Thursday, 2 July 2015

BBC defies Churchill over 'Chancellor' Hitler

A call by the Prime Minister, the Rt Hon Winston Churchill MP, to the BBC to stop calling the German enemy Chancellor Herr Hitler and awarding his cronies their full titles, such as Reichsmarshall Goering and Reichsminister Bormann, has been rejected by the BBC on the grounds that the organisation is required to be impartial. The BBC also rejected on the same grounds a call to refer to the German governing party as 'Nazis' instead of using their full NSDAP designation. 

The Chairman of the BBC said yesterday "Irrespective of the fact that Britain is at war with Germany, the BBC has a duty of impartiality and must stick to the titles and styles preferred by the NSDAP political leadership of the Third Reich. We cannot simply abandon our neutrality to support the UK - this would be biased"

The BBC is understood to have prepared contingency plans in the event of a German invasion of Britain that would hand over the country's entire broadcasting infrastructure intact to the invaders. "To deny the new NSDAP Gauleiter of the British Isles the use of our broadcasting equipment would not be impartial" said a BBC spokesman yesterday.

[NB The BBC's decision to continue referring to ISIS as Islamic State is actually the right one - but made for all the wrong reasons]


Edward Spalton said...

The BBC kept Churchill off the air whilst he was opposing the doomed policy of Apeasement.
Having read the memoir by Sir Nevile Henderson, ambassador to Berlin, one realises that it was not so much the policy itself which was wrong but the complete blindness to the stated aims of Hitler which were known and non negotiable. There had been frequent frontier adjustments in Central Europe before and the British government was subject to public opinion which was just not ready for war. I would compare their blindness to the reality of Nazism to today's unwillingness to face up to the reality of the non negotiable demands of Islam.

Churchill, of course, was no infallible fount of deep wisdom. In the Twenties he was highly complimentary to Mussolini and his opposition to Indian self rule was pig-headed in the extreme. But in Hitler, he recognised a wrong 'un when he saw one and tried to sound the alarm against the settled political correctness of the day.

One only has to see the film clips of the deliriously happy crowds outside Buckingham palace after Munich to realise what he was up,against. The BBC and The Times played a huge part in manipulating public opinion in favour of Apoeasement.

Anonymous said...

A few idle minutes, spent perusing its (bbc) output and any objective observer would immediately pick up the rather unsubtle vibe. Tune in to see, the 'ad's' for the latest Al-beeb propaganda offering concerning Gaza, to know which side the pro Araby supporting luvvie broadcasting house favour - "favour" prostrated submission might be a preferable phrase.

Fuck off to the champagne Socialists and arab arse kissers in the bbc.


In what was clearly a reconoitred and planned attack on a specific Tunisian hotel which caters for almost exclusively - its BRITISH CLIENTELE.


The yellow bastards, at every opportunity cede ground to Daesh and thus, the nation is yet again abandoned by the back-scuttlers and slime covered scum suckers sometimes named - the UK government.

Lysistrata said...

@Edward Spalton
What a delight to read your sane and historically accurate comment. Thank you.

right_writes said...

Many years ago... mid to late 80's, I had a personal policy of ensuring that I did not read, hear or see any media output from any source that purported to be related to current affairs... And I was, on the whole a happy bunny...

Gradually bit by bit, I was enticed back to reading, hearing and seeing... Possibly this was as a result of becoming interested in the activities of the new whippersnappers on the political scene known as UKIP. It became an obsession, particularly during the lead up to the recent general election, I was constantly finding myself offended or outraged at the latest media insult... I was very angry indeed.

However, also during the lead up to this debacle and the "internal rows" that were excitedly being reported following the party's successful, but relatively fruitless campaign, I was being influenced by a chap, who was obsessed by "renewables"... (incidentally those rows are virtually non-existant)...

I was mostly hostile to his words, since I could only visualise his ideas in relation to the current model for energy provision by "the utilities" (aka government)... But a couple of things that he said suddenly (and without his knowledge) caused me to have a Damascus moment.

Firstly, I realised that the implications of what he was saying about renewables, was that it is entirely possible for many people (in many different circumstances) to become much less, and eventually independent of these agencies... It is entirely conceivable that most people, even poor people who are subsidised in the wrong ways, to contact their energy supplier and tell them to come and take their meter(s) away, since they were now self sufficient.

Secondly, during conversation, when I mentioned to him that I was a UKIP supporter, he said that he had heard of them, but did not know what they were or what they stood for... Since he only read, listened or saw reported matters relating to current affairs, by accident, and that he made a point of not taking what was being said on board, and that he had made this a guiding principle back in the late 90's... He was blissfully ignorant of "current affairs".

I remembered that I had done this in the 1980's and how much less angry I had been. I immediately decided to rekindle that policy...

I stopped watching television (the contraption, as Peter Simple used to call it), and I started listening to jazz and classical music via the phone in the car... No more radio, and I have removed all of the Breitbart, Telegraph, Guardian, Spectator, Express etc. feeds from my "Feedly" application... I have also removed all of the "product, affiliate sales" feeds from the same thing (thinking Steve Huff, Jamie Oliver, hifi related stuff) ...

I have never been happier...

I have just read this piece by Radders, it is one of the few remaining feeds, since he is nothing if not original, and rarely refers to his sources, apparently expecting us to already be aware? It is the first time that I have looked at my Feedly feed for about three weeks, and I am unlikely to read much more...

I prefer blissful ignorance...

As Raedwald says in the above piece...

Nothing much changes under the sun, he is still a conservative (small c), and I am still a liberal (large C), and we are still under constant attack by the forces of evil in the media.

Happy days.

Anonymous said...

I do wish Cameron would stop referring to Islam as a 'Religion of Peace' when there is no evidence to support that claim and each day produces new evidence that he is wrong.

Edward Spalton said...

Lysistrata - thank you so much for your delightful compliment which has quite made my morning.

Right-writes - Another Peter Simple fan! How I wish the Way of the World column could be resurrected. The trouble is that the way things have developed has exceeded his parody. The Right Reverend Dr Spaceley Trellis and his live-in partner the Rev Mantissa Shout are quite eclipsed by today's clerics of the C of E.

I have sometimes thought that the style and sympathies of mine host of this blog might have the potential to succeed to the Way of the World column. I stopped taking the Telegraph after its eclipse and the death of the wonderfully acerbic Auberon Waugh. The Telegraph is badly in need of new blood and old values. Why not propose yourself, Radders, as their saviour?

right_writes said...

Dear Mr. Spalton, I agree with your comments about Mr. Raedwald, unfortunately the closest that the Barclay Twins will ever come to Peter Simple, is in their uncanny resemblance to Janet and John Nodule, "the traffic jam fans" not so much in their pursuit of, and connivance with the development of congestion everywhere... but rather in their devotion to the machinations of the European Union, just so long as it doesn't interfere with the establishment of their "kingdom" on Sark....

...oh, hang on a minu

Anonymous said...

Raedwald said at 5:55

'The BBC also rejected on the same grounds a call to refer to the German governing party as 'Nazis' instead of using their full NSDAP designation.'

So what were we fighting?

“The enemy is the German Reich and not Nazism, and those who still haven’t understood this, haven’t understood anything.” - Churchill’s chief counsellor Robert Lord Vansittart (as said to foreign minister Lord Halifax, September 1940)

.. I see, so it wasn't about politics then?

“Not the political doctrine of Hitler has hurled us into this war. The reason was the success of his increase in building a new economy. The roots of war were envy, greed and fear.” - Major General J.F.C. Fuller, English historian.

.. thanks for that. Is there anything more?

“The war wasn’t only about abolishing fascism, but to conquer sales markets. We could have, if we had intended so, prevented this war from breaking out without doing one shot, but we didn’t want to.” - Winston Churchill to Truman (Fultun, USA March 1946)

.. ah money, that explains alot.

"We made a monster, a devil out of Hitler. Therefore we couldn’t disavow it after the war. After all, we mobilized the masses against the devil himself. So we were forced to play our part in this diabolic scenario after the war. In no way we could have pointed out to our people that the war only was an economic preventive measure.” - US foreign minister James Baker (1992)



Bill Quango MP said...

Edward Spalton : You have missed what came next. The people were happy over Munich. Neville's popularity soared. As a result of the Munich crisis, the children evacuation order was almost given in 1938.People were talking about it. Shelters and sandbags were being put up. Bombers were expected i the skies at any moment. So when war was averted, the relief was real.
Who could want another WW1 ?

However, once it became clear that war had not been averted the popularity of Chamberlain dropped and never recovered. A new, grimmer mood took hold across most of the UK. Hitler was going to have to be dealt with. War was going to have to be fought. It wasn't with the WW1 enjoyment that men signed up. More with a determination to get it over with.

That was the mood that Churchill inherited. A more realistic appraisal of the world situation.

None of which excuses appeasement. A failure of a policy that only increased the liklihood of war.

Bill Quango MP said...

“The war wasn’t only about abolishing fascism, but to conquer sales markets. We could have, if we had intended so, prevented this war from breaking out without doing one shot, but we didn’t want to.” - Winston Churchill to Truman (Fultun, USA March 1946)

You do know that this is a made up quote? Where is the source?

And does this sound like Winston? The war was to conquer "sales markets"?
The master of the English language?

Be like Boris standing for Mayor on a platform of "Improving the sidewalks of London whilst ensuring you citizens get the congressman you deserve."

Edward Spalton said...

Dear Mr Quango,

That is an era which I quite often discussed with my father who was around at the time.
We should not forget that the Communist party and fellow travellers in the shop stewards' movement regarded the war against Germany as an "imperialist war" until the attack on Russia in 1941. All we hear about are the (mostly) upper class people who were sympathetic to the Nazis but the comrades were issuing instructions to obstruct war production and there were even strikes in aircraft factories during the Battle of Britain whilst Soviet raw materials were rolling into Germany.

Dad also remarked that the Labour party opposed rearmament in the early Thirties for fear that the Soviet Union would be the target. The one time when Hitler could have been relatively easily overthrown was after the reoccupation of the Rhineland- a breach of the Versailles treaty but the French, who were most affected, didn't have the nerve to intervene so Britain certainly wouldn't. The German generals were in a panic but Hitler gauged the mood of the democracies better than they. Basically the real thing wrong with Appeasement was that
it was Hitler they were trying to appease!

James Higham said...

Required to be impartial. Hmmm.

Anonymous said...

Bill Quango said @ 18:24

'You do know that this is a made up quote?

No I don't. I this one?

“Germany’s unforgivable crime before WW2 was its attempt to loosen its economy out of the world trade system and to build up an independent exchange system from which the world-finance couldn’t profit anymore.. We butchered the wrong pig.” - Winston Churchill (The Second World War - Bern, 1960)


Bill Quango MP said...


A search of the quote on the internet reveals the following.

1) It is a favourite of the conspiracy crowd, the Illuminati appear to
he the preferred bad guys in this case.

2) All the users point back to the one source, the modern reprint
of the Sydney Rogerson book, and usually make it clear they are
referring to the foreword.

The quote is given there without any source. So it is not in the
original book, but a modern piece added to the front.

The writer is apparently David M Pidcock from The Institute For
Rational Economics, it endorses the conspiracy theories for
Pearl Harbor and appears to do the same for the 2001 attacks
on New York amongst other things.

Putting the author name and title into a search engine gives,

Which is the British Islamic Party.

He has apparently translated a book into English that claims
Napoleon converted to Islam and therefore the code
Napoleon is based on Islamic law.

Pidcock is apparently a co-founder and director of the institute.

G. Tingey said...

Bill Quango
No surprise there - ties in with "The Protocols" & other trash.

Oh ... "appeasement" - Chamberlain realised, unlike Baldwin, that Hitler was almost certainly going to start a war (Chamberlain started our re-armament in 1936-7 - too late, but (just not too too late, if you see what I mean) - he was desperately trying to avoid war if possible & if not that, postpone it.
This is often forgotten.
However, by keeping Churchill in the wilderness, he did boith himself & his country a grave dis-service, for which, after Sept 1939, he was not forgiven.