Tag Archives: Winston Churchill

A real conspiracy: Churchchill & Stalin made secret pact to give Eastern Europe to Soviet Union

This post is for all who deride “conspiracy theorists” as tinfoil-hat-wearing crazies, at best, and at worst, “agents of Satan,” which a former friend, R., accused me of when I sent him my January 8, 2019 post, “More evidence that Sandy Hook Elementary School had moved to Monroe, CT before the shooting massacre,” with documentary evidence from Wolfgang Halbig showing Sandy Hook Elementary School had moved to Chalk Hill Middle School in nearby Monroe, Connecticut, months before the December 14, 2012 mass shooting.

Instead of disputing my post with evidence or reasoning, R. called me an agent of Satan for trafficking in conspiracy theories, which he dismisses because he doesn’t believe in conspiracies and because so many conspiracy theories implicate Jews.

Churchill & Stalin share a private joke

Izzy Lyons reports for The Telegraph, April 2, 2019, that in October 1944 during a late night, whiskey-fuelled meeting in the Kremlin, Winston Churchill and Josef Stalin, the respective leaders of Great Britain and the Soviet Union, made “a nominal agreement” on how they would carve up (“spheres of influence”) Eastern Europe after Hitler was eventually defeated and the Second World War ended.

Prime Minister Churchill jotted down on a slip of paper that he referred to in his memoirs as the “naughty document,” his proposals as to how various East European countries would be divided among the Allies, down to percentages of influence:

  • Roumania would be apportioned 90% to Russia, 10% to the others.
  • Greece: 90% to Great Britain; 10% to Russia.
  • Yugoslavia and Hungary would be divided 50/50?
  • Bulgaria: 75% to Russia and 25% to the West

Stalin appears to have approved Churchill’s suggestions by scrawling a big blue tick across the top of the “naughty document”.

Churchill-Stalin secret pact

Beginning April 5, 2019, that “naughty document” is now on public display for the first time at the British National Archives’ Protect and Survive: Britain’s Cold War Revealed exhibition.

Mark Dunton, chief curator of the exhibition, said Churchill called the paper his “naughty document, not for public eyes” because he and civil servants were aware of how it could come across as “callous”. Dunton said:

“This was the result of late night discussions between Churchill and Stalin, they both had a fair bit of whiskey. They were trying to make a nominal agreement about the spheres of influence after the war. I think it’s important that this document is going on display because there’s so much significance in that little square of paper. It’s potentially incredibly significant – the fate of millions being decided with the stroke of a pen as a result of a casual meeting. An official later said that the figures could have looked very cruel and callous if they were seen by the public. I think Churchill was very aware of that. It obviously didn’t quite pan out like this, but it is nonetheless a powerful document and an amazing piece of history.”

World War II Today has Churchill’s account of his secret pact with Stalin:

At ten o’clock that night we held our first important meeting in the Kremlin. …

The moment was apt for business, so I said, “Let us settle about our affairs in the Balkans. Your armies are in Roumania and Bulgaria. We have interests, missions, and agents there. Don’t let us get at cross—purposes in small ways. So far as Britain and Russia are concerned, how would it do for you to have ninety per cent. predominance in Roumania, for us to have ninety per cent. of the say in Greece, and go fifty—fifty about Yugoslavia?”

While this was being translated I wrote out [the percentages] on a half—sheet of paper….

I pushed this across to Stalin, who had by then heard the translation. There was a slight pause. Then he took his blue pencil and made a large tick upon it, and passed it back to us. It was all settled in no more time than it takes to set down.

Of course we had long and anxiously considered our point, and were only dealing with immediate war-time arrangements. All larger questions were reserved on both sides for what we then hoped would be a peace table when the war was won.

After this there was a long silence. The pencilled paper lay in the centre of the table. At length I said, “Might it not be thought rather cynical if it seemed we had disposed of these issues, so fateful to millions of people, in such an offhand manner? Let us burn the paper.” “No, you keep it,” said Stalin.

These percentages which I have put down are no more than a method by which in our thoughts we can see how near we are together, and then decide upon the necessary steps to bring us into full agreement.

As I said, they would be considered crude, and even callous, if they were exposed to the scrutiny of the Foreign Offices and diplomats all over the world. Therefore they could not be the basis of any public document, certainly not at the present time.

They might however be a good guide for the conduct of our affairs. If we manage these affairs well we shall perhaps prevent several civil wars and much bloodshed and strife in the small countries concerned. Our broad principle should be to let every country have the form of government which its people desire.

We certainly do not wish to force on any Balkan State monarchic or republican institutions. We have however established certain relations of faithfulness with the Kings of Greece and Yugoslavia. They have sought our shelter from the Nazi foe, and we think that when normal tranquillity is re-established and the enemy has been driven out the peoples of these countries should have a free and fair chance of choosing.

It might even be that Commissioners of the three Great Powers should be stationed there at the time of the elections so as to see that the people have a genuine free choice. There are good precedents for this.

The New Observer noted that:

As events transpired, the Soviet Union seized even more territory than this, taking 10 percent of all the countries listed (except for Greece, which remained free of Soviet occupation) and included Poland, Czechoslovakia, eastern Germany, and the three Baltic states.

Millions of people were displaced, killed and tortured under the Soviet rule during the next four and half decades in Eastern Europe. At least three major uprisings against communist rule followed: In 1953 in East Germany, in 1956 in Hungary, and in 1968 in Czechoslovakia. All three were suppressed with force by the Soviet army.

H/t Voat

See also “A real conspiracy: Wealthy Americans conspire with coaches, university & college entrance test administrators to rig admissions into elite universities“.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Trump – a man for such a time as this

trump-churchill

Screen grab from Breitbart April 1, 2016

Churchill was rejected by the elite, until things went truly dark

Our times are very dark. It is obvious. Sometimes a man or woman has been prepared with the exact gifts and nature to rescue a nation. In ancient Israel, when no man was up to the task, God chose a woman, Deborah, to lead the nation. In WW2 England, Winston Churchill was called in from obscurity to save his nation.
Is Donald Trump such a man?

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Churchill saw it coming……

w-churchill“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.
A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.
Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome …”
Sir Winston Churchill; (Source: The River War, first edition, Vol II, pages 248-250 London).

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Why Conservatives must not give up politics

moron2
Larry P. Arnn is the 12th president of that rare thing — a conservative university, Hillsdale College, which actively promotes Americans getting educated about our Constitution.
The following are excerpts of Arnn’s answers from an interview by Hugh Hewitt for the Hugh Hewitt Radio Show, conducted on the day after the election, November 7, 2012:
[The election on Nov. 6] indeed turn out to be a terrible election from the standpoint of constitutionalism. Its results will bring about hardships and set back the time frame for reviving the kind of government our Founders bequeathed to us. […] But I very much disagree with the idea that this election marks a decisive event in our politics, or a point of no return.
[…] the reason you can’t retreat into private life and give up on politics—is that the cost of doing it is overwhelming. If you don’t live under good laws, life becomes truncated and less happy, injustice becomes customary, civilization is compromised. And one cannot acquiesce in that. One has to be involved. And since politics is natural to us—man is essentially political, as Aristotle says—and since we do live in the greatest modern country—founded that way at least—we owe it a lot. And many of the people who have seen the republic through to where we are today have gone through things that are worse than this. So first of all, it’s a duty not to give up. But second, there are good reasons to know that the game isn’t over.
One of them is that the election is shot through with contradictions. The obvious contradiction is that we have a divided government. The presidency and the Senate are in the hands of one party, and the House of Representatives and most governorships are in the hands of the other. A second contradiction is that a large majority of people continued to say in the exit polls that they were against raising taxes in order to cut the deficit. One might be cynical and put that down to an irresponsible refusal to pay for existing benefits—to get more and more “free stuff.” But for a long time now, opinion polls have pointed towards the existence of a broad majority of Americans who favor smaller government. This obviously contradicts the re-election of the president and the Democratic gains in the Senate. The country is still a house divided against itself, and that’s dangerous. But it doesn’t mean that there’s been a resolution. It means in fact the opposite: there is not a resolution. That resolution still has to be made, and the making of it lies ahead of us, and not behind us.

Lincoln’s argument was that either slavery is right or freedom is right, and that the country couldn’t long stand if it was divided on which was so. There was an argument that slavery should be allowed to spread and be protected as a good thing, and there was an argument that slavery violated America’s principles and should be kept from spreading. There’s almost an exact parallel today, because the people who founded our country believed and wrote—and established a Constitution to provide—that there must never be unlimited rule by any man or group of men over other men. And our government is getting to a place where it threatens to become limitless.

Not only that, but government itself has become a strong force in elections: Much of the money funding the party of big government comes from inside the government through public employee unions—not to mention corporations, so many of which receive a form of welfare from the government. This new development represents a dangerous corruption of the election process—and elections are the only means left to Americans to limit government. It’s a real problem.

[…] just think of what our Constitution is doing right now—the protection it is providing. In 1946 in England, following Churchill’s ouster as prime minister, the Labor government got its first outright majority, and within a year it had nationalized 15 or so major industries. It was able to do that all at once. Compare that to what occurred here. President Obama only had that kind of united power for two years, because our Constitution divides power. He did, in his first two years, push through Obamacare and Dodd-Frank, which are significant. They will do a lot of damage, and we are stuck with them for now because of the election. But despite the election, one part of the government remains in the hands of the opposition. That means that no big new legislation is going to go through. So the Constitution is working, despite the uncharted waters […]

[…] the principles of Progressivism that animate our government today, which are antithetical to the principles of the American Founding, lead to policies that cannot work, will not work, and result in obvious injustices. That is its weakness, and that provides cause for hope. But by the way, there is a parallel with the great twentieth century tyrannies: The modern bureaucratic form of government cannot remain accountable to the people, so in the fullness of time it will become despotic. That’s not the intention of anybody who runs it today, or at least not very many people. But that is its direction.

The experts who run the modern bureaucratic state think they are architects of a perfectly rational society. They think of themselves as scientists, and of the running of government as something more like science—the science of administration—than politics. They think they can coordinate society comprehensively so that no one is left out. That’s why they think of their work as something good and as something high. The problem is that what they are trying to do defies human nature—the human nature that led James Madison to write famously that men are not angels, and that led the Framers of the Constitution to divide government in order to limit government—and so what these experts are doing will ultimately lead to despotism.

But […] there are many indications that there’s a deep and even intensifying opposition to bureaucratic government today. People don’t like it, and they don’t trust it. They want less of it. And I don’t believe that yesterday’s election signified any change in that. Now, how to harness that opinion politically is the challenge. No one yet has been able to capitalize upon it.

One obvious theme to strike is that people didn’t vote for, and don’t support, higher taxes and bigger government. But conservative statesmen have to get better. Calvin Coolidge once said that great statesmen are “ambassadors of providence, sent to reveal to us our unknown selves.” What that means is that great statesmen are not going to be around very often. I’d say that the standard of conservative statesmanship today is improving, but too few prominent conservatives are skillful at explaining the problem of the modern bureaucratic state. This form of government proceeds by rules, and rules upon rules, and compliance with those rules becomes a key activity of the entire nation. That results in bureaucracy, and in the inefficiencies of bureaucracy. Constitutional government, on the other hand, proceeds by clearly stated laws.

Not grasping this is an important failure of conservative statesmen today. During the first presidential debate I stood up and slapped my leg, and my wife said to sit down and be quiet, when Mitt Romney said that business and prosperity require regulation. What he should have said instead was that of course we require laws in order to be productive and to live safely, but that laws are different than regulations. Laws are passed by elected (and thus accountable) representatives, they cover everybody equally, and we can all participate in their enforcement because they are easy to understand. Not one of those three things is true of the regulations imposed by independent boards such as those established under Obamacare and Dodd-Frank. Romney was not able to make that distinction, and yet that distinction is at the heart of the choice Americans must make about how they will be governed.

[…] there are some fine young conservatives in Congress and serving as governors who give one hope. They understand the urgency of the situation, and that makes them better.

[…] let me close with a word about Churchill. The service that he did in 1940, when his nation stood up against Hitler alone, was preceded by a service equally great. In the 1930s, British politics were ugly and ill-directed. Churchill’s own party leaders conspired to deprive him not only of his seat in Parliament, but of his livelihood writing for the public. One of his colleagues, an official in the Foreign Ministry named Ralph Wigram, was threatened with transfer to a remote place without medical care—his son had birth defects—if he continued speaking with Churchill. Churchill, Wigram, and Wigram’s wife Ava stood up to this kind of thing, year after year. First a few, and then many, and then legions joined them. Finally the British people realized the truth, and then all over London billboards appeared with the words in large black letters, “What Price Churchill?” He was called to lead in 1940 because he proved in the 1930s that he could do so.

That same year, Churchill asked one of his assistants, John Colville, to find him the precise text of a prayer he remembered from the siege of Gibraltar. It reads:

Fear not the result, for either thy end shall be an enviable and a majestic one, or God will preserve our reign upon the waters.

We might follow Churchill in saying that prayer in hard times. We might cultivate the strength that it can give.

To the reasons Arnn gave, I’ll add another one:

Conservatives far outnumber liberals in America. In 2010, 62% of Americans identified themselves as conservatives.

Of course, the question is why those 62% didn’t translate into a victory for Mitt Romney on last November 6.

Was it massive Democrat voter fraud? The GOP tying its own hands because of that stunning 1982 agreement it made with the Democratic Party not to prevent or contest vote fraud? How about the thousands of U.S. military votes that were uncounted or missing? Was it the Ron Paulists who stayed home? Was it the partisan media and public schools who brainwashed Americans? Or was it because too many of those 62%, while they say they’re conservative, are dependents on Big Government?

I don’t mean to be disrespectful to Dr. Arnn. But until and unless Conservatives find out why we lost the election and how to fix the problems, his rah-rah chins-up cheerleading only means Conservatives will continue fruitlessly expend our time, money, and energy — like caged hamsters furiously running on wheels, but going nowhere.

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Quotes to live by

Sometimes, when I look at my children, I say to myself, “Lillian, you should have remained a virgin.”

-Lillian Carter (mother of Jimmy Carter)

I had a rose named after me and I was very flattered.  But I was not pleased to read the description in the catalog: “‘No good in a bed, but fine against a wall.”

– Eleanor Roosevelt

Last week, I stated this woman was the ugliest woman I had ever seen.  I have since been visited by her sister, and now wish to withdraw that statement.

– Mark Twain

The secret of a good sermon is to have a good beginning and a good ending; and to have the two as close together as possible.

– George Burns

Santa Claus has the right idea. Visit people only once a year.

– Victor Borge

By all means, marry.  If you get a good wife, you’ll become happy; if you get a bad one, you’ll become a philosopher.

– Socrates

My wife has a slight impediment in her speech. Every now and then she stops to breathe.

– Jimmy Durante

I have never hated a man enough to give his diamonds back.

– Zsa Zsa Gabor

Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat.

– Alex Levine

Money can’t buy you happiness. But it does bring you a more pleasant form of misery.

– Spike Milligan

Until I was thirteen, I thought my name was SHUT UP.

– Joe Namath

I don’t feel old.  I don’t feel anything until noon.  Then it’s time for my nap.

– Bob Hope

I never drink water because of the disgusting things that fish do in it.

– W. C. Fields

We could certainly slow the aging process down if it had to work its way through Congress.

– Will Rogers

Don’t worry about avoiding temptation. As you grow older, it will avoid you.

– Winston Churchill

My favorite is Victor Borge’s. LOL

H/t our Miss May!

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Skippy's 2012 Campaign Poster.

Can't argue with that.


 
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure,
the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy,
its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery..”
Winston Churchill
These are possibly the 5 best sentences you’ll ever read: Unfortunately, most voters don’t know this.
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity, by legislating the wealth out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them; and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work, because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.
Can you think of any reason for not sharing this?
Neither can I.
~Steve~      H/T I-Man
 

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

2012: Mission Accomplished

Aprés moi, le deluge


“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” Winston Churchill (whose bust Barack Dajjal Obama removed from the Oval Office and sent back to Britain, the minute he was sworn in as President)
H/t beloved fellow May.
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0