Start a thread about the current bloody Sunday findings and I will give you my views.
Am sure their message is very clear in the case we are talking about.
As for gassing anyone, it was war pure and simple.
Remember most of Europe was also flattened including many British cities, with the loss of thousands of lives.
If you want to talk about Churchill gassing Muslims fine....lets also talk about over three thousand people killed on 9/11 then, or the 52 people killed in London eh?
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Should this be allowed anymore?
Sex God
They are inciting hatred period.......as people have already said, if it was a white group protesting outside a Mosque on a Friday afternoon, the police would not just stand by. They would arrest and charge those people with racial hatred.
You really cannot see the difference.....can you?
What? The difference between incitement to racial hatred, incitement to religious hatred, incitement to violence, treason, public order offences, or a bit of a publicity seeking to-do on a perfectly legal demo you mean?
Soldiers are not a racial / religious group, so abusing soldiers cannot possibly constitute a racial / religious hatred type offence, can it? Telling soldiers to 'go to hell', or calling them 'murderers' does not in itself constitute incitement to violence. It's definitely not treason. Before we get bogged down in 'Nick Griffin got arrested for less' type arguments, what arrestable offences do you think these Muslim protesters actually committed, and got away with, that a white person would have been nicked for exactly? :?
Google 'EDL protests outside mosques' Kenty. There's plenty of 'em on the internet. Oddly enough, not all that many arrests?
N x x x ;)
Quote by neilinleeds
They are inciting hatred period.......as people have already said, if it was a white group protesting outside a Mosque on a Friday afternoon, the police would not just stand by. They would arrest and charge those people with racial hatred.
You really cannot see the difference.....can you?
What? The difference between incitement to racial hatred, incitement to religious hatred, incitement to violence, treason, public order offences, or a bit of a publicity seeking to-do on a perfectly legal demo you mean?
Soldiers are not a racial / religious group, so abusing soldiers cannot possibly constitute a racial / religious hatred type offence, can it? Telling soldiers to 'go to hell', or calling them 'murderers' does not in itself constitute incitement to violence. It's definitely not treason. Before we get bogged down in 'Nick Griffin got arrested for less' type arguments, what arrestable offences do you think these Muslim protesters actually committed, and got away with, that a white person would have been nicked for exactly? :?
N x x x ;)
A pointless exercise to even continue with this....For me I know which side I am standing on.
Quote by kentswingers777
Enlighten me then Davey please.
When Churchill was the Secretary for War and Air he stated "I do not understand this sqeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against uncivilised tribes". These uncivilised tribes were the Kurds........the ones where our boys and girls died to protect in modern times.
In the 1920's it was for empire, and that makes my stomache churn. In modern times they died to protect those that could not protect themselves. The modern soldiers I do support but not the empire and Churchills methods.
Dave_Notts
" It has been speculated that the British may have used toxic gas against the Kurds in Mesopotamia, during the Ath Thawra al Iraqiyya al Kubra or Iraqi revolt against the British in 1920, in the period of the British Mandate of Mesopotamia "
I draw you to the words " speculated "and also the word " may ".
Have you any proof he was responsible for killing people outside of war?
I draw you to the words " speculated "and also the word " may ".
Have you any proof he was responsible for killing people outside of war?
Quote by kentswingers777
" It has been speculated that the British may have used toxic gas against the Kurds in Mesopotamia, during the Ath Thawra al Iraqiyya al Kubra or Iraqi revolt against the British in 1920, in the period of the British Mandate of Mesopotamia "
I draw you to the words " speculated "and also the word " may ".
Have you any proof he was responsible for killing people outside of war?
The RAF officer says it all to me "The Arab and Kurd now know what real bombing means in casualties and damage. Within forty-five minutes a full-size village can be practically wiped out and a third of its inhabitants killed or injured". That RAF officer was "Bomber" Harris of WW2 fame
Dave_Notts
Quote by kentswingers777
That does not show Churchill killed anyone.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: As Secretary of War and Air he was the minister in charge. Or did you want me to show you evidence of him pulling the trigger?
This argument is like saying Truman didn't drop the A Bomb....it was the pilot, honest guv.....or was Pol Pot innocent because others pulled the trigger
Dave_Notts
Quote by Dave__Notts
That does not show Churchill killed anyone.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: As Secretary of War and Air he was the minister in charge. Or did you want me to show you evidence of him pulling the trigger?
This argument is like saying Truman didn't drop the A Bomb....it was the pilot, honest guv.....or was Pol Pot innocent because others pulled the trigger
Dave_Notts
Was Churchill PM then?
He was Secreatry of war and air but any decisions ultimately have to be made by the PM.
No different to today really. The PM makes the final decison and that was not Churchill.
I still see no proof that Churchill gave the go ahead to gas anyone, other than a Google link of which there are very few.
Sex God
Gosh, the debate has turned another corner.
I don't think Churchill was the the person responsible for building the empire, but found himself in a time where he had to defend it
He was also unaware of the damage the gas was capable of causing, perhaps badly advised by others, that would not be a first.
"Churchill himself was keen to argue that gas, fired from ground-based guns or dropped from aircraft, would cause *only discomfort or illness, but not death* to dissident tribespeople; but his optimistic view of the effects of gas were mistaken."
I don't think Churchill was the the person responsible for building the empire, but found himself in a time where he had to defend it
He was also unaware of the damage the gas was capable of causing, perhaps badly advised by others, that would not be a first.
"Churchill himself was keen to argue that gas, fired from ground-based guns or dropped from aircraft, would cause *only discomfort or illness, but not death* to dissident tribespeople; but his optimistic view of the effects of gas were mistaken."
Sex God
Quote by Kaznkev
Gosh, the debate has turned another corner.
I don't think Churchill was the the person responsible for building the empire, but found himself in a time where he had to defend it
He was also unaware of the damage the gas was capable of causing, perhaps badly advised by others, that would not be a first.
"Churchill himself was keen to argue that gas, fired from ground-based guns or dropped from aircraft, would cause *only discomfort or illness, but not death* to dissident tribespeople; but his optimistic view of the effects of gas were mistaken."
Tell that to the Irish,or Trades Unionists,the deification of Churchill grows stronger the fewer war veterans we have left,As my Grandad used to say,theres a reason he lost in 45.
I stongly beleive he was instrumental in preventing the above mentioned, from speaking German, Twice
Quote by Kaznkev
Tell that to the Irish,or Trades Unionists,the deification of Churchill grows stronger the fewer war veterans we have left,As my Grandad used to say,theres a reason he lost in 45.
So why was he re-elected seven years later??
Who is voted the best PM of all time....in every poll? Wanna guess?
If the man was so bad he would have gone into the wilderness, but no he became PM again.
You talk about what we did to the Irish, shall I remind YOU what the Irish have done to us in return?
As for Trade Unionists......where's the gas.
Sex God
Quote by Kaznkev
Gosh, the debate has turned another corner.
I don't think Churchill was the the person responsible for building the empire, but found himself in a time where he had to defend it
He was also unaware of the damage the gas was capable of causing, perhaps badly advised by others, that would not be a first.
"Churchill himself was keen to argue that gas, fired from ground-based guns or dropped from aircraft, would cause *only discomfort or illness, but not death* to dissident tribespeople; but his optimistic view of the effects of gas were mistaken."
Tell that to the Irish,or Trades Unionists,the deification of Churchill grows stronger the fewer war veterans we have left,As my Grandad used to say,theres a reason he lost in 45.
I stongly beleive he was instrumental in preventing the above mentioned, from speaking German, Twice
Important yes,instrumental,i think the 25 million Russians who died were instrumental in defeating fascism tho.
11%of serving soldiers voted conservative in 45,Churchill was a great Prime Minister but lets not rewrite history because we want a good story.
You say potato I say patato
Important regards the the whole world, instramental regards the UK
Quote by flower411
Oh blimey !!! Let`s all be honest .....what we needed when the Nazi`s were blitkrieging the world was an unstable psychopathic despot ......
In true British fashion we came up with one !!!! He wouldn`t have lasted five minutes if the world had been nice and quiet at the time.
Let`s celebrate the man for what he was ......Somebody in the right place at the right time and aren`t we all thankfull for that ??
Not some it seems.
Sex God
Quote by flower411
Oh blimey !!! Let`s all be honest .....what we needed when the Nazi`s were blitkrieging the world was an unstable psychopathic despot ......
In true British fashion we came up with one !!!! He wouldn`t have lasted five minutes if the world had been nice and quiet at the time.
Let`s celebrate the man for what he was ......Somebody in the right place at the right time and aren`t we all thankfull for that ??
Agreed.....but just to bug our friend from kent let's not forget he was also a right twat
Sex God
Quote by Ben_welshminx
Annnd erm let us never forget
that he did make lots of really really really bad decisions that cost thoudsands of lives and very nearly buggered the whole shebang up.
what`s tony blair got to do with anything
Quote by kentswingers777
Was Churchill PM then?
He was Secreatry of war and air but any decisions ultimately have to be made by the PM.
No different to today really. The PM makes the final decison and that was not Churchill.
I still see no proof that Churchill gave the go ahead to gas anyone, other than a Google link of which there are very few.
If only the PM is to be held accountable.......why do Ministers resign
. Do ministers have no power to make decisions? If not then why did he go after the complete feck up of Gallipoli and not the PM. If this is your stance then you must wonder about the war criminals being charged in the Hague and Nuremburg when surely it should have only been the leader of the country who should have stood trial.
Dave_Notts
Quote by kentswingers777
Tell that to the Irish,or Trades Unionists,the deification of Churchill grows stronger the fewer war veterans we have left,As my Grandad used to say,theres a reason he lost in 45.
So why was he re-elected seven years later??
Who is voted the best PM of all time....in every poll? Wanna guess?
If the man was so bad he would have gone into the wilderness, but no he became PM again.
You talk about what we did to the Irish, shall I remind YOU what the Irish have done to us in return?
As for Trade Unionists......where's the gas.
Because the electoral system meant that the party that came second in the popular vote won the most seats. Add that to the complete polarization of the vote as a consequence of the self destruction of the Liberals, and you have Churchill sneaking a majority.
Quote by awayman
Because the electoral system meant that the party that came second in the popular vote won the most seats. Add that to the complete polarization of the vote as a consequence of the self destruction of the Liberals, and you have Churchill sneaking a majority.
Is that a clever way of saying yes he was re-elected, in some roundabout way?
Sex God
Quote by Ben_welshminx
Annnd erm let us never forget
that he did make lots of really really really bad decisions that cost thoudsands of lives and very nearly buggered the whole shebang up.
I often feel it is too easy to criticise others when we have hindsight on our side. Always good to Analise what went wrong though.
Quote by Kaznkev
Because the electoral system meant that the party that came second in the popular vote won the most seats. Add that to the complete polarization of the vote as a consequence of the self destruction of the Liberals, and you have Churchill sneaking a majority.
Is that a clever way of saying yes he was re-elected, in some roundabout way?
No its a direct answer to your why was he re elected question,aint it fab when people do that,see a question and reply based on their knowledge of a subject.
I think you are a tad obsessed with him.:giggle:
Hold on I need a whisper...you know that choccie bar.
