Connect with us

World News

Cambridge University Panel: Winston Churchill A “White Supremacist” Leading Empire “Worse Than The Nazis”

‘Academics’ label Britain’s past ‘morally poorer than the Third Reich’

Published

on

Central Press/Hulton Archive/Getty Images

A Cambridge University panel of academics discussing wartime Prime Minister Winston Churchill’s legacy concluded that the leader who helped defeat Hitler was actually a “white supremacist” and was leading an empire “worse than the Nazis”.

The London Telegraph reports that the inflammatory comments were made during a discussion titled “Racial Consequences of Mr Churchill”.

Ironically, the event was taking place at the Churchill College, named in honour of the former Prime Minister.

Participants decided that Churchill was “the perfect embodiment of white supremacy”, and labelled the British Empire ‘morally poorer than the Third Reich’.

The academics involved agreed that it is a “problematic narrative” that Britain was ‘virtuous’ in comparison to the Nazis.

One academic, Professor Kehinde Andrews, declared “The British Empire far worse than the Nazis and lasted far longer.”

“That’s just a fact.  But if you state something like that it’s like heresy,” Andrews added, claiming that holding Churchill in esteem is part of a process of “lionising dead white men”.

Another panelist, Dr Onyeka Nubia, claimed that Churchill promoted ‘white supremacy’ because he used terms such as “English Speaking Peoples” and “Anglo-Saxon”.

Others argued that Churchill viewed Indian people as animals, and that his policies regarding India led to mass starvation there in the early 1940s.

Another academic, Dr Madhusree Mukerjee, dismissed Britain’s role in the Second World War, stating that “It was the Soviets who defeated the Nazis and the Americans who defeated the Japanese.”

Before the ‘discussion’ at the college took place this week, Andrew Roberts, author of Churchill: Walking with Destiny, warned that the panel taking part lack historical expertise, and that previous claims made by some of them are  “libels” that are “entirely factually incorrect”. 

Defending Churchill, Roberts wrote that “a white supremacist wants bad things to happen to non-whites… Churchill fought to protect the hundreds of millions of non-whites in the Empire.”

“If the Japanese had captured India in WW2  [that] would have led to perhaps tens of millions of deaths if their record elsewhere was comparable,” the author added.

“In his political career [Churchill] fought again and again against slavery and for the rights of non-whites within the British Empire. Churchill was moreover instrumental in destroying the worst racist in history, Adolf Hitler,” Roberts further urged.

The discussion group was chaired by college fellow Prof Priyamvada Gopal,  who last year made headlines for declaring “abolish whiteness”, and stating that “white lives don’t matter”.

After receiving backlash for the comments, Gopal was defended and then promoted by Cambridge University, despite the fact that Twitter removed her original tweet under ‘hate speech’ rules.

Cambridge is one of the Universities named in a recent study by leading education focused think tank Civitas, which found that free speech at the world’s leading universities is being eroded at an alarming rate owing to the rise of “cancel culture”.

This kind of revisionist history being pushed by race baiting activists who have wormed their way into the fabric of Universities is having real world effects, as witnessed by the boxing up of Churchill’s Parliament Square statue, as well as the Cenotaph WWII memorial in London last year during Black Lives Matter led protests.

London Mayor Sadiq Khan also just appointed a ‘task-force’ made up of unelected woke activists and campaigners to determine whether the capital’s statues and landmarks are ‘diverse enough’.

Continue Reading
Comments

World News

Pelosi’s Taiwan Visit Was A “Carefully Planned Provocation” To “Destabilize”: Putin

Published

on

Zero Hedge

Chien Chih-Hung/Office of The President via Getty Images

On Tuesday Russian President Vladimir Putin weighed on on major security issues ranging from the ongoing war in Ukraine to China-US tensions over Taiwan in a televised speech. Speaking before defense officials and regional think tank analysts at the Tenth Moscow Conference on International Security, among the most notable assertion of his is that NATO is moving “further east”.

Within days prior to launching the Feb.24 invasion of Ukraine, he gave what was essentially a war speech emphasizing that urgent military action was needed to prevent NATO’s further expansion into Ukraine. But it seems that in his latest comments Tuesday, he sees the threat of NATO influence at work as far as southeast Asia as well.

In the fresh remarks, Putin continued his prior theme of a turn from unipolar to multi-polar world order, based on the decline of the United States and West. He said as translated in state media

“Western globalist elites are provoking chaos by rekindling old and inciting new conflicts, implementing a policy of so-called containment, while undermining any alternative, sovereign paths of development. Thus, they are desperately trying to preserve the hegemony and power that are slipping out of their grasp, trying to keep countries and peoples in the grip of a neo-colonial order.”

He blasted this Western “hegemony” as what in the end will result in global stagnation. Further he said:

“NATO’s war machine is moving, approaching Russia’s borders closely… Russia has been trying for 30 years to negotiate NATO non-expansion to the east…”

The Russian leader continued, “Any means are used. The United States and its vassals rudely interfere in the internal affairs of sovereign states by organizing provocations, coups d’état and civil wars. Threats, blackmail and pressure are resorted to in a bid to force independent states to submit to their will.”

The Kremlin has long emphasized that the 2014 overthrow of pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych was the real start of hostilities in Ukraine, and that it was fundamentally Washington and its EU allies behind it. The West, however, has rejected this narrative – emphasizing the Maidan events as a spontaneous democratic uprising. 

On expanding East, he said of NATO:

“The so-called collective West is deliberately destroying the European security system, putting together new military alliances. The NATO bloc is expanding East, building up its military infrastructure, deploying missile defense systems and increasing the strike capabilities of its offensive forces.”

In this context he again stressed that just before Russia’s “special operation” in Ukraine, Moscow repeatedly submitted requests for security ‘guarantees’ to NATO, but that this was ignored. He said this is what has damaged European security. He also charged that the West in the end sees the Ukrainian people as “cannon fodder” for its proxy war.

Putin’s defense minister has also of late been stressing the role of the West in planning and executing Ukrainian military actions, also as Crimea has recently come under rare attack…

Interestingly, in the speech he turned his attention to rising China tensions, charging that the US is still trying to add “fuel to the fire” over the Taiwan issue. This echoes precisely Beijing’s own line, as the two countries continue to grow lockstep while under the crosshairs of Washington. He called Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan a “carefully planned provocation”meant to whip up tensions.

China will without doubt applaud Putin’s fierce defense of Beijing’s point of view: 

“The American reckless gamble in relation to Taiwan is not just a visit by an individual irresponsible politician, but part of a purposeful, conscious US strategy to destabilize… the situation in the region and the world, a brazen demonstration of disrespect for the sovereignty of other countries and for its international obligations. We see this as a carefully planned provocation,” Putin said.

This post was originally published at Zero Hedge

Continue Reading

World News

Russia Says It May Sever US Relations If Declared Terrorism Sponsor

Published

on

Zero Hedge

Dennis Grombkowski/Getty Images

A Russian diplomat warned that if his country is declared a state sponsor of terrorism, it could not only harm US-Russo relations but potentially sever them completely. 

On Friday, Alexander Darchiyev, director of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s North American department told the TASS news agency: 

“I would like to mention the legislative initiative currently being discussed in Congress to declare Russia a ‘country sponsor of terrorism.’ If passed, it would mean that Washington would have to cross the point of no return, with the most serious collateral damage to bilateral diplomatic relations, up to their lowering or even breaking them off. The US side has been warned.”

Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) have been leading an effort to pressure the Biden administration into making the terror designation, which would allow new categories of sanctions. The are only four designated countries today: Cuba, North Korea, Iran and Syria. 

On July 28, the Senate passed a non-binding resolution calling on Secretary of State Antony Blinken to designate the Russian Federation as a state sponsor of terrorism. At the time, Graham said this about a potential designation:

“It means that doing business with Russia with that designation gets to be exceedingly hard – it has secondary effect sanctions, it would limit dual export items, and more importantly it would waive sovereign immunity when it came to suing Russia in U.S. courts. This designation would be a nightmare for Russia.”

Blinken, however, has said a terror designation wouldn’t change things much: “The costs that have been imposed on Russia by us and by other countries are absolutely in line with the consequences that would follow from designation as a state sponsor of terrorism.”

On Thursday, the Latvian parliament made its own terror-sponsor designation of Russia. “Latvia recognizes Russia’s actions in Ukraine as targeted genocide against the Ukrainian people,” declared the legislature’s resolution.  

“A timely move,” tweeted Ukraine foreign minister Dmytro Kuleba. “Russia has long deserved this status with its actions in Ukraine and beyond. Ukraine encourages other states and organizations to follow suit.”  

As we wrote in June, “the U.S. government’s application of terrorist designations has been impulsively disingenuous to the point that it saps the label of any meaning apart from the financial consequences. In practice, terror designations are just another means of bludgeoning countries that are out of favor with the U.S. government.”

Designating Russia a state sponsor of terror over a conventional military invasion would represent just the latest bastardization of the term. Indeed, if the terror label were attached to every invasion that’s accompanied by alleged war crimes, the U.S. government would have to designate itself. 

This post was originally published at Zero Hedge

Continue Reading

World News

Watch: Reporter Tells White House Security Coordinator ‘You Gave A Whole Country to Extremists’

“What did you think was going to happen?”

Published

on

Steve Watson

Screenshot

White House Coordinator for Strategic Communications at the National Security Council John Kirby was confronted Tuesday by Fox News correspondent Peter Doocy over the revelation that Al Qaeda has resestablished itself in Afghanistan following the Biden administration’s botched withdrawal from the country, handing it back to Taliban extremists.

Doocy first raised the issue of the administration claiming they knew Al Qaeda has a presence in Afghanistan despite Joe Biden’s claim last year that the terrorist organisation was “gone” from the country.

Kirby responded, “They weren’t playing a major role in operations or resourcing or planning in Afghanistan. But Peter, I know specifically because I was at a different podium a year ago and we talked about the fact that al-Qaida had a presence in Afghanistan, but small and not incredibly powerful or potent. And, I think, again without getting into numbers, we would still assess that to be the case.”

Doocy fired back, “So, we know that the Taliban was harboring the world’s most wanted terrorist. You guys gave a whole country to a bunch of people that are on the FBI Most Wanted List, what did you think was going to happen?”

Kirby responded, “I take issue with the premise that we gave a whole country to terrorist groups.”

“They were harboring the world’s number one terrorist, how is that not giving a country to a terrorist-sympathizing group, if not giving them permission to have terrorists just sit on a balcony?”  Doocy replied, referring to the revelation that Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri was reportedly killed by drone strike while relaxing in Kabul.

“Are we waiting for some spectacular terrorist attack in the U.S. to then say ‘oh, well there’s terrorists in a safe haven in Afghanistan, now we can go get them,’” Doocy further pressed.

Watch:

In an interview the same day, Kirby admitted that Al Qaeda is now using Afghanistan as a “safe haven” again:

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————
Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/ PJW Shop

ALERT! In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here.

Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Also, we urgently need your financial support here. ———————————————————————————————————————

  • Continue Reading

    Trending