.

---

06 Dec 15 - 07:39 PM (#3756275)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

"Rather odd then isn't it "Dave" that in 1941 it was the UK that went to Russia's rescue - not the other way round."
This is the second time you've stupidly claimed this -
Russia was not in the position to "come to the assistance of Britain" - Britain did did what they did, not as an act of charity, as you apparently seem to be suggesting, but as an Ally acting out of self interest.
It is typical of the mean-minded right to suggest this was a humanitarian act - it is what allies do in wartime - out of self preservation.
I suggest you remind yourself of exactly how many people Russia lost fighting Fascism - and they began three years before the war, when Britain was still sucking up to "Herr Hitler"
Leading British politicians - including an ex Prime Minister considered "new Germany a bulwark against Bolshevism" until the partnership failed to materialise.
Mean minded right wing bastard!   
Jim Carroll
   
Although relations between the Soviet Union and the United States had been strained in the years before World War II, the U.S.-Soviet alliance of 1941–1945 was marked by a great degree of cooperation and was essential to securing the defeat of Nazi Germany. Without the remarkable efforts of the Soviet Union on the Eastern Front, the United States and Great Britain would have been hard pressed to score a decisive military victory over Nazi Germany.

A reminder of what it was all about
Department of Defense Pro-Soviet Poster
Department of Defense Pro-Soviet Poster
As late as 1939, it seemed highly improbable that the United States and the Soviet Union would forge an alliance. U.S.-Soviet relations had soured significantly following Stalin's decision to sign a non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany in August of 1939. The Soviet occupation of eastern Poland in September and the "Winter War" against Finland in December led President Franklin Roosevelt to condemn the Soviet Union publicly as a "dictatorship as absolute as any other dictatorship in the world," and to impose a "moral embargo" on the export of certain products to the Soviets. Nevertheless, in spite of intense pressure to sever relations with the Soviet Union, Roosevelt never lost sight of the fact that Nazi Germany, not the Soviet Union, posed the greatest threat to world peace. In order to defeat that threat, Roosevelt confided that he "would hold hands with the devil" if necessary.

Following the Nazi defeat of France in June of 1940, Roosevelt grew wary of the increasing aggression of the Germans and made some diplomatic moves to improve relations with the Soviets. Beginning in July of 1940, a series of negotiations took place in Washington between Under-Secretary of State Sumner Welles and Soviet Ambassador Constantine Oumansky. Welles refused to accede to Soviet demands that the United States recognize the changed borders of the Soviet Union after the Soviet seizure of territory in Finland, Poland, and Romania and the reincorporation of the Baltic Republics in August 1940, but the U.S. Government did lift the embargo in January 1941. Furthermore, in March of 1941, Welles warned Oumansky of a future Nazi attack against the Soviet Union. Finally, during the Congressional debate concerning the passage of the Lend-Lease bill in early 1941, Roosevelt blocked attempts to exclude the Soviet Union from receiving U.S. assistance.

Under-Secretary of State Sumner Welles
Under-Secretary of State Sumner Welles
The most important factor in swaying the Soviets eventually to enter into an alliance with the United States was the Nazi decision to launch its invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941. President Roosevelt responded by dispatching his trusted aide Harry Lloyd Hopkins to Moscow in order to assess the Soviet military situation. Although the War Department had warned the President that the Soviets would not last more than six weeks, after two one-on-one meetings with Soviet Premier Josef Stalin, Hopkins urged Roosevelt to assist the Soviets. By the end of October, the first Lend-Lease aid to the Soviet Union was on its way. The United States entered the war as a belligerent in late 1941 and thus began coordinating directly with the Soviets, and the British, as allies.

Several issues arose during the war that threatened the alliance. These included the Soviet refusal to aide the Polish Home Army during the Warsaw Uprising of August 1944, and the decision of British and U.S. officials to exclude the Soviets from secret negotiations with German officers in March of 1945 in an effort to secure the surrender of German troops in Italy. The most important disagreement, however, was over the opening of a second front in the West. Stalin's troops struggled to hold the Eastern front against the Nazi forces, and the Soviets began pleading for a British invasion of France immediately after the Nazi invasion in 1941. In 1942, Roosevelt unwisely promised the Soviets that the Allies would open the second front that autumn. Although Stalin only grumbled when the invasion was postponed until 1943, he exploded the following year when the invasion was postponed again until May of 1944. In retaliation, Stalin recalled his ambassadors from London and Washington and fears soon arose that the Soviets might seek a separate peace with Germany.


Harry Lloyd Hopkins
In spite of these differences, the defeat of Nazi Germany was a joint endeavor that could not have been accomplished without close cooperation and shared sacrifices. Militarily, the Soviets fought valiantly and suffered staggering casualties on the Eastern Front. When Great Britain and the United States finally invaded northern France in 1944, the Allies were finally able to drain Nazi Germany of its strength on two fronts. Finally, two devastating atomic bomb attacks against Japan by the United States, coupled with the Soviets' decision to break their neutrality pact with Japan by invading Manchuria, finally led to the end of the war in the Pacific.

Furthermore, during the wartime conferences at Tehran and Yalta, Roosevelt secured political concessions from Stalin and Soviet participation in the United Nations. While President Roosevelt harbored no illusions about Soviet designs in Eastern Europe, it was his great hope that if the United States made a sincere effort to satisfy legitimate Soviet security requirements in Eastern Europe and Northeast Asia, and to integrate the U.S.S.R. into the United Nations, the Soviet regime would become an international team player and moderate its authoritarian regime. Unfortunately, soon after the war, the alliance between the United States and the Soviet Union began to unravel as the two nations faced complex postwar decisions.

---

06 Dec 15 - 08:13 PM (#3756283)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

Good post, Jim...maybe your best!

GfS

---

06 Dec 15 - 09:42 PM (#3756293)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Wesley S

Yeah it's a great post. And it's a shame that at least parts of it were not attributed to the US State Department archive.

Seen here.

Or here.

---

06 Dec 15 - 10:37 PM (#3756303)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

Wesley, Do you mean Jim 'interjected' parts not factual??...or just a cut and paste, with freelance 'commentary'?

GfS

---

07 Dec 15 - 03:35 AM (#3756325)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Dave

Wesley, thats unfair, Jim has attributed those quotes to the authors.

---

07 Dec 15 - 03:35 AM (#3756326)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

" And it's a shame that at least parts of it were not attributed to the US State Department archive."
Yes they were, in fact the entire quote came from State Department documents which gives the statement a "horse's mouth" validity - and there's a lot more where that came from.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of The Soviet Union, and I'm one of its greatest critics for the way Stalin was allowed to destroy the dream of 'a worker's state, the price that The Soviet Union payed in helping defeat fascism is far too often forgotten - estimated at up to 26.5 million dead - around 13.7% of the total Soviet population.
It seems more than a little mean-minded to suggest that anybody came to its rescue - the war was about nations coming together to defeat fascism - it's a bloody crying shame that that unity wasn't there when Hitler and Mussolini might have been stopped.
If Churchill made any contribution, it was in helping shut the stable door long after the horse had bolted - it was the people who paid the ultimate price (notably the six million Jews who were butchered) , not the ***** politicians who ran up the bill in the first place.
Jim Carroll

---

07 Dec 15 - 03:42 AM (#3756328)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Meanwhile, Churchill made the conscious decision to sacrifice Singapore and risk losing Australia to the Japanese. It was his way of saying thanks for supplying him with cannon fodder.

---

07 Dec 15 - 12:54 PM (#3756451)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

Jim Carroll: "The Soviet Union payed in helping defeat fascism is far too often forgotten - estimated at up to 26.5 million dead - around 13.7% of the total Soviet population.
It seems more than a little mean-minded to suggest that anybody came to its rescue - the war was about nations coming together to defeat fascism -.."

Jim, I am not asking this in a contentious manner, partly because I think you've hit a great point...so, in that spirit you said, "...the war was about nations coming together to defeat fascism -..". So, being as Fascism in Germany was the Nazi Party, which in itself is The National Socialist Party, and the Soviets were Socialists, and Churchill is also accused of being a Fascist, and the Bush family, are noted for giving support to the German Nazi regime, as were many 'sympathizers' at the time, one has to wonder, was it really against Fascism, or something else?...and how does the Socialism, embodied in Nazi Germany differ from any other Socialism....especially when, let's say, Socialism today, has at its goal, to become a National Socialist Party, with the elimination of any other opposing points of view...and moreover, when do you think that goal would be achieved??
Fair question...give it some thought, OK??
Looking forward to your reply.

GfS

---

07 Dec 15 - 01:16 PM (#3756458)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Greg F.

Goofus, look up the definition of "socialism, will ya? Might help you look like less of a jackass. Or not.

Your nonsense about this has been dealt with several times before.

---

07 Dec 15 - 01:42 PM (#3756471)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Dave

Not a chance Greg, you can have a rational discussion with Keith even if you disagree with him, but not this guy.

---

07 Dec 15 - 01:57 PM (#3756475)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

Greg, Stop disrupting the thread. The question I put to Jim is a valid question, and worthy of an honest exchange. Let Jim answer..nobody is on trial here, nor should any valid question be squelched with your antics....AGAIN!!

GfS

---

07 Dec 15 - 02:30 PM (#3756482)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Go on then, I give in.

How do you get a rational discussion with Keith?

---

07 Dec 15 - 02:44 PM (#3756490)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Dave

Try Astrophysics.

---

07 Dec 15 - 02:56 PM (#3756495)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

Back to Churchill...

GfS

---

07 Dec 15 - 03:02 PM (#3756498)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

I'd have to be a space cadet myself first.

---

07 Dec 15 - 04:02 PM (#3756515)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Dave

If you want to go back to Churchill stop writing silly posts trying to equate Naziism with Socialism. Churchill was neither a Socialist not a Nazi. And this issue was not that anyway, it was whether he was a thieving cheapskate.

---

07 Dec 15 - 04:23 PM (#3756524)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Greg F.

The question I put to Jim is a valid question

On the contrary, Goofus, the question you put is a garble of ignorant nonsense. And its apparent that you would be better committed without trial.

I take it you're referring to Churchill, Manitoba? I don't think they'd welcome you there, either, except as bear food.

---

07 Dec 15 - 04:32 PM (#3756528)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: The Sandman

Winston Churchill made military mistakes so did Hitler.
Churchill maintained morale during the war and had some good speech writers and knew how to deliver a good speech,
Churchill Stalin and Roosevelt, were all important in Hitlers Downfall.

---

07 Dec 15 - 05:23 PM (#3756537)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Raggytash

So was Spike Milligan, he even wrote a book about it.

---

07 Dec 15 - 05:37 PM (#3756540)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

A number of them. Mainly about what it was really like to be a soldier.

Shhh. Don't wake Keith up.

---

07 Dec 15 - 05:55 PM (#3756551)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: The Sandman

Spike was a very funny man, but if Hitler had won. we would not have had his humour, so you partly have to thank Churchill. think about it.

---

07 Dec 15 - 06:55 PM (#3756563)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Raggytash

Dick that is purely conjecture.

---

08 Dec 15 - 02:11 AM (#3756642)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Someone who chirps repeatedly that they were a review journalist yet lets their blinkered view of the person behind the talent obscure their take on the talent?

A good job we had Colin Irwin to give objective views on folk music eh?

---

08 Dec 15 - 02:29 AM (#3756644)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

To answer Dave's question to me:

Read carefully....very short....see if there's anything familiar.

(My previous post got deleted again...here's the short version).

GfS

---

08 Dec 15 - 03:06 AM (#3756648)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Dave

A name is nothing more than that. Take the name "Liberal". We have taken it to mean a party which occupies the middle ground. In the dictionary it says something like:

"willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own; open to new ideas."

In the US it seems to have become a term of abuse thrown around by the right. But in Australia it is a right wing party, and you cannot imagine that dictionary definition being applied to the government of the unlamented Tony Abbott.

The Nazis may have called themselves National Socialist, but their values are far removed from those of equality and justice put forward by people like Jeremy Corbyn. Their model of central control is far removed from the workers' democracy advocated by the Socialist Workers Party. And their values were not those of the planned economic model of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The Nazi system was fascist, racist and anti-semitic, but you could not call it planned.

---

08 Dec 15 - 04:02 AM (#3756650)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

Dave: "A name is nothing more than that. Take the name "Liberal". We have taken it to mean a party which occupies the middle ground. In the dictionary it says something like:

"willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own; open to new ideas.""

Well, 'Librals' (in the U.S.A.) means 'progressives', associated with the 'left wing', in favor of Socialistic changes to our government and society. Fair enough??
Would you characterize the 'so-called liberals' on here, or that you know as, "willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own; open to new ideas." ????

Yes, things have different meanings.

GfS

---

08 Dec 15 - 04:04 AM (#3756652)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: MGM·Lion

Colin liked his notices more than mine too, modest fellow that he was. Why, he once devoted an entire one of his full page Melody Maker lucubrations to all that was wrong with my reviews and how he hated them. Never been so flattered in all my puff.

So keep up with your ½ɷed animadversions, little Guestibuttox. Breath of life to me they are, not to be forgotten in my long retirement...

≈M≈

Now 4cryingoutloud like we've said be·4: BACK TO WINNIE-BOY innit...

---

08 Dec 15 - 04:35 AM (#3756657)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

Sorry Mike - one last word then I'm gone
Gfs
"one has to wonder, was it really against Fascism, or something else?"
One does indeed.
You will probably know that the left parties were extremely confused about supporting the war - the Communist Party of Britain actually lost a leader (Harry Pollitt) over the confusions.
It was regarded as another Imperial war until The Soviet Union was invaded, when it became a war in defence of the world's only workers state to most people of the left.
The one time I visited Russia in the mid-1960s it was still being referred to as 'The Great Patriotic War' there.
It is my opinion that Hitler needed to be stopped largely because of what was happening to the Jews, the Gypsies and the Trades Unions - later to be extended to the "unfit for purpose" disabled in Germany (an obvious ethnic and political cleansing - I believe he could have been slowed down in Spain, but them in charge decided on appeasement - Hitler was allowed test out the re-established Luftwaffe on the people of Guernica and Madrid.
You are wrong in equating Soviet Socialism with German National "Socialism"
Socialism is a political and economic theory based on the re-distribution of wealth, the attaining of equality of opportunity for all and the eventual withering away of the State (It's all in the books.
National "Socialism", on the other hand, was based on extreme industrial capitalism - equality for all or re-distribution of wealth never showed its ugly head in Nazi policy - simple capitalism backed by big industry (wonderful film of the early 70s, 'The Damned' sums up the situation perfectly)
Anyway - we really should let these people continue- sorry Mike - carry on.
Jim Carroll

---

08 Dec 15 - 05:04 AM (#3756661)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Stu

"...and how does the Socialism, embodied in Nazi Germany differ from any other Socialism...."

Hmmm. They both have the word 'Socialism' so they must be the same thing. What an erudite and fine observation.

You're taking the piss son.

---

08 Dec 15 - 05:13 AM (#3756662)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Dave

GfS, I am really not familiar with the USA, but I am familiar with Australia, and there it is the name of a political party whose outlook is very much aligned with UK conservatives. I have no idea what you mean by the "so-called liberals" on here. It probably depends where they come from, given the vastly different uses of the word.

---

08 Dec 15 - 06:19 AM (#3756667)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Steve Shaw

Hmm. Anyone remember Colin famously screwing up when Penguin Eggs was reissued...? :-)

I must agree with Michael's small print. The Guest thing on this website is far and away its silliest and most damaging feature, and in recent days it seems to have gone particularly haywire. We have moderators who in one breath call for civil discussion and in the next say diddley squat about the mockery of the place being made by a plethora of anonymous posters. Half the time you haven't a clue who you're supposed to be talking to. It's like going down the pub with a bunch of blokes all using voice-distortion technology and wearing cardboard boxes on their heads all evening. It's not my gig but I'm still saying that it's daft.

---

08 Dec 15 - 06:33 AM (#3756668)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Teribus

"You are wrong in equating Soviet Socialism with German National "Socialism"
Socialism is a political and economic theory based on the re-distribution of wealth, the attaining of equality of opportunity for all and the eventual withering away of the State"

The above from Jom and then we have Stue's contribution in answer to the following question:

"...and how does the Socialism, embodied in Nazi Germany differ from any other Socialism...."

"Hmmm. They both have the word 'Socialism' so they must be the same thing. What an erudite and fine observation.

You're taking the piss son."

Many more points of similarity than of difference between the two than that Stu:

1: The achievement of this equality that Jom witters on about under both systems was an illusion as under both systems as in "Animal Farm" - Some animals were more equal than others.

2: To actually thrive and prosper under either system you really did have to be a "Party Member" and under both systems that was by invitation only (IIRC in the USSR only about 3% of the population were honoured as being allowed to join the "Party" and they lived very comfortable lives while others damn near starved and made do with what the "Party Aristocracy" deigned to leave them)

3: Both systems required single Party political systems

4: Both systems required brutal and repressive measures to keep their respective populations in check

5: Neither system was EVER set up in order that any "withering away of the state" would occur.

I think that it is you that's "takin' the piss son"

Now go and read what it says in the Party Booklet so that you can answer the points made in a way that all the rest of the sheeple can nod in agreement.

---

08 Dec 15 - 06:40 AM (#3756670)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Teribus

Another thing I find rather puzzling.

Jom waxes lyrical about the heroic sacrifices made by Russia in the Second World War where under Stalin's orders thousands of men were thrown against the enemy in suicidal frontal attacks against prepared enemy positions, "punishment Battalions" were marched at gun point over ground know to be mined without one hint of criticism, yet somehow when a British General orders a frontal assault it is tantamount to plain murder if not classified as a war crime.

---

08 Dec 15 - 06:48 AM (#3756672)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Keith A of Hertford

Does Jim approve of theses Red Army SOPs?

" During the Battle of Moscow, in which 8,000 Soviet citizens were executed for perceived cowardice, ..."

"To prevent his soldiers deserting the front line around the capital, Stalin ordered special 'blocking detachments' to shoot all deserters. The Soviet leadership also instructed Soviet partisans operating in the countryside to kill anyone whom they believed was disloyal. This resulted in an effective carte blanche for partisans to abuse their power and extract whatever they wanted from helpless villagers.

A report from one partisan division shows that rape, killings and beatings were commonplace."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/hitler_russia_invasion_01.shtml

---

08 Dec 15 - 07:07 AM (#3756675)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Stu

"Now go and read what it says in the Party Booklet so that you can answer the points made in a way that all the rest of the sheeple can nod in agreement."

You can't argue with an ideologue Tezza, and you are amongst the most zealous of these on this board. Which puzzles me, as after all these years on this forum I've never believed you to be an unthinking right-wing drone despite the fact your posts are utterly unquestioning of authority and totally supportive of the establishment, which cares not a jot for you or I. No-one is so malleable and open to suggestion to one single viewpoint as you would appear to be.

Methinks you too are taking the piss boyo.

---

08 Dec 15 - 07:36 AM (#3756680)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

Stalin's behaviour - which I have never at any time supported (prove otherwise) has SFA to do with socialism in any shape or form (prove it has)
Stu (one of the sheeple (whatever that is) has it about right - whereas you pair are just RIGHT
Jim Carroll

---

08 Dec 15 - 07:49 AM (#3756683)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: The Sandman

I agree wth you there Jim, same can be said of Mao.

---

08 Dec 15 - 08:03 AM (#3756688)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

The Guest thing on this website is far and away its silliest and most damaging feature

I disagree. What damages the forum most and causes threads to be closed and/or deleted are personal attacks against other posters, something the above quoted poster is only too familiar with.

---

08 Dec 15 - 08:51 AM (#3756699)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Sorry Mike but there is no "collective host", our host is Max, the owner of the site, and he makes the rules, one of which is permitting Guest posts.

---

08 Dec 15 - 08:56 AM (#3756700)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: akenaton

As a Communist Party member for many years, I think Teribus is right on the button with the five points he puts forward.

It pains me to say so but industrial communism is not the answer and as Orwell said "power corrupts". The "liberal" ideologues are amongst us right now.

We are now in a situation where resources are becoming depleted and the environment degraded, so we must find an alternative to unfettered capitalism......that must involve the lowering of expectations...which is the driving force of capitalism, and putting an end to the wastefulness which capitalism encourages......In short we need a plan!.....but first our population need to be re educated, not to be greedy and not to completely abdicate responsibility for their own and their family's welfare.

Society has become weak and debauched, as much through "liberalism" as the survival tactics of capitalism.

---

08 Dec 15 - 09:15 AM (#3756703)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

"As a Communist Party member for many years, I think Teribus is right on the button with the five points he puts forward."
As someone who is of the opinion that you are as near to socialism as is your hero Nigel (whoops Mr) Farage.
I know Communist Party theory and actual policy pretty well - (I've argued against it with members and officials for longer than I care remember) and I know that what Terrytoon describes is as far away as it gets from reality.
The British Road to Socialism (Communist Party official policy) is a wishy washy, middle of the road liberal document bearing no resemblance to either Stalinism nor Socialism proper; The History of The Communist part of Great Britain is freely accessible on line to been examined in all its glory !! ( a liberal organisation - nothing more)
If you have documented evidence that what is fully available on line is incorrect, fine - show it.
I have as much time for the CPGB as I do for Stalin, but I do wish you fellers would go somewhere other than the right-wing press for your information.
Socialism in its proper form has yet to show its head in Britain or elsewhere
Jim Carrroll

---

08 Dec 15 - 09:53 AM (#3756708)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

In more detail:
"The achievement of this equality that Jom witters on about under both systems was an illusion as under both systems as in "Animal Farm"
It was under Stalinism – though even then, it was no more or less democratic than it was in the West – they had the vote as we do, but they had as much control over our politicians as we do – Stalin smashed the dream of Socialism, he certainly never put it into operation in any shape ot form.
For all his brutal ways, The Soviet Union, throughout its existence, moved from being a mixture of poorly industrialised in the west and primitive feudalism in the east into a fairly unified State competing in technological terms on the world stage.
The "Stalinist Gulags" were actually set up under Tsarism and used just as brutally
Conditions for the people in general improved immensely and notably, since the fall of 'Communism' are now in decline for the poorest.
One thing that the overthrow of Tsarism did immediately was to take the people out of the bloodbath that was World War One.   
To actually thrive and prosper under either system you really did have to be a "Party Member"
See above: nothing to do with Socialism and totally inaccurate anyway
"Both systems required brutal and repressive measures to keep their respective populations in check"
See above – Stalinism did – nothing to do with socialism in any shape or form
"Neither system was EVER set up in order that any "withering away of the state" would occur."
Yes it was – it was contained in all the literature – the fact that it was never put into practice is down to the fact that once Stalin took hold of Russia the ideals of Socialism were to totally abandoned .
You are setting up a Trojan Horse shipmate – comparing what happened with Stalin is like comparing what happens in Britain today with real democracy – those at the top as likely to respond to what we have to say as Stalin did.
Stalinism had SFA to do with socialism and it is crass to suggest it did - even in socialist literature it is described as a "deformed workers State".
Jim Carroll

---

08 Dec 15 - 10:04 AM (#3756712)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Teribus

""Rather odd then isn't it "Dave" that in 1941 it was the UK that went to Russia's rescue - not the other way round."
This is the second time you've stupidly claimed this -
Russia was not in the position to "come to the assistance of Britain" - Britain did did what they did, not as an act of charity, as you apparently seem to be suggesting, but as an Ally acting out of self interest.
It is typical of the mean-minded right to suggest this was a humanitarian act - it is what allies do in wartime - out of self preservation.
I suggest you remind yourself of exactly how many people Russia lost fighting Fascism - and they began three years before the war, when Britain was still sucking up to "Herr Hitler"
Leading British politicians - including an ex Prime Minister considered "new Germany a bulwark against Bolshevism" until the partnership failed to materialise.
Mean minded right wing bastard!"   
Jim Carroll

1: Ah so the demands from Stalin for 400 aircraft; 500 Tanks; 1000 trucks; Artillery; Ammunition and Raw Materials to be delivered to the USSR every ten days wasn't us coming to their aid. No-one has claimed that it was humanitarian, and yes we acted in our nations best interest (That oddly enough is what governments are supposed to do) but had we not acted as we did then the USSR would have been defeated and knocked out of the war.

2: By the time Hitler's armies arrived 23 kilometers from Moscow, 75% of the armour that was in position to defend the city had come from Britain. But according to Jom that isn't aid.

3: The USSR got itself into the position it did through incompetent and corrupt leadership - a hallmark of the Soviet Socialist System. They'd killed off (Murdered) all their competent senior officers in 1938 and those who were left in 1941 we so scared of denouncement by the "Party" that their decision making in time of crisis completely failed them - if the "Party" didn't order it it didn't get done it cost them hundreds of thousands of men, tens of thousands of tanks and aircraft.

4: As for the communists fighting fascism three years before the war. Was that when Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin decided to use the whole of Spain ans a "live firing range" in 1936 Jom? What about the German tank commanders, paratroopers and pilots trained in the USSR in secret between 1933 and 1936 - wonder how they did against each other when instructor met up with former pupil in Spain?

5: While we were sucking up to Hitler?? At least we didn't form an alliance with him and then take part in the division of the spoils when Poland was invaded.

---

08 Dec 15 - 10:20 AM (#3756717)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Mean minded right wing bastard!

This is the kind of foul shite that keeps me posting as Guest. When it ceases I will revert to posting under my Mudcat moniker.

---

08 Dec 15 - 10:32 AM (#3756719)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: MGM·Lion

I do not disagree with that postulation, O Nameless-One; but did not gratuitous use of that excremental term ('nonsense' would have made the point with better effect imo) somewhat ironically detract from the force of your point?...

---

08 Dec 15 - 11:13 AM (#3756726)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

"Ammunition and Raw Materials to be delivered to the USSR every ten days wasn't us coming to their aid."
Back to that - are we
The Soviet Union was our ally -and British action was one taken in the interest of the allies not for the benefit of the Soviet people.
"But according to Jom that isn't aid."
It wasn't - it was reinforcing an ally
"The USSR got itself into the position it did through incompetent and corrupt leadership"
No it didn't and I've never seen it suggested anywhere that id ever did - another historical @first' for you.
Russia to some feeble steps to stop fascism in its tracks in Spain - not enough, but a million times more than either Britain or the west did.
It was still a relatively new state that had been crippled by the War, had faced strong opposition to the introducing the changes changes necessary to creating a new state by the right within Russia and from outside - 14 countries participated in the Civil war - all on the side of the opposition which wanted to turn the country back to te way it was,
Britain had none of these problems yet it was unready for war.
"German tank commanders, paratroopers and pilots trained in the USSR in secret between 1933 and 1936"
As far as I know, the small, clandestine training schools that were set up in Russia were closed in 1933 - the year Hitler was declared Chancellor.
Britain on the other hand, continued to appease Hitler rite up to the end.
The Soviets instigated the International Brigades and provided some weapons - not enough - Britain's P.M came back waving his "Peace in our Time Paper not long before war broke out despite being fully aware of what was happening to The Jews
Jim Carroll

---

08 Dec 15 - 11:42 AM (#3756731)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

Just to re-iterate shipmate
I have no brief for Stalin ad what he did to the Soviet Union.
If you want to show that he was no better than Britain in appeasing fascism - feel free - he was certainly no worse and as I said, he at least went through the motions in Spain, whereas Britain semi-criminalised those who went out to fight as "premature anti-fascists" and the effects of thet criminalisation lasted until well after the war.
In the U.S, Senator McCarthy was putting those who went to fight on trail.
Jim Carroll

---

08 Dec 15 - 11:54 AM (#3756733)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: MGM·Lion

That would have been just about contemporaneously with the notorious Moscow Trials, would it not, Jim, that dear old Uncle Joe would have been denouncing & endeavouring to prevent totalitarian persecution of opposition in Spain? Perhaps just a touch of the Pot & the Kettle, eh?

Darkness at Noon by Arthur Koestler. One of the great novels of the mid-20C; perhaps even more so than Lewis Grassic Gibbon's admirable A Scots Quair trilogy, beginning with Sunset Song of which you profess so much admiration. Would you greatly disagree with this assessment?

≈M≈

---

08 Dec 15 - 12:32 PM (#3756745)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Stu

"As a Communist Party member for many years, I think Teribus is right on the button with the five points he puts forward."

Sorry, are we talking about socialism or communism?


"Society has become weak and debauched, as much through "liberalism" as the survival tactics of capitalism."

My god.

---

08 Dec 15 - 01:27 PM (#3756758)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

"Darkness at Noon by Arthur Koestler. One of the great novels of the mid-20C;."
Very true Mike, even though it was written by a rapist.
Neither the Moscow trials nor any other of Stalin's crimes have anything to do with Socialism in any shape or form
You disappoint me - you seem to be clinging on to Terrytoon's straw men for support
I really do have no love for Stalin and I detest what he did to Russia - I feel pretty much the same as you do for Israel, I would imagine - a beautiful idea gone wrong (speaking of which in passing; don't suppose you watched 'Storyville last night - Israeli soldiers talking about their experiences during the Six Day War - Amos Oz included)? - as I said, a beautiful idea gone wrong.
Jim Carroll

---

08 Dec 15 - 01:34 PM (#3756759)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

I agree with guest. I too have a Mudcat login.

Far too many people on here judge a post by the bit above it stating who wrote it rather than what they wrote.

Mind you, I seem to have struck a chord when I compared Michael (who I had never heard of till he kept rattling on about who he is) and Colin Irwin, who I used to read with interest.

Nice to prick a few bubbles.

---

08 Dec 15 - 02:36 PM (#3756771)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: MGM·Lion

So you read Melody Maker but not The Guardian or Folk Review? Very ver-chewous and inter-letchal of you, 2B-Shaw, Mr Bubbly-Prick!

Arthur Koestler, rapist; but no effect on quality as a writer as you say, Jim. Just as the murderous Caravaggio one of world's greatest painters.

≈M≈

---

08 Dec 15 - 02:38 PM (#3756772)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: MGM·Lion

& the 'thieving cheapskate' Churchill being what & who he was...

Which is where we came in!

---

08 Dec 15 - 03:02 PM (#3756775)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Teribus

""German tank commanders, paratroopers and pilots trained in the USSR in secret between 1933 and 1936" - Teribus
As far as I know, the small, clandestine training schools that were set up in Russia were closed in 1933 - the year Hitler was declared Chancellor." - Jim Carroll

Ehmmm Jom hate to point this out to you but German rearmament did not start until after Hitler was declared Chancellor and became the Leader of Germany. So it logically follows that the tank commanders, paratroopers and pilots would be trained after Hitler came to power, and they were trained in the Soviet Union Jom of that there is no doubt and plenty of evidence.

What was the name of that First World War Stretcher- Bearer historian chap of yours who is still alive Jom?

---

08 Dec 15 - 03:05 PM (#3756777)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: The Sandman

His name was Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill KG OM CH TD DL FRS RA.
Despite all the initials he was not a puller of the Ivories.

---

08 Dec 15 - 05:57 PM (#3756823)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Steve Shaw

No, Michael, Folk Roots, as was when I stopped reading it when it went all worldly on me. In my callow yoof I bought enough duffers on the strength of great reviews to persuade me to give up reading them.

---

09 Dec 15 - 03:06 AM (#3756942)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Musket of the original variety

I suppose now that this thread has evolved from Churchill stuff, it'd be nice to join in.

I used to get Melody Maker, as well as New Musical Express. My love of folk as a teenager coupled with being in a number of local rock bands, I found Melody Maker to cover both to a certain degree. Funnily enough, I recall having a letter published under my old school nickname Musket, and the cartoon at the back, Savage Pencil, making a comment about it.

I never read The Guardian nor indeed any newspaper. Teenagers have better things to do with their time. Although given Michael's confusion and illogical stances on the many "what is folk" threads, I doubt I missed much.

---

09 Dec 15 - 04:25 AM (#3756956)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Keith A of Hertford

Jim, you rushed in on this thread to attack Churchill based on dubious or plain false evidence.

When there was a thread about Stalin, you made no such attacks.
All you did was defend him, and deny his acknowledged culpability for the famine in Ukraine, an act of genocide that killed seven million.
http://www.historyplace.com/worldhistory/genocide/stalin.htm

---

09 Dec 15 - 04:44 AM (#3756961)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: MGM·Lion

"No, Michael, Folk Roots, as was when I stopped reading it..."
Steve 8 Dec 5.57
.,,.

Regret have somewhat lost the thread [pun, hoho!]. Could you please remind me, Steve, to which or what question or postulation of mine you are replying "No"?

≈M≈

---

09 Dec 15 - 05:07 AM (#3756967)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

"When there was a thread about Stalin, you made no such attacks."
I have never made any secret of my contempt for Stalinism, but I see no reason to enter into debate with someone who obviously possesses no knowledge of the subject and lives for scoring points - as shown by your stunning cut-'n-paste ignorance of the Ukraine famine.
Stalin was what he was and did what he did - but people like you use monsters like Stalin to distort the massive gains made by the Soviet Union - from a monarchist semi/feudal state to world contender despite the aftermath of one Imperial World War and another which robbed it of 13.7% of its population.
Your ignorance on all subjects has become legendary - why bother debating complicated subjects with people like you when there are plenty of others around?
The Stalinist period is really nothing you can deal with with cut-'n-pastes, and you don't offer anything else.
You don't present honest arguments - you deal in pointless quagmires and blind alleys - spent far too much time in yours already.
Terribus.
Really time you need to distinguish between "allies" and "beneficiaries" - until you do you will remain the mean-minded little flag-wagger that you are (oh - forgot to add the "errrm" - there you go - errrm)
When will you learn to talk to people properly - and when will you learn that the nastiness of trying to score points from mistakes only leads to own-goals - too late, too late, the maiden cried!.
Mike
While I agree with you about 'Darkness at Noon', being a great book, I believe that the perhaps not quite as well written and certainly less well known 'Case of Comrade Tulayev"by Victor Serge, (described as "unquestionably the finest work of fiction ever written about the Stalinist purges") deals with the subject (from the point of view of a committed revolutionary) far more satisfactory and comprehensively.   
Off to Dublin.
Jim Carroll

---

09 Dec 15 - 05:47 AM (#3756976)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: MGM·Lion

Thanks, Jim.

"Off to Dublin." -- In the green I presume.

≈M≈

---

09 Dec 15 - 05:51 AM (#3756977)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Keith A of Hertford

I have posted no paste job here Jim.
On the Stalin thread I quoted extensively from Conquest's book which you said informed your opinions but which in fact contradicted you.

---

09 Dec 15 - 06:32 AM (#3756981)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Steve Shaw

Yesterday 02.36pm, Michael.

---

09 Dec 15 - 10:02 AM (#3757027)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Keith A of Hertford

24th July 15
It's a little facile to just write off Stalin as a despotic monster - the period is a fascinating one and well worthy of examination and plenty of literature to draw on.
Jim Carroll

Deliberately causing the starvation death of seven million people.
Why not write him off as a monster? His young wife killed herself because she could not live with the horror of what he was doing.

Ordering the murder of hundreds of thousand Polish prisoners.
In what sense was he not a monster Jim?

---

09 Dec 15 - 02:46 PM (#3757135)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Yeah, and I bet your vicar has had a wank in the past.

Most days if his human side beats his superstitious contractual employment basis.

Accusing Jim of cherry picking by cherry picking yourself just shows two arses instead of one.

Stalin was a monster, true. But reality is unfortunate to have Keith's logic applied.

---

10 Dec 15 - 04:51 AM (#3757277)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Keith A of Hertford

"Guest" leaving aside all the personal stuff, your only criticism is of "cherry picking."

But, I did not cherry pick.
So we are left with a non-contribution from a non-person.

(Of course we all know it is Musket, but he is now just a non-person.)

---

10 Dec 15 - 05:12 AM (#3757282)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Putting aside I am not Musket, and I'm sure he or they can speak for themselves, (about music reviews if their contribution to this thread is analysed.)

Is your assertion that a guest is whoever it pleases you to be the basis of your logic on all threads? It would certainly answer many questions.. I'm alive, have posted in the last twenty years and am eminent. Does that change your view of my posts? It should do if we apply your weird logic.

---

10 Dec 15 - 05:17 AM (#3757284)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Keith A of Hertford

Another non-contribution from a non-person.
Just personal stuff.

---

10 Dec 15 - 05:30 AM (#3757290)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

He says... After posting "just personal stuff" himself.

Just the wrong person, that's all.

Consistent if nothing else.

By the way Keith, all the historians agree that I am eminent.
😹

---

10 Dec 15 - 05:30 AM (#3757291)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Dave the Gnome

I am sure this argument has gone on before. Saying it is facile to just write him off as a monster is not the same saying he is not a monster. I suggest you look up the word 'facile' yourself but, as a quick reference, it means ignoring complexities.

---

10 Dec 15 - 06:20 AM (#3757305)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Keith A of Hertford

OK Dave, I will rephrase the relevant post.

24th July 15
It's a little facile to just write off Stalin as a despotic monster - the period is a fascinating one and well worthy of examination and plenty of literature to draw on.
Jim Carroll

Deliberately causing the starvation death of seven million people.
Why not write him off as a monster? His young wife killed herself because she could not live with the horror of what he was doing.

Ordering the murder of hundreds of thousand Polish prisoners.
In what sense is it facile to write him off as a monster Jim?

---

10 Dec 15 - 06:39 AM (#3757309)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Fred

Ah, Now you want Dave to justify something Jim posted five months ago. It really is very silly. Does it actually matter whether someone calls Stalin by the childlike term "monster" (something I associate with the playground by the way). Tyrant, Despot, Dictator, Monocrat, oligarch are much better words.

---

10 Dec 15 - 07:08 AM (#3757314)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Keith A of Hertford

Fred, I am sure you are also the Guest who just wrote,
"Stalin was a monster, true."

You clearly do not think it facile to call him one then.

---

10 Dec 15 - 07:17 AM (#3757318)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Fred

Keith I do not want to get involved in your frankly childish little games, and no I am not the guest who wrote previously. If I want to play childish games I will go and find my 8 year old Grandson. At least he has an excuse for behaving like a child.

---

10 Dec 15 - 07:40 AM (#3757323)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Fred

Just for the record though. No I do not call Stalin a monster. I consider he was far worse than that childlike appendage.

---

10 Dec 15 - 08:54 AM (#3757354)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Teribus

"I do not want to get involved in your frankly childish little games,"

So why do you Fred?

---

10 Dec 15 - 09:16 AM (#3757363)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Fred

Don't recall addressing you Teribus. As Jim would say do you not have any potatoes to peel.

---

10 Dec 15 - 09:58 AM (#3757382)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

"On the day of Operation Barbarossa, Winston Churchill made a radio broadcast to the people of Britain assuring them that 'any man or state who fights against Nazism will have our aid'.

Churchill's message was clear, even his anti-communist sentiments would not stop him from declaring Britain's full support of the Soviet Union. In the broadcast, Churchill proclaimed that 'We (the British) are resolved to destroy Hitler and every vestige of the Nazi regime'"

---

10 Dec 15 - 10:15 AM (#3757392)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Teribus

Question too difficult for you Fred?

---

10 Dec 15 - 02:25 PM (#3757470)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: EBarnacle

My enemy's enemy, to use the Arabic and Sicilian construction.

---

10 Dec 15 - 05:10 PM (#3757519)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Musket

I must be facile. I am learning to ignore the complicated mental processes of some of the idiots on here.

Still, rather facile than fascist eh? Didn't Stalin used to be a priest or something?

---

11 Dec 15 - 12:14 PM (#3757686)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link

I think he was a choirboy, went to seminary for awhile .

---

11 Dec 15 - 04:10 PM (#3757752)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Dave

Wasn't Churchill also a choirboy at Harrow? No wonder they admired each other.

---

12 Dec 15 - 07:13 AM (#3757855)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Musket

I'm sure I'd read somewhere that he used to be a priest or had been trained as one. Ah well. I might pop into the Hertford branch of WH Smith. I reckon they sell history books that agree with what you would like to think.

---

12 Dec 15 - 12:24 PM (#3757906)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Try Watersons instead. WH Smith are a bit proly for sanctimonious wannabe Col Blimp (retd) types.. Not sure Keith would want to cohort with the proletariat.

---

12 Dec 15 - 12:30 PM (#3757908)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Surely that should read that the proletariat would not want to associate with Keith.

---

12 Dec 15 - 12:36 PM (#3757912)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Serendipity

---

12 Dec 15 - 12:45 PM (#3757914)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

...or just make something up, and get everyone who doesn't know better to agree!

GfS

---

12 Dec 15 - 04:06 PM (#3757939)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST

Shh Goofus. Keith has the copyright on that.

---

12 Dec 15 - 08:07 PM (#3757986)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: EBarnacle

In re: Koestler
The only evidence for him as a rapist was a single accusation about 50 years after the "fact." Taking it as gospel when he was no longer alive to defend himself seems questionable, at best.

---

13 Dec 15 - 12:38 AM (#3758017)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

Really???

GfS

---

13 Dec 15 - 02:45 AM (#3758023)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Philbert Digby

To quote a well known folk singer " those who seek power should be forever banned from having any"

---

13 Dec 15 - 04:20 AM (#3758034)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

"about 50 years after the "fact.
Like Jimmy Saville and all those priests, you mean?
I've been aware of the rumours of Koestler's behaviour towards women for the best part of the time I've had an interest in political history - I was told that it was covered up because of the position of respect he occupied.
Michael Foot's wife, Jill Craigie, confirmed that she was one of his victims and Simone De Beauvoir described his sexual tastes as being "violent".
" those who seek power should be forever banned from having any"
Always thought the same about gun ownership.
Jim Carroll

---

13 Dec 15 - 04:46 AM (#3758039)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Musket

Plenty of science fiction writers have set a future society based on the person least wishing to have power becomes the global / galactic whatever President for a term.

Fits into the same theory.

There are many people decrying the Eton crowd running the government and in a democracy, that's often fair comment. Not the envy bit but the less than world view combined with thinking they have a world view.

They have the power because they were brought up to believe that not only can they demand the power but have a duty to wield it.

Why else would Churchill have automatically felt the need to rule and be so confused after losing the first post war election?

---

13 Dec 15 - 05:27 AM (#3758047)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: MGM·Lion

All very good points. But let us keep in mind his own excellent dictum that   "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."

≈M≈

---

13 Dec 15 - 05:32 AM (#3758048)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

"Deliberately causing the starvation death of seven million people."
Keith – one last time with you – your right wing fanaticism has lost even its entertainment value – you are an ignoramus from whom it is impossible to learn anything
You have vigourously defended and no doubt still are defending between 9 and 15 million dead in WW1
In World War II 25,000 non combatants died Dresden – don't doubt where you stand on that one
The Viet Nam War brought about 1.5 million deaths – don't even have to guess
At Hiroshima and Nagasaki, around 200,000 largely non-combetants perished because of the deliberate bombing of two civilian occupied cities – those were the ones who died at the time, – the deaths and casualties that were caused through the fallout are still incalculable – no doubt completely justified.
You have defended the massacre of refugees in the Middle East and I have no doubt will go on doing so (wonder if you saw the 'Storyville' programme on the Six Day War, where Israeli veteran soldiers compared what happened to the Arabs in the aftermath to The Holocaust and describing the massacre of Arab prisoners?) .
Stalin's leadership was both brutal and crudely inept – but he did not deliberately set out to murder millions – that was the result of the policies he adopted which he (at first) believed necessary for the survival of the Soviet Union (pretty much as those who sent all those millions of young men to their deaths in WW1 – which you defend so vigorously) – later he became an unhinged megalomaniac.   
You are already at it with your "Robert Conquest" – who would become your next "real historian" if I chose to debate with you –which I don't.
You certainly haven't read Conquest – far, far too many words and not enough pictures for your abilities as a reader.
You claim to have read Deutscher – another writer far beyond your literary capabilities.
If you had, you would have found an extreme critic of Stalin but one far more interested in examining what made him do what he did rather than glorying in his errors and his extremism, he also did similarly excellent jobs on Lenin and Trotsky –
You don't even bother to use him to hide behind, despite having claimed to have read him – if you have, how do you explain the discrepancies between him and Conquest – do you even know what they are? (Sorry – don't bother answering that – we already know about your "real historians" approach to history).
Your juggling unread historians to prove your case has become a standing joke here and those of us who have responded to you have become little more than 'straight-men' feeding you your lines – sort of like our Little Ernie Wise to your Eric Morcambe – no more from me, I'm afraid – too many interesting people who prefer to share ideas rather than score points.
Jim Carroll
Incidentally – a last 'last word.
The hotel we stayed in in Dublin was run by a WW1 nut with a sizeable collection of books on the subject – one of those being 'The War That Ended Peace' by one of your "real historian" heroes, Margaret McMillan'
Managed to flick my way through some of it over the three days we were there (far too big a time to read it in any depth and we were far too busy enjoying the ballads) - it transpires that she is every bit as scathing about both the reasons for and the conduct of the war as is Max Hastings – more, in fact.
And as for the Christoper Clarke and his 'The Sleepwalkers' - wow!
– sorry 'bout that!
Why not ask somebody to buy you a book for Christmas – they may even offer to explain it to you – after all – it is the Season of Good Will?

---

13 Dec 15 - 06:24 AM (#3758059)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Keith A of Hertford

Everything Jim has just said about me is made up, and Jim, I have read both those books.

---

13 Dec 15 - 07:16 AM (#3758066)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
An argument put forward by Churchill which conveniently ignores the point that all political and economic systems are movable feasts, one replacing the other as it passes its sell-by date, and that the worst threats to peace and progress comes from those who would cling onto the old systems.
Two world wars increasingly regular economic crises and the centring of more and more wealth into fewer and fewer hands are all indisputable signs that the system we live under is no longer fit for purpose and in need of replacement.   
A couple of weeks ago on question time I watched a woman with a disabled child explaining that she could no longer afford to send her son to the necessary school because the latest round of welfare cuts had disqualified her from a grant for transporting him there.
She was told - by a Tory MP, a right wing journalist and a member of the Adam Smith Institute that unless she and those like her were prepared to bite the bullet in order to pay for the weapons necessary to "defend our society", then the future safety of her grandchildren and great grandchildren could not be guaranteed - thus passing the atrocious mess that is Capitalism on two generations.
No system has ever fully replaced Capitalism anywhere, so it can't be claimed that it has not worked.
The Soviet Union was a system in transition originally aimed at Socialism and eventually Communism, which got lost on the way, but during the tottering first steps it took, managed to achieve vast improvements in what went before - sometimes at enormous cost.
Some years ago, when Castro fell ill, I watched a programme based around the Cuban refugees living in Miami, all of whom stated that when "the dictator" died they would return to Cuba, dismantle the welfare State there and return the country back to its rightful owners - presumably the six families who owned over three quarters of the land.
I see from this mornings papers that the gangsters who made pre-revolutionary "America's open sewer" are now planning to sue the Cuban Government for compensation under new legislation, thus impoverishing the Cuban people even more than they already are, thanks largely to the half-century U.S. trade embargo.
The extreme right is on the move in the world today - France stands to respectablise fascism in its next election so the system that condemned six million human beings to the gas chambers will once more be a contender.
One country has now announced a shoot-to-kill policy to "defend itself" from refugees fleeing religious terrorism and mass poverty - more to come, no doubt.
A right wing nut-job stands to be a front runner in the U.S. Presidential election - and already the right in Britain are lining up behind him, that champion of democracy, Melanie Phillips has described those opposing his racist homophobic and Islamophobic rants as "the real fascists" and this morning's Sunday Times suggests that Trumps attacks on British policy in allowing Muslims access to Britain might have some validity.
Dangerous times, all indicating cracks in a system defending itself on behalf of the wealthy
All we need now to make the repetition of history complete is having a few Muslims thrown to the lions - wonder if Wembley's fully booked up!!
Jim Carroll

---

13 Dec 15 - 01:05 PM (#3758130)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: GUEST,Musket

Seems like fair comment to me. I don't agree with Jim on many subjects, especially in the arena this website promotes, but be fair Keith, he's got you weighed up.

🐮💩

---

06 Jan 16 - 03:55 PM (#3763300)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: EBarnacle

Getting back to the original posting, The Atlantic [magazine] has an article in the January/February, 2016 entitled "Churchill in Debt." This a review of the book, "No more champagne: Churchill and his money" by David Lough, Picador Press.
It seems that the reason he did not pay his debts to tradesmen and others was that he could not. He constantly lived far beyond his and was regularly bailed out by his friends to keep him from the embarrassment of bankruptcy. He repaid them handsomely when he was in office. He only became financially secure, nay wealthy, after he left office and became a popular historian. He started life comfortably, blew it all and died rich.

---

06 Jan 16 - 04:17 PM (#3763301)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Wesley S

Thank GOD we revived this thread. I was deeply concerned about Winston Churchill's debts and what happened. Will justice ever be served?? With over 200 posts will we EVER come to a consensus on this earth shattering matter?? Let's watch and see........

---

06 Jan 16 - 05:46 PM (#3763321)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Thompson

Whoever said religion is the opium of the people was only half right; in fact, it's war. Both the first and the second world war - and all wars - were about profit. Before the second world war the upper classes all across Europe were big fans of Hitler, though some thought he was regrettably a bit too firm with the Jews.
If you don't believe me, look at the editorials in March 1933 when Hitler swept into power.

---

06 Jan 16 - 08:10 PM (#3763341)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: Jim Carroll

"Both the first and the second world war - and all wars - were about profit"
Just about says it all for me
Jim Carroll

---

26 May 16 - 06:53 PM (#3792338)
Subject: RE: BS: Winston Churchill, thieving cheapskate
From: keberoxu

This thread has a mention of "No More Champagne," the David Lough book about Churchill. I just this moment finished reading a review of it in the book-review section of the New York Times. This review agrees with the review cited in the Atlantic.

The review made the point that there is a great quantity of books about Churchill, but no one writer/biographer has gotten the entire story about the person, the career, and the consequences: the reviewer maintains that THE definitive Churchill biography has yet to be written.

The review was certainly edifying with its summary of the debt and the spending. The excesses of fallen empires, excesses both material and moral, come to mind. The name of the author of the storied "History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" escaped me when I started data-entering this sentence, now my mind tells me it is Gibbon? Maybe that is what is needed to take on the Churchill biography challenge.

---