Skip to comments.How the BBC Censored Churchillís Speeches Against Appeasement
Posted on 10/14/2012 6:26:33 PM PDT by expat1000
This is an important history lesson for anyone who thinks that state-owned media can in any way be informative or that politically correct censorship began recently.
He was finally invited to give a talk in 1934 and used this opportunity to warn of the danger of ignoring German rearmament. That broadcast demonstrated the impact Churchill could have had in warning the country against appeasement. It was not to be. This was his last radio appearance on the subject before the outbreak of war.
Churchill did complain to a young BBC producer who visited him on the day after Chamberlain returned home from Munich. A memo records their meeting. They spent hours discussing the Nazi threat and Churchill complained that he had been very badly treated and that he was always muzzled by the BBC. The producer was called Guy Burgess. The man who would become his countrys most famous traitor tried to reassure the man who would become its saviour that the BBC was not biased.
Burgess proved to be a top Soviet agent who eventually fled to Moscow. And the BBCs alienation of Churchill helped open up the television marketplace, marginalizing the Beeb.
Some years earlier, Churchill had taken a decision that would change television for good. He had decided to break the BBC monopoly that his old enemy John Reith had considered so vital for broadcasting. He did so in the face of Reiths hysterical warning that commercial television would be as disastrous for Britain as dog racing, smallpox and bubonic plague. Indeed, that wild overstatement seems to have helped overcome Churchills initial doubts. The grand old man explained his conversion to his doctor, Lord Moran: For 11 years, they kept me off the air. They prevented me from expressing views that proved to be right. Their behaviour has been tyrannical.
There was a considerable debate in Britain about which was better, socialism or fascism. Nevil Shute wrote about it in “So Disdained”.
He wrote a few books that slammed the slammed the socialists.
He had a few things to say about Islam as well. No wonder 0bama hates Churchill. A quote from an 1899 book by Winston Churchill, "The River War", in which he describes Muslims he apparently observed during Kitchener's campaign in the Sudan
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 Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; 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.
Any thoughts on that?
Yes. You are truly pathetic. I feel sorry for you. You sound like a lonely old man with no other 'pleasure' in life but to troll FR.
'gunner' may be a 'favorite son' of sorts, but bashing expat for posting Greenfield's stuff is just over the top, imho.
The Sultan is one of conservativism's truly great current voices/pens, and this is another of those times when hg's bitterness passes quirky and enters the realm of driving folks away.
And yes, this'll be cc'd in the thread.
It’s always nice to have someone articulate in your corner on a forum. :-)
But rest assured he’s not driving me or my posting of Daniel’s stuff away. It’s too important, and every forum has bully wannabees like HG. They don’t bother me.
When my husband was stationed in Turkey years ago, he noted that the Muslim men just sat around on the ground in those baggy britches, fingering prayer beads for hours on end, mostly leaving the women to do all the work. Then, too, the FATALISM was rampant with auto accidents being epidemic; said he once saw where a VW had left the road and went airborne ending up in a tree! He didn’t want me to go with him to Turkey; said it wasn’t safe for a woman over there - too easy to end up in jail and raped.
You pulled the trigger before identifying the target on this one. It’s a very informative article.
Ultimately, there is about a nickel’s difference between fascism and communism, and about a dime’s worth between either and socialism. For more on the topic, see the Hayek quote on my FR profile page. It’s the 3rd one down.
Yup the difference between communism and fascism is lake the difference between blue green and aqua. They were just fighting over the same hearts and minds and both hated free market freedom.
>>Any thoughts on that?
I certainly do.
expat generally posts the complete text, as he does here. So how does this meet your own definition of blog pimping? Or have your recently changed that?
I think you should lay off the booze and shut the hell up regarding Greenfield, who is one of the best columnists writing today, a man who has fast risen to the level of VDH and Steyn in my book. I appreciate expat’s pings, as do many others.
In short, go soak your head.
“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.”
We are seeing his predictions come to pass, if not in our time, soon afterwards.
Wow! It’s awesome of you to cry to teacher.
Truly the best of American Exceptionalism is displayed by crying to teacher.
Why, had our founding fathers not cried to teacher, where would we be?
I understand that someone writing words you dislike is more than you feel able to handle yourself.
Thanks for the ping! Excellent stuff, as usual.
Very interesting! Thanks so much for the ping.
Are you and he partners or something?
I can't believe you, humblegunner. You are being childish. You are intelligent and write well yourself. It's too bad you don't care about the same things many other FReepers do because you could write articles that people would read. Many of us simply love to read well-written, exceptional, interesting and informational pieces like those by Daniel Greenfield.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.