Winston Churchill’s Darkest Hour?

By 1919, Churchill already had blood all over his hands. “We are enforcing the blockade with rigour,” he said, “and Germany is very near starvation.” When the dust settled, Churchill ended up slaughtering almost 90,000 German civilians. He also was responsible for the deaths of more than a million Indians.

28
43301

…by Jonas E. Alexis

Hollywood still hasn’t come to grip with Winston Churchill and his plan to exterminate German civilians. In the recent movie Darkest Hour, they portray Churchill as a man of the people. Church did everything he could to avoid a bloody war with Germany, Darkest Hour tells us, and he even asked the average person about their opinions on how to avoid the looming war with Hitler.

As we shall see, this is complete baloney. But that’s not all. Gary Oldman, who stars as Winston Churchill in the biopic, made even more stupid statements when he declared that “Churchill was the man who saved the world. That’s what I hope people will take away: To see the film and realize, ‘Oh boy we came very close to a different way of living.’”[1]

When Oldman was asked the question, “What do you want audiences to talk away from the film?,” he responded: “It highlights the fortitude and resilience and the humanity of its leader, Winston Churchill. We screened the movie, and I could forgive the Americans for not knowing the history, but I was amazed that Britons didn’t really know it either.”[2]

If you like a good laugh, then consider this. When Oldman was again asked, “What did you learn about Churchill while shooting the film?,” he said:

“His stock rose considerably. I realize that this was a man, he was incomparable. I don’t know if you could equate him or contrast him with other leaders. I think perhaps he’s there up with Washington and Lincoln. The achievements…He was a superman. An indispensable figure.”[3]

The humanity of Winston Churchill? Did Oldman have a different Churchill in mind when he said this? Did he actually know Churchill’s track record even during World War I? What Darkest Hour teaches us is simply this: Gone is the true history of Winston Churchill—all that is left is Hollywood’s deliberately distorted and dubious account of the man who did not hesitate to kill multiplied thousands of civilians to please his bosses.

Even the Irish Independent had this to say back in 2012: “Everything people believed about Hitler’s intentions toward Britain was a myth created by Churchill.” For example, Churchill perpetuated the categorical lie that Hitler desired to invade Britain in 1940, but it was a total fabrication.

On the contrary, Hitler “admired the British Empire,” and that he “offered terms that did not involve German control of Britain. Churchill refused to allow these terms to be read to the cabinet, and they remain prudently concealed under the 100-year rule.”[4] The same newspaper rightly reported:

“Instead, Churchill’s determination to keep Britain at war turned what had been merely a continental defeat of its army into the enduring myth that in 1940, Britain faced a war for national survival.

“But the German naval leader, Raeder, had repeatedly forbidden his staff from planning an invasion of Britain. And far from wanting to continue the war, in June 1940, Hitler ordered 20pc of his army to be demobilised, in order to get the German economy going again.

“The ‘invasion fleet’ that the Nazis began to assemble that summer was no more capable of invading Britain than it was Hawaii. It was war by illusion: its purpose was to get the British to the negotiating table.”[5]

Perhaps the bigger issue is that Churchill concocted deliberate lies about Hitler because he was working for the Powers That Be. In fact, right after his father’s death, Churchill became Ernest “Cassel’s creature,” one of the most “influential Jewish moneylenders” then.[6] Once that happened, Churchill began to hate the Germans. In the process, he starved the German civilians to death and bragged about it. This is Churchill at his best:

“Starve the whole population—men, women and children, old and young, wounded and sound—into submission.”[7]


Churchill got his wish:

“In December 1918 the German Board of Public Health claimed that 763,000 Germans had died because of the blockade. In April 1919 Dr. Marx Rubner claimed that another 100,000 Germans who died between April and the signing of the Treaty of Versailles in July, so the number of Germans who died from Winston Churchill’s starvation blockade most probably approximates the number of Irish who died during the Great Famine.”[8]

Gary Oldman should have told his interviewer that Churchill ended up joining the greatest mass murderer (Stalin) in the twentieth century in order to defeat Hitler. In 2013, popular historian Max Hastings wrote in the Daily Mail that Churchill did summon “bold lies to wage war,” but those lies were good because “Churchill did it to save Britain…”[9]

Churchill: The Mass-Murdering Clown

Destroyer of nation and people.

Churchill was an avowed social Darwinist and flaming Zionist at the same time.[10] Churchill became Prime Minister in 1940. During his speech, he unequivocally declared:

“You ask, what is our policy? I will say: it is to wage war, by sea, land, and air, with all our might…”[11]

Here once again we see the incestuous relationship (or competition) between the Darwinian ideology and Jewish subversive movements. Both Zionism and Darwinism support the promiscuous idea that wars will bring about the greatest good—at the expense of the weak and needy. Wars, according to Darwin, is inevitable because the “higher animals” need to wipe out the “lower” ones.

The Malthusian doctrine, said Darwin, could be applied “with manifold force to the whole animal and vegetable kingdoms.”[12] In that sense, “the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life,” which incidentally is the subtitle of Darwin’s On the Origin of Species, is of primary importance.

Darwin, in a covert and pernicious way, subverted the moral order and replaced it with the “favoured races.” It was no coincidence that colonial empires were viewed in a Darwinian terminology. As one historian puts it,

“Contemporaries explained this rush for land in terms of Darwin’s evolutionary theories. The fittest and most adaptable of the great powers would survive and grow stronger at the expense of the enfeebled…As Churchill observed in 1899, ‘the position of England among the nations is the position of a dog with a bone in the midst of a hungry pack.’”[13]

At one point, Churchill said: “I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion.”[14] Toye writes that Churchill “gave his views on the Indian famine of 1873-4, claiming that Viceroy had been right to refuse demands that he prohibit grain exports.”[15] Another observer writes that

“Churchill had corroborated Malthus’s perspective, writing of an 1898 Indian plague: ‘a philosopher may watch unmoved the destruction of some of those superfluous millions, whose life must of necessity be destitute of pleasure.’”[16]

Churchill said elsewhere:

“I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilized tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum.”[17]

Darwin used similar words to describe “uncivilized men.”[18] In fact, Darwin constantly used phrases such as “higher animals” to describe how the powerful would eliminate the weak. Following Darwin’s ideology, Churchill declared,

“I do not admit for instance that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America, or the black people of Australia. I do not admit a wrong has been to those people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher grade race or… a more worldly wise race…has come in and taken their place.”[19]

When people were objecting to his views about poisoned gas, Churchill said that they were being too squeamish, adding that

“the objections of the India Office to the use of gas against natives are unreasonable. Gas is a merciful weapon than [the] high explosive shell, and compels an enemy to accept a decision with less loss of life than any other agency of war….Why is it not fair for a British artilleryman to fire a shell which makes the said native sneeze? It is really too silly.”[20]

It got even better: “when an aide pointed out that Tito intended to transform Yugoslavia into a Communist dictatorship on the Soviet model,” Churchill responded by saying, “Do you intend to live there?”[21]

Churchill, as should be evident by now, has a history of liquidating civilians mercilessly. He said way back in 1915, right after World War I broke out:

“I know this war is smashing and shattering the lives of thousands every moment—and yet—I cannot help it—I love every second I live.”[22]

Churchill continued, “The twin roots of all our evils, Nazi Germany and Prussian militarism, must be extirpated. Until this is achieved, there are no sacrifices we will not make and no lengths in violence to which we will not go.”[23]

When Stalin was sending people by the millions to the Bolshevik slaughter house, Churchill thought it was a great idea. He said:

“Why are we making a fuss about the Russian deportations in Rumania of Saxons [Germans] and others?…I cannot see the Russians are wrong in making 100 or 150 thousand of these people work their passage….I cannot myself consider that it is wrong of the Russians to take Rumanians of any origin they like to work in the Russian coal-fields.”[24]

Again, after the destruction of Dresden, Churchill tried very hard to wash his hands off. He said: “I cannot recall anything about it [Dresden]. I thought the Americans did it.”[25] When all is said and done, it was pretty clear to perceptive observers and historians that Churchill and Roosevelt intended to destroy Germany.

By 1919, Churchill already had blood all over his hands. “We are enforcing the blockade with rigour,” he said, “and Germany is very near starvation.”[26] When the dust settled, Churchill ended up slaughtering almost 90,000 German civilians. He also was responsible for the deaths of more than a million Indians.

“Britain’s wartime prime minister did not discuss in his six-volume account the 1943 famine in the eastern Indian province of Bengal, which killed 1.5 million people by the official estimate and 3 million by most others.

“One primary cause of the famine was the extent to which Churchill and his advisers chose to use resources of India to wage a war against Germany and Japan, causing scarcity and inflation within the colony.”[27]

This is the man that Hollywood, the entire Holocaust establishment, the Neoconservative movement, and outlets like the Rolling Stone revere. The Rolling Stone, the BBC, and the Guardian actually hope that Oldman will receive an Oscar for his performance as Churchill in the Darkest Hour.[28]

In a review of the film, A. O. Scott of the New York Times declares that Churchill “enjoys the push and pull of politics, the intellectual labor of problem-solving and the daily adventure of being himself.”[29] We are also told that ““Darkest Hour” is proud of its hero, proud of itself and proud to have come down on the right side of history nearly 80 years after the fact. It wants you to share that pride, and to claim a share of it.”[30]

What is missing in these flattering and sweeping pronouncements is that the average person never gets to know who Churchill really was: was a mass-murdering clown whose god was Mammon and whose diabolical enterprise left Germany and India in ruin.

Churchill was willing to steal, kill, and destroy for the people who actually put him in power. Hollywood and the Neoconservatives have been deliberately ignoring or dismissing the historical accounts on Churchill in order to maintain the historically incoherent view that Churchill was “fighting against international terrorism and tyranny.”[31] What these people end up saying is that German civilians and Indians were incontrovertibly terrorists.


  • [1] Helena Andrews-Dyer, “Gary Oldman on Winston Churchill: ‘He was a superman,’” Washington Post, November 21, 2017.
  • [2] Ibid.
  • [3] Ibid.
  • [4] Kevin Myers, “Everything people believed about Hitler’s intentions toward Britain was a myth created by Churchill,” Irish Independent, June 19, 2012.
  • [5] Ibid.
  • [6] E. Michael Jones, Barren Metal: A History of Capitalism as the Conflict Between Labor and Usury (South Bend: Fidelity Press, 2014), 1201-1202.
  • [7] Ibid., 1211.
  • [8] Ibid.
  • [9]  Max Hastings “Yes, they both used lies to wage war. But Churchill did it to save Britain – Blair did it to save himself,” Daily Mail, July 2, 2013.
  • [10] See for example Ralph Raico, Great Wars & Great Leaders (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2010), 59; Mukerjee, Churchill’s Secret War, 16-17; Richard Toye, Churchill’s Empire: The World That Made Him and the World He Made (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2010), 28.
  • [11] Winston Churchill, The Quotable Churchill (Philadelphia: Running Press Publishers, 2013), 163-164.
  • [12] Quoted in Madhusree Mukerjee, Churchill’s Secret War: The British Empire and the Ravaging of India During World War II (New York: Basic Books, 2010), 204.
  • [13] Lawrence James, Churchill and Empire: A Portrait of an Imperialist (New York: Pegasus Books, 2014), 28.
  • [14] Quoted in Mukerjee, Churchill’s Secret War, 78.
  • [15] Toye, Churchill’s Empire, 30.
  • [16] Mukerjee, Churchill’s Secret War, 204.
  • [17] Quoted in Warren Dockter, Churchill and the Islamic World (New York & London: I. B. Tauris & Co., 2015), 113.
  • [18] Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1896), 1: 168.
  • [19] Dockter, Churchill and the Islamic World, 178; Gilbert, Churchill and the Jews, 120; Addison, Churchill, 137.
  • [20] Quoted in Giles Milton, Russian Roulette: How British Spies Thwarted Lenin’s Global Plot (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 2013), 243.
  • [21] Raico, Great Wars & Great Leaders, 85.
  • [22] Quoted in ibid., Great Wars & Great Leaders, 101.
  • [23] Ibid.
  • [24] Raico, Great Wars & Great Leaders, 95.
  • [25] Ibid., 101.
  • [26] Ibid., 95.
  • [27] Murkerjee, Churchill’s Secret War, ix.
  • [28] Peter Travers, “‘Darkest Hour’ Review: Gary Oldman Gives Us a Fearsome, Oscar-Worthy Churchill,” Rolling Stone, November 21, 2017; Nicholas Barber, “Film Review: Darkest Hour,” BBC, November 21, 2017; Peter Bradshaw, “Darkest Hour review – Gary Oldman is a tremendous Winston Churchill in high-octane drama,” Guardian, September 14, 2017.
  • [29] A. O. Scott, “Review: ‘Darkest Hour,’ or the Great Man Theory of History (and Acting),” NY Times, November 21, 2017.
  • [30] Ibid.
  • [31] Joseph Laconte, “Winston Churchill’s July 4 Message to America,” Weekly Standard, July 3, 2010.

28 COMMENTS

  1. I picked up my book from the local library yesterday and will begin the read this morning.
    Should be a very interesting read.
    Churchill, Hitler and the Unecessary War by Pat Buchanan
    I noticed the library tag was placed directly over Hitler.
    I am now a marked man. The DHS has my name on its books for arrest as an extremist threat. The library no doubted reported my rental of this book to the Kommisars at the DHS.
    I must expect heavy boots to knock the door down as they come to arrest me.
    I will be waiting.

    • Watch out for Arab looking guys with a back pack trying to sell you JHW’s watchtower. It will be MI6 in disguise coming after you. It is out of DHS jurisdiction because they pretend to be the good guys.

  2. Excellent and timely article. Thanks.

    Churchill was also responsible for turning the full propaganda power of the state, including the newly-created BBC, against the miners leading the British General Strike of 1926. The British state cunningly gave the impression that the BBC was independent of government and then after defeating the workers, in 1927 changed the British Broadcasting Company by Royal Charter to the wholly-controlled British Broadcasting Corporation.

    The rest, as the cliche goes, is fake history.

  3. Excellent article as usual Jonas.
    It has reached the point where I will no longer watch Hollywood’s “Historical” movies.
    I am not going to pay for being propagandized.
    Fortunately I had a few history teachers who gave us the real version of events – like Churchill’s use of poison gas in Iraq, along with Roosevelt’s foreknowledge of the Pearl Harbor attack which brought the US in to WW2.
    The Australians have a saying: “There will always be an England – as long as there are Australians there to die for her.”
    The song Harry Haller is refering to is most likely “And The Band Played Waltzing Matilda” (1971)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_the_Band_Played_Waltzing_Matilda
    No – the Aussies (and Kiwis) haven’t forgotten.

    • Haven’t they???? A good example was John Howard as PM who could not wait to have his “Australian troops” fighting against “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq on behalf of humanity and the unholy lying coalition US & UK. “There will always be an England – as long as there are Australians there to die for her.” England has invited USA and Israel and the Aussies forces still love their wars so they can’t wait to get involved. Though unfortunately the real war Australians are involved begins after returning home with depression on the road to suicide after their unjust actions against humanity. Maybe it is then that the memory comes back.

    • I listened to the Pogues version of the song on youtube with a photo gallery of the fight at Galipoli.Advertising for a Churchill Hollywood movie then popped up, go figure. The song, however, was very well stated and thank you for the mention. It was worth a listen.

  4. Jonas, it is impossible to find a kind word to say about Churchill! The facts are … the fact is, you can’t. Gordon Duff’s fascinating series of videos here on VT several weeks ago recalled a talk given by David Irving in Canada which covered the history of this ‘drunken vainglorious lout’ to the on-set of nausea. The movie will be devoid of one more fact against the lies of Hollywood where it should have a reference to his present surroundings … dark, flaming pits of fire, screams and groans through twenty-three hours of hot pokers, searing hot pincers tearing at his bloated flesh and sledge hammers raining down on every bone in his poisoned corpse … and one hour of visual re-enactment of his annihilation of millions. Somewhat similar to what the Zionist/NeoCon Satanists can look forward to, who continue to crank up the numbers of murdered innocents. Your days of fun are numbered … eternity awaits its damned … a hideous inferno of suffering.

  5. Different way of living for Britain would be unacceptable, different meaning equal purchase parity and rights like the rest of the world mainland. Equality is something that British politics have been studiously thoroughly avoiding for centuries, at any cost of human lives. Churchill is only one rosebud in such sorry state of affairs. I have been following since the early days of John Major, and I have never seen anything like it, the official London, a watchful madhouse of world politics. And may god save the queen from the ghosts of slaughtered and executed souls worldwide.

    • Especially as the monarch has personally signed execution papers for many poor souls from Jamaica and other colonies, even after the death penalty was scrapped in the UK.

      Imcidently, I read that the so-called Queen and spouse have killed more wild animals with guns than any other elite deviants. So they really are leading merchamts of death. A “God” that saves that kind of monster would be better described as a “Devil”.

  6. Sooner or later the public will learn real truth about this beast and Churchill will no longer be revered as a great statesman, instead as a horrible, self serving racist, a drunkard, a degenerate, a war monger, a zionist tool and the idiot he always was.
    I have Pat Buchanon’s book,” Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War.” on order from the local library. Can’t wait ti read it.
    Great statesman indeed. What a joke.
    Attempted to defraud people as well.
    Should have been tossed in prison instead.

    • Rewriting history is an old trick. And it works, alas… I’d like to read this book, too. But better in Russian language, JohnZ. In my turn i hope there at least one clever western brain will appear and do a good work to write a True info about our coward, traitor and liar juda Solzhenitsin with his science fiction novel Arhipelag Gulag, whos name enables Russian people to spit and curse his person.
      Those who spread lie and change the facts must be revealed and exposed to the society.

    • Unfortunately, young generation watches Hollywood fictions and accept it. Strong manipulation.
      Fortunately, thanks to internet we may live on different continents and discuss the history, the modern news and exchange the viewpoints. This is our strong weapon.
      But this magic stick has two points. The good and the bad one.

    • In modern Russia it also happens when new-brand liberal movie-makers (in my country liberal is the sinonim of 5th column of traitors) try to shoot movies with alternative history. And it causes resonance in society, because many people who saw WW2 with their own eyes are still living and reject this modern lie in the movies.

  7. Good article, Jonas. Not so many years have passed since those times, but someone is in a hurry to re-write the history. Many people in Russia do not know that Hitler would be not Hitler if there were no great financial help from Rotschilds, Rockfellers and Morgan. They needed to create Hitler, ’cause USSR since 1927 to 1933 during five years had around 4500 big factories and plants built. Economical progress of Stalin’s pyatiletka was a shock for USA in crisis. But Hitler once decided to become independent from his sponsors. The finish we know. And Churchil was a carnivore and never felt sorry for his words and deeds.

  8. When Germany won the first world war in 1916, and offered Britain a peace plan, ‘Lets go back to where we where before the war started’. Britain had to seriously consider the offer, she had only a weeks worth of food left, and no ammunition for her soldiers. But then international jewry found out about the peace initiated by Germany, and promised to bring in the US as long as Palestine was handed over to these zionist creatures.
    As Napoleon once stated,”Only the winners write history”, and the jews in hollywood are still writing history.

    • Not only in Hollywood frog, they are the international education ministry of the western world since WW2 and have cast a spell against truth in general.

    • I absolutely totally agree with you eduardo, first was the MSM, then the movie business,then infiltrate every fa-cite of Govt, from the politicians to secrete intel services.
      As for ANZAC day, although a 9 year x serviceman, I refuse to march, celebrate nor wear a poppy.

  9. The Churchill’s have a long history of self interest. I read his ancestor the Duke or Marlborough was in the pay of Jews from Holland to aid in the removal of James II from the British throne and replace him with William of Orange. Who handed over the bank of England to the Jewish bankers and enslaved the UK to debt bondage ever since. Winnie himself, if half of what the revisionist historians say was also in the pay of the Jew’s and the Czech’s up to the start of WW2. He then did everything he could to get the UK into a war where we lost the Empire , all our Gold reserves , all our interests in the USA and ended up in debt to the USA till 2010. However it’s his Jewish links which keeps his reputation intact. It just shows the power these evil people have that they can even keep Churchill’s failures from damaging his reputation to much.

    • Is it true the Winston is really the bastard son of lady Churchill and another man? I also read that “Lady” Churchill was a high priced prostitute for those in the government, that is when the members of parliament weren’t engaged in buggering little boys.

  10. If Kurdistan ever becomes a state, they should put up a monument to Churchill for being the first to order the use of aircraft to drop poison gas bombs on civilians.

  11. In WW1 Churchill was First Lord of the Admiralty during the planning of the Landings at Galipoli at the entrance to the Black Sea. Astle the Prime Minister was writing a letter to his mistress and taking only peripheral part in proceedings. When the actual landings took place, Churchill ordered his Battleshjips to ineffectually bombard the shore to no effect and lost the element of suprise. Later the New Zealand and Australian Divisions were put ashore in the wrong place at the base of steep cliffs. Horrendous casualties and to this day in New Zealand and Australia, the day of commeration for Dead Soldiers is 25 April to remember that tragic day in 1915 with very long casualty lists that people Down Under have never forgotten.

    • The Australians have not forgotten how many died in Galipoli but have no recollection at all that they were just used as canon fodder by the Brits.

    • What is the connection with the song Waltzing Matilda and all those Soldiers getting slaughtered at Galipoli. Perhaps the song was just popular with the Troops and the Aussie populace at the time?

Comments are closed.