Lies enslave, but the truth sets free. And tonight in one of the deception operations that endangers civilization, wanting to look at Winston Churchill. The first casualty in war is truth. And we've been told a lot of lies about Winston Churchill. There's a film out right now called Darkest Hour, and I've entitled this Winston Churchill, The Legend of Winston Churchill, because he is probably one of the biggest legends Do you know that Winston Churchill in 2002 was voted the greatest Briton of all time? And forget King Arthur, forget King Alfred the Great and Queen Elizabeth the First and all the great Britons of history, even the great missionaries and reformers, they are trying to say that Winston Churchill is the greatest Briton of all time. And of course there's been many times saying greatest Prime Minister of Britain and things like that. Darkest Hour is a British war drama focusing on Winston Churchill's first month in office as Prime Minister of Great Britain, so tackles from May through to June 1940. Darkest Hour is a suspense-filled, engrossing historic drama and it's set against the backdrop of the German Blitzkrieg which sent the British and French armies in a headlong retreat. Now, this is not exactly given to you clearly in the film, but this is the backdrop, is the fact that the Allies had been facing Germany on the Western Front, threatening them for 10 months of what they called phony war. Well, there had been wars at sea, there had been bombing of Germany, there had been a war on the Polish front, there had been the Norwegian campaign, but no bullets had been exchanged on the Western Front before the 10th of May. And then suddenly the German army launched Blitzkrieg and completely and utterly stunned the world as they were able to, in a matter of weeks, completely turn the tables and send the greatest army in the world at that time, which everyone thought was the French army, in headlong retreat and the British army, which is considered a really great professional army, fleeing for the coast. Parachutists for the first time in history, paratroops were being landed, The Meuse and the Albert Canal were being crossed. The tanks were getting across rivers that they weren't meant to be able to. German soldiers were able to storm right past the Maginot Line. And they did it in two phases. The first phase was to go into Holland and Belgium to get the entire British and French Army to race in to confront them. And then going through the Ardennes Forest, especially through Luxembourg, raced through the Ardennes Forest and encircled the entire British and French army in a trap. And the whole British and French army was holed up in this pocket. Even though they totally outnumbered the German army that was attacking them, their morale was shattered and they were good for nothing much more but to be evacuated. Here's a picture of Erwin Rommel with a group of British forces and French forces that he had captured in the 7th Panzer Unit in one of the most brilliant advances ever. It's still in the Guinness Book of Records the fastest advance of any military group under fire in history. What a 7th Panzer Unit was able to do is just staggering. He reached the channel so fast people were reeling. And it wasn't long before German troops were marching down the Champs-Élysées in front of the Arc de Triomphe. And as was said many a time, why are the trees on both sides of the Champs-Élysées so that the German army can march in the shade? And there's another joke which is, how many soldiers does it take to defend Paris? And the answer is nobody knows, it's never been done yet. They've given up each time. The whole thrust of this film, Darkest Hour, is peace or war? That is the question. To war or not to war? That is the question. The near consensus of Churchill's cabinet was begin peace negotiations with Germany immediately. And much of the suspense and drama of this film focuses on Winston Churchill's determination to continue the war at any cost and to appeal directly to the people in the street to support his policy of no surrender, no negotiations, victory at all costs. That's the whole thrust of this film. Now it's remarkable that in the last two years there have been another three major films on Britain in the 1940s. Churchill, where Brian Cox played the role of Churchill and that's set in 1944 just before the D-Day landings and it has the premise that Winston Churchill had a conscience and he is wracked with doubts and he is deeply concerned that this could be another disaster like the Gallipoli campaign as though he cared and that it really has a very fictitious feel about the whole thing, that the whole D-Day landings could have been pulled off just because of his doubts. Actually, it was out of his hands. These things had been decided by powers way past him and even if he had wanted to, there's no evidence that he did, he couldn't have pulled it off. But anyway, they make a drama out of that. Then, a bit of an older one, The Gathering Storm, where Albert Finney played Winston Churchill, also portrayed him as a really wonderful man, lost hope of Britain and things like that. There'd been a never-ending series of hagiography on Winston Churchill. But then, just a year ago, there was their finest. Dealing with the British Ministry of Information, that's what the British called the propaganda department during the war, they had an assignment to produce a morale-boosting film presenting the debacle of Dunkirk as an inspiring victory. Now, to be fair, this film is a bit of a comedy, because how on earth do you depict the disaster and debacle of Dunkirk as an inspiring victory? They had been outfought by a smaller German attacking force. They had been whipped so soundly that they fled their shores, leaving behind on the beach of Dunkirk 45,000 motor vehicles, 20,000 motorcycles, 700 tanks, huge amounts of weaponry, 11,000 machine guns, 850 anti-tank guns, 2,472 artillery pieces. I mean that was more artillery pieces than the entire German army possessed at that time. no end of rifles, 80,000 tons of ammunition. Can you imagine? This is like the entire military inventory was left on the beaches. Enough equipment to field ten divisions. And at that stage Britain only had nine divisions, so that's pretty impressive. And they literally were driving their vehicles into the sea to make piers to get their troops to evacuate faster. And very ingenious, very desperate, but absolutely catastrophic. And this is the scene of a defeated army, completely and utterly routed by an inferior force, numbers wise. And what a total and utter disaster and catastrophe left behind. And this is the backdrop, which I don't show you in this film, but this is the backdrop to this drama in this film. The filmmakers of Darkest Hour evidently received tremendous cooperation from the British government. As a number of scenes are filmed in the Palace of Westminster, the House of Commons, which I think that's only been allowed twice before, that have ever allowed filmmakers to do a dramatic film inside the Palace of Westminster. And from the underground war room bunkers under Whitehall, the Ministry of Defence, this is not easy to gain access to. And for them to have opened up the war rooms of Churchill for a film means they're obviously approved of the script. Some scenes are even shot plainly within the grounds of Buckingham Palace. There's Queen Victoria's monument up there. This, I don't know how you could fake this, this is filmed within Buckingham Palace grounds. Darkest Hour has done well at the box office, it's already scooped up over $100 million in box office revenues just in the less than a month that it's been out. It's been generally praised by critics, it's been nominated for six Academy Awards and American Oscars, and the British Academy of Films has nominated for nine categories. Many are hailing Gary Oldman's performance of Winston Churchill as the best of his career. And it probably is, but even if there's better actors this year, they're not going to get the Oscar because this is a film that the Oscar people want to promote. And so they will promote whatever is the message they want. They want people to see the films that you might have missed otherwise. And so a big hoopla in the Oscars is part of it. Bear in mind, what are the Oscars? The Oscars are a group of filmmakers patting one another on the back, in a mutual admiration society, and swapping gold statues with one another, you know, I give you a gold statue this year, you give me the gold statue next year, you know, it's just basically a marketing scam to give people the impression that this is some kind of objective, you know, sort of like the Olympic race or something, but it's not. It's the filmmakers themselves have their own boards and they determine which of their films gets, there's no objectivity here. These people are completely and utterly involved in the whole process. Unfortunately, despite being set in authentic venues and at a most dramatic period of history, the filmmakers have taken some serious licenses and introduced fictional events and fictional conversations even outrageously from the lips of King George VI himself. Even more seriously is what has been left out of the film, such as King George VI's empire-wide call for repentance and prayer. On the 26th of May 1940, with the British expeditionary force in defeat and retreat, the King made an international broadcast instructing all people in the British Empire to return to God in repentance and humbly seek God for divine intervention. He called for a day of humiliation, repentance and prayer to enable the rescue of their beleaguered army from total destruction. Many millions of people across the British Isles and throughout the world flocked into churches, including in Cape Town. Praying in shifts for deliverance, churches were so packed people were lined up for hours waiting to get into the churches to take part in organised national repentance. Now these would have made impressive scenes in any film. but inexplicably, they're not even referred to verbally in darker style. I mean, like, it's not a prayer. In fact, the only reference to anything vaguely Christian is done in a joke format where the The Prime Minister phones up Admiral Ramsey in the middle of the night and says, I hope I didn't wake you, and the man who's obviously just asleep says, no, I was just reading my Bible on the phone. And that's about the only disrespectful reference to anything in the scriptures in this film. This is the King's microphone, prepared especially for the occasion, and the form of prayer to Almighty God at the time of war, to be used on Sunday the 26th of May. And Churchill doesn't look quite as enthusiastic about the whole thing as the King and Queen do. The King appointed Sunday the 9th of June as an empire-wide day of thanksgiving that the army had been evacuated safely and brought across the Channel back to Britain. The film also includes a fictional scene of the King coming into Churchill's bedroom and actually sitting on his bed to encourage him to press on with the war. Not only was such a breach of protocol unthinkable, but unnecessary. The King had only to summon his Prime Minister to the palace if he wanted to talk to him. The King wouldn't have been allowed to go out and do that by all of his entourage who are concerned for both his safety and also for his itinerary. There's no hint in any historic record of such an anachronistic event taking place. I don't even think today. you'd have the Queen going to the Prime Minister's residence. Let alone into the bedroom. It's just so inappropriate, so ridiculous, you sort of think, who can believe this? The King summoned Churchill to the palace whenever he wanted to talk to her. And they often would meet over a dining room table. Interestingly enough, because at the beginning, when he was first appointed Prime Minister on the 10th of May 1940, the King said, how would Monday four o'clock in the afternoon before our weekly meeting. And Churchill said, oh no, I sleep at that time. How about lunchtime? It's so outrageous to suggest that a Prime Minister could ever have a comeback. If the King gives you a date, it's not a suggestion, it's actually a command. They don't invite you. The Queen requests and requires your presence at. It's that sort of thing. But Winston Churchill was quite a presumptuous character. The film also takes a major detour from reality by introducing a fictional event of Prime Minister Winston Churchill disappearing out of his vehicle in the midst of a crowd, downtown, in order to ride an underground in a tube, which he never did in his whole life, and survey passengers as to their opinions regarding peace or continuing the war. This not only didn't happen, but Winston Churchill wouldn't have cared what they thought. Anyone who's read Churchill's biographies would immediately recognize that this is another anachronistic Hollywood type of ploy. Winston Churchill was not a Democrat. He never cared for the opinions of the masses. He didn't even care for the opinions of fellow parliamentarians. And his war cabinet said he didn't even care for their opinions. And the Chief Joint Chiefs of Staff said he didn't even care to go through them. He was the first Prime Minister ever in Britain who would routinely bypass the whole chain of command, the entire structure. He wouldn't go through the Secretariat or the Cabinet. He would just issue a personal instruction, often by phone, to a group commander of a squadron or to a commander in the field. Just highly irregular. He was so secretive and so devious and he never cared what anyone thought, as was said by Prime Minister Baldwin. in 1930. He said, Winston never comes to Parliament to listen to what anyone else has to say. He only comes to make his speeches and then he leaves. He doesn't even listen to what we've got to say in reply. He was absolutely, completely arrogant, not interested in what anyone else had to say anyway. So this anachronistic idea that he would have gone to the Tube to ask the different people what they thought is, you know, really just 21st century nonsense. However, Darkest Hour seems determined to recast British legend Winston Churchill in a more 21st century mould. Hollywood loves the reluctant warrior. Filled with self-doubts, filled with fears, determined to do the right thing, going to the common people to hear their concerns, choosing principle over politics, championing the cause of justice, if only all that had been true. But of course, that is just myth and legend being recast in a 21st century mould. The real Winston Churchill is so far removed from the myth and the legend built up by never-ending stream of hagiographical films, but the truth is always stranger than fiction, and the truth is always more interesting than the fiction. I mean, just take the fact that Adolf Hitler went to the battlefront while the battle was still raging in Ypres, wouldn't allow his people to attack Ypres, even though it was a stronghold, saying no city should be allowed to go through this twice. He is on the Ypres front in the First World War, wept at the British war cemetery at the Menin Gate at Ypres, warmly greeted the French head of state, General Pétain, who he would have been fighting against in the First World War. was incredibly gracious to the French forces that were defeated. The soldiers who'd been captured were released almost immediately back to their homes. All sorts of amazing graciousness to his defeated enemies. None of the vindictiveness that the French had extracted on the Germans under the Sai Treaty. When he beat France, he was super gracious about it. But that doesn't come into the film. In Darkest Hour, Winston Churchill seems to be an eccentric loner. However, the reality is quite different. Nowhere does Darkest Hour or the other Churchill films I've seen recently even hint at the existence of the Focus Group. The Focus Group was a group of about a dozen key politicians and bankers who continuously advised and guided Churchill in every decision. He would meet with them more than once a week, regularly, and in time of crisis more often than not. He would have had his meals with them regularly. These bankers were around him. Sir Henry Strakosch, a banker, a Jewish banker, who made his fortune in South Africa on the gold and diamond fields, by the way, and who was a member of the Southern Communist Party, too, regularly bailed Churchill out of his incessant, reckless gambling debts, which were incredible. Even when he was a schoolboy at boarding school, his mother would complain of how he had no regard for money, and he could always be in debt, didn't matter how much extravagant money he had, he was always out of money and in debt. There's no appearance of Henry Strakosch in this movie, even though Strakosch and the Rothschilds bankrolled him endlessly, bailed him out endlessly, and basically bought and owned him. Just an interesting point, do you know that Winston Churchill met his future wife Clementine at a dinner appointment in Lord Nathan Rothschild's home, in his dining room, and they set her up for him. Winston Churchill was identified by the Rothschilds and by the focus group long before any of this, he was destined to be the Prime Minister of Britain. He didn't just fall into it accidentally. This isn't just that the people of Britain were aimless and didn't know what to do and Churchill was the one man who knew what to do and he just came on his own, which is of course what Hollywood likes, the lone, reluctant warrior who's just, he just comes in for the time. He was completely moulded, shaped, prepared, bankrolled by the biggest money powers on earth for this exact moment. Here you can see for example a letter to the Prime Minister by Lord Rothschild. and it's marked secret and so on. And just dealing with 1943, it's dealing with issues of explosive chocolates, this is SOE terrorism campaign options. But here you can see one of the focus group bankers with Churchill wasn't walking around on his own almost ever. He was always surrounded by his focus group. Here's an interesting film that's been brought out recently on Churchill and the Jews and unlikely obsession, the true story of Churchill and how he was basically groomed and he was prepared and financed by them. He was back in during the time of the Bolshevik revolution describing Bolshevism as the greatest evil in the world, a plague bacillus, a new bubonic plague, and he was quite open about the fact that the Bolsheviks were Jewish and the Soviet revolution was a Jewish revolution, and he was very critical of it. But then he got bankrupted, and he was needing a bailout. And they came alongside, they bailed him out, enabled him to keep Chartwell, his family home, estate, and all rest, and continue in his extravagant lifestyle. And from that point he never said anything against the Communists, and suddenly his whole shift was against Germany, and Adolf Hitler was the worst evil person on the planet, and no more anything against Stalin, or the Bolsheviks or the Soviets. So, plainly, this is a man who, the most important thing was himself and money. Nathan Rothschild, an older Nathan Rothschild, said a couple of centuries ago, I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls Britain's money supply controls the British empire and I control the British money supply. In the First World War, there was another, I think one of his grandchildren, Nathan Rothschild, Lord Nathan Rothschild, who was on the British cabinet that declared war. He was the one who ran the Bank of England, where they borrowed the money from, and he owned the huge munition works at Coventry and elsewhere, where they were paying to make the weapons to kill the Christians on the other side. And he had his sons running the banks in Frankfurt, Naples, Paris, New York, all at the same time. I mean, how's that? They all were involved on all sides. The Rothschilds made it mega-rich. Billions out of the First World War, and even more in the second. It's quite extraordinary that the filmmakers portray Winston Churchill phoning Franklin Delano Roosevelt, FDR, and pleading with a plainly reluctant American president to provide some military assistance. Please, anything. Fifty of your old First World War destroyers, anything, in their darkest hour. The idea that FDR was a reluctant and disinterested participant on the sidelines may have been an impression people had years ago. However, you can't have that view anymore, not since the publication of President Herbert Hoover's monumental Freedom Betrayed. and Sir Max Hastings' The Secret War, which I read this last year. The unsealing of the GC and CS, that's the General Communications and Cipher School decrypt, or GCH got known as later, Bletchley Park. The decrypt of all the Enigma codes of the war on all sides. Sir Max Hastings wrote The Secret War on, as people have said, who reviewed it. We're going to have to rewrite every single history book. and every single documentary on the Second World War in the light of the secret war, because the decrypts that were sealed for 60 years, and when a government seals things for 60 years, you know they're hiding something pretty bad. And it makes it clear that the whole situation is very different from how it has been portrayed in Hollywood and in our school textbooks for so long. It's now known that far from the US President FDR being an unwilling participant, Franklin Delano Roosevelt was the prime mover for the war. He was the initiator. FDR had bribed, bullied, and persuaded the Polish government to refuse to hand the German port city of Danzig, which was 95% German, and had been unjustly seized by the Versailles Treaty, refused to give it back to Germany. Now, the British leaders, even Lloyd George had been British Prime Minister at the time of Versailles. was saying, you know, it's not just, it's got to be rewritten, we should scrap the Versailles Treaty, Danzig should go to the Germans, Neville Chamberlain agreed, I mean they all looked around and said, this is as reasonable as it comes, and yet, while everyone expected the military government of Poland, because Poland was not a democracy, in fact the government of Poland was pretty much like National Socialism in Germany and Fascism in Italy. They were a military type of National Socialist type government with a military leader who in fact was a natural ally for Germany. Germany wanted Poland as the ally against the Soviet Union. And it was something that puzzled Herbert Hoover. Franklin Delano Roosevelt had managed to get these people to change their mind and it's quite an interesting story and it comes up in both the Secret War and in the Freedom Betrayed but FDR had used his embassy staff to put the Poles up to starting the whole war. And it was FDR who had bribed and persuaded both the French and British governments to give the unprecedented war guarantee to Poland. Poland had never been an ally of Britain. Britain had never given a war guarantee to anyone ever before 1939. This was so strange. Herbert Hoover, who had been a President of the United States before, said he thought it was the worst decision made in politics in history and the greatest blunder in British history. and he predicted at that time 1939 this will destroy the British Empire. He said you're throwing Britain and France under the German war machine that's moving east. They're going east, you can't stop them, all you're doing is throwing Western civilization under the tanks. It's not going to stop the panzers moving, and you can't even save Poland anyway. And as it so happened, they never even tried. They never sent a bullet or a bomb or a bandage to Poland at all. They did nothing for Poland. Poland was just sacrificed at the end of the war. Poland was betrayed anyway. 40% of Poland's land surface was given to Russia, just like that. And when the Polish delegates complained, Churchill threatened them with extermination, literally. He was as vile and nasty and threatening and addictive as they could be, and yet Britain is meant to have gone to war for the Poles. As Patrick Buchanan well documents in his Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War book, it was Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Winston Churchill more than any other two individuals who conspired to bring about the Second World War, who connived and maneuvered to bring about the catastrophic Second World War. More than anyone else, he said, who can you blame for the Second World War? Well, he would have blamed Winston Churchill the most. But Herbert Hoover says actually Franklin Delano Roosevelt was the one even behind and before Winston Churchill in bringing about this war over Poland, which the British managed to develop into a world war. However, the Churchillian cult obviously prefers myths and propaganda to the hard facts. As Winston Churchill so famously declared, the truth is so important that it needs a bodyguard of lies to protect it. A bodyguard of lies? What kind of truth is that? And by the way, notice the poster for the film, A Man with the Heart of a Nation. Well, people who knew him questioned if he had any soul at all. his conscience was so seared, and you can see here, interesting, that these days smoking in public is just about bad, just about everywhere, but this man incessantly smoked, he's got the smoke haze around him, he's got the red background, man with the heart of the nation, well what kind of hearts are they talking about? This doesn't even look very friendly, it looks a little on the demonic, and not just worldly side, but occultic almost. Lily James, if you didn't recognize that's Lily James, she played Cinderella not that long ago. She was one of the beloved characters in the Downton Abbey series and so she gets put in a very unusual position of being the secretary for Winston Churchill. Of course he had a lot of secretaries but I think they wanted some kind of glamour in there in order to make the film more appealing. Winston Churchill is hardly very appealing himself. The darkest hour includes some of Winston Churchill's most famous and powerful speeches including, I have nothing to offer you but blood, toil, tears and sweats. Probably the most honest words he ever spoke. You ask what is my policy? It is to wage war by sea, air and land. You ask what is my aim? It is victory. Victory at all costs. Victory whatever the cost. Actually, that's probably his most honest speech. That was made on the 3rd of May. His policy was war. And he did wage it, first of all by sea, the naval blockade, attempted invasion of Norway, by air, most of it was actually by air, bombarded, blockaded and bombarded, and then by land. Land was last of all. I mean, after the people had been blockaded for over five years, and after they had been bombarded from the air for many years. And what is the aim? Victory. Well, define victory. bankrupted the Empire, left Britain absolutely destroyed. In fact the crown of the jewel of the Empire was India and at the very end of the Second World War they had to give it away. And that was just the beginning and they were giving away everything. Suez Canal, whatever it was, there was nothing left. Winston Churchill had bankrupted the Empire. So victory at whatever the cost, at all costs, That's actually honest if people had just paid attention to what he was saying. They would have been well off to have asked, what do you mean by victory? Something better for Britain? Will Britain be better off? At the start of World War I, it had taken just 10 months for Churchill's conduct as First Lord Admiralty to plunge him into political disgrace and have him fired. Hillary campaign primarily. In the Second World War, eight months sufficed to make him Prime Minister. And it's not that his character changed. Age had done nothing to temper his irrationalism age had given him no balance to his judgement, all the accusations of madcap irresponsible schemes for disastrous action that had been made against him in 1915 could have even more justifiably been repeated in 1940. His disaster in the Dardanelles in the Gallipoli campaign is just one of the worst out there. He took the British Navy and had them to try and go through the Dardanelles. Now, Dardanelles are the straits that Constantinople sits on, which is between Asia and Europe, and to get into the Black Sea. Why? To help Russia, which had always been the enemy of Britain, but never mind. And the classic dictum of Lord Nelson is, ships do not fight forts. And he sent his ships in to fight forts. Battleships going through the Dardanelles, being fired at from entrenched artillery positions, bunkered on the sides, on both sides, and of course they lost just about everything they sent in there. And not satisfied with the naval defeat, he then sent in the cannon fodder of the Anzacs, the Australians and New Zealanders, who got slaughtered for months of worthless... Snowball's chance in hell did they have of attaining their objectives, but they were just thrown away in a fruit... They didn't even manage to get off the beaches, let alone to get anywhere close to taking Constantinople. It was a complete and total disaster. And he tried to do it again in the Second World War. Fortunately his Navy officials just wouldn't let that happen. And what he did in Norway was a complete catastrophe. But he had been the prophet of doom for seven years in the political wilderness, as they called it, and with doom descending upon the politicians of Europe, Churchill had positioned himself for leadership eloquent and pugnacious and, as he put it, untainted by appeasement. He was the one British politician who had not at any time tried to negotiate with Hitler, at any time tried to talk peace So he'd been pre-positioned for this situation where Chamberlain had been fooled into war, pushed against his better judgments by Churchill no less, and he had gotten to a position where of course the British were now defeated, as they should have seen coming, I mean this was a foolish thing that they were doing anyway, and his reputation was in tatters, and so Churchill, although he had nothing but failure behind him, was the one person who was positioned to take the leadership of the nation. The French army had defeated the war. Whenever it went badly, the Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain bore the blame and if the war went well, Churchill was always likely to steal the credit. The First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Dudley Pound, seen here next to the First Lord Admiralty at the time, Winston Churchill, fought a brilliant series of delaying actions to block Churchill's highly irresponsible projects such as wanting to send the British warships into the Baltic Sea. Now if you've looked at the map you've got to get between Denmark and Norway and Sweden to get into the Baltic Sea and Germany had air superiority over the Baltic so the Navy wouldn't have lasted very long there, which was a foolish idea, quite aside from the fact that the U-boats didn't have very far to travel either. And then he wanted to invade neutral Iceland to seize control of the strategic seaport. That was overruled by the British cabinet then. When he became Prime Minister he invaded and took neutral Iceland and Persia too while he was a brother. But even with the sinking of the British battleship HMS Royal Oak in Scapa Flow, that's the chief naval base of Britain during the First and the Second World War, and here as U-boat went straight into the actual headquarters of the Royal Navy and sunk one of their top battleships, somehow the blame didn't attach to the First Lord the Admiralty but somewhat to the Prime Minister. So somewhat Churchill always dodged the bullet of blame and somewhat the person who wasn't to blame always got the blame. Churchill was not too disturbed at the disastrous defeat suffered by the British Army on land, because he was convinced that, as with the First World War, the Allies had time on their side, and that no matter how many victories Germany might win on land, the Royal Navy would ultimately bring Germany to an ease through economic blockade alone. And that's actually pretty likely true, that the First World War was decided by the naval blockade, that everything that happened on land, the longer it went on, The people were running out of all the raw materials, running out of everything they need, and running out of food most of all. And so the naval blockade actually determined the war. Which is why Germany in the Second World War was so determined to have what they needed, which is why when Britain wanted to take the iron ore from Sweden by taking Norway. They had to block that when they were going in through Greece to threaten the Polsky oil fields of Romania. Germany had to counter that because they needed Ukraine for enough food, they needed the oil from Romania, they needed the iron ore from Sweden. There were a whole lot of things they had to do to prevent themselves getting destroyed as they were in the First World War by not having access to the raw materials and the food needed. And so, time was on the Allies' side. by blockade alone. But Winston Churchill had even more faith in the Royal Air Force's power to reduce Germany's cities to rubble and wreck her factories by saturation aerial bombardment, what they call strategic bombing campaigns, from the colossal four-engine bomber fleets. being produced in Britain, even at this early stage in the war. Britain had already decided from the end of the First World War, 1919, they had already decided, we are going to build four-engine bombers that are going to be so big that we'll be able to destroy cities in the next war. And so, they for 20 years had been building up their bomber fleets. On the 16th of February 1940, Churchill ordered HMS Cossack to violate Norwegian neutrality to capture the Altmark, a German ship taking refuge in a Norwegian fjord. He then ordered the Royal Navy to mine the Norwegian coastal waters to cut off Germany's iron ore supplies from Sweden, shipped by Narvik way up in the far north, Narvik's right up there. The plan was a bold naval action to invade neutral Norway. In this, the French were eager to join in. Now, it's not that Norway had the iron ore. The iron ore came from Sweden, but they couldn't ship it all the way along this area. They had to ship it to the close seaport, which is Narvik, on the Norwegian coast, and then came down the side. So to stop Germany's iron ore, which Germany needed for any heavy weapons, the British were going to invade neutral Norway. The unwise bragging by Churchill of this upcoming seaborne operation tipped off the German Abwehr, and as the Franco-French naval invasion force approached Norway, they found themselves outmanoeuvred, pre-empted by Operation Weserbung. with seaborne landings and Felshammer paratroop landing assaults. This is absolutely extraordinary, in fact the world had never seen parachute assaults before. These were the first and it surprised everyone how quickly they could take Norway. And so when the Royal Navy came in, they found themselves pre-empted and it was an absolute bloodbath catastrophe. The Royal Navy knew that they were the greatest navy in the world, they were ten times the size of the German Kriegsmarine and it should have been no problem. But the Luftwaffe operating off bases that they had just now established in Norway completely changed the whole situation. Here you can see a Luftwaffe Messerschmitt 110's cameras as they take out some British ships in the fjords. Churchill had disastrously underestimated his enemy. The Royal Navy lost an aircraft carrier, two battlecruisers, seven destroyers, a submarine, 112 aircraft and over 6,000 casualties. the French lost two destroyers and two submarines in this failed Allied invasion of Norway. This was the immediate context behind the opening scene of The Darkest Hour film, which you don't see, you only hear about, you know, this catastrophe in Norway, Norwegian debacle, and of course it was Churchill's fault, and as Churchill himself admitted in his own writings, his optimism had led him to neglect the difficulties and drawbacks, and ignore these drawbacks, and he had fatally underestimated his enemy. You should never underestimate your enemy. He wrote, considering the prominent part I played in these events, well here's the initiator, planner, and first sea lord, it's a marvel that I survived and maintained my position in public esteem and parliamentary confidence. Indeed. I mean, that's understatement of the century. But ironically, it was Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain who paid the price of Churchill's failure. So, Chamberlain was brought down because of Churchill's highly irresponsible, reckless and foolhardy scheme, and the Norwegian debacle forced Neville Chamberlain's government to resign. To restore confidence and unity for the nation for war, there would now need to be a coalition government. But the Labour Party refused to serve under Neville Chamberlain. So Lord Halifax, the Foreign Secretary, was the first choice of the King, and he is acceptable to all parties. And here is Churchill with Chandler and the Prime Minister at the time, and here with Lord Halifax. Lord Halifax was the Foreign Minister, highly respected, very competent, but Halifax declined the premiership on the grounds that the war should not be run from the House of Lords. He was Minister of Foreign Affairs, but he was in the House of Lords, and when you're going to get a lot of the common people do the fighting and dying, you kind of need the Prime Minister to come from the House of Commons, ideally. The only other candidate willing to take the Prime Minister in this time of defeat and retreat was the very man, Winston Churchill, who had been the most responsible for the debacle that is now bringing down the Conservative government. So this is one of the ironies of history that Churchill had not done anything right. Everything he'd ever done was a catastrophe. Everything he did, everything he touched was a disaster. He had never had one political success. He hadn't had one military success. And now he gets a prime ministership because nobody else wanted the job at such a time of disaster. So at 6pm on the 10th of May 1940, Winston Churchill was summoned to Buckingham Palace and instructed by the King to form a government. Virtually everyone in government distrusted Winston Churchill, or disliked him, or both. And when they heard the news that he was the new Prime Minister, there was general shock and depression in the country. Now, you get that when you get the original reports, you get the things at the time. Churchill was not a popular choice. I mean, the average person was, oh no, not that disaster. I mean, he's a catastrophe. Gallipoli, Lusitania, Norway. It's just, what has this man ever done right? However, his reputation as a prophet of doom had made him the natural choice when doom descended. Even though he is the primary architect of the very disasters possessing the country at that time, he was the main one pushing for the war all the way along. Although many people in the country had great doubts about Churchill's ability, he apparently had no doubts. Churchill's memoirs record, as I went to bed at around 3am, I was conscious of a profound sense of relief. At last I had the authority to give direction to the whole scene. I felt as if I was walking with destiny and all my past life had been but a preparation for this hour." Indeed he had been prepared, but not by God or destiny. He had been prepared by bankers and New World Order characters who had a very different agenda. On the very day that Chamberlain resigned and Winston Churchill was appointed Prime Minister, the German army launched the Blitzkrieg on the Allied armies in the Western Front. The impression given in the darkest hour film, in fact it's not just an impression, they say so over and over, is that the German army is the largest army in the world and greatly outnumbers all other armies. That's just actually not true. The largest army in the world was most certainly the Red Army of the Soviet Union, which outnumbered the German army 10 to 1 in people, 7 to 1 in armour, 5 to 1 in aircraft. But the French army was also much larger than the German army. The Polish army had outnumbered the German army, actually, at the time of war in September 1939. Together with the British Expeditionary Force and the French Army, they greatly outnumbered the German forces on the Western Front with twice as much artillery and almost twice as many tanks and armoured cars as the Germans had. You never get that impression, average form, they try to suggest, well, the Germans won because they had more tanks and more aircraft and more people and, well, actually, no, they didn't. The Germans, however, clearly made better tactical use of their limited resources. German casualties in the six-week blitzkrieg that defeated France were 27,000 dead, 111,000 wounded, which sounds horrific, but bear in mind, in the First World War, Germany had lost two million dead on the Eastern Front, Western Front and the Italian Front. and here they'd finished a war that had dragged out for four years in the West in the First World War that without getting into trench warfare through Blitzkrieg they had finished the war with only 27,000 dead where in the previous war it had been more like a million on the Western Front. Total German casualties including those captured was under 160,000. Allied casualties were over 2 million. 2,260,000 Allies killed, wounded or captured. The Germans destroyed twice as many Allied aircraft as they lost and more than five times as many Allied tanks as they lost. So plainly the German army proved itself superior in quality even though the Allies actually had the advantage in terms of quantity. Those are the facts, but this film bluntly lies and says they're the biggest army in the world. They don't say they're the best army in the world, they say they're the biggest army in the world. They said the best would have been true. If they said the biggest, well that's complete fabrication. Before the Battle of France in 1940, France would have been considered the military superpower of Europe. So the swift and decisive defeat of France stunned the world. Now bear in mind in the First World War, France had lost 1.3 million soldiers dead. in the First World War. In the Second World War they lost less than a hundred thousand dead at the hands of German army and the war was over for them. Although having said that they lost another more than a hundred and forty thousand to Allied aerial bombardments for their liberation. So to use that word nicely in inverted commas. So the Allies managed to kill more French people than the Germans did in the Second World War. How's that when your friends kill more of you than your enemies? Blitzkrieg is when you only stop for kittens. Sir Max Hastings, author of The Secret War Spies, Codes and Guerrillas, 1939-1945, states in his conclusion that the Allied commanders routinely complained that British intelligence greatly underestimated the numbers of German soldiers and their resources. But time proved that in fact the intelligence departments were infallibly accurate due to the government code and cipher school, GC&CS, cracking the German Enigma code early in the war. They provided a complete intelligence picture of all German dispositions and warplanes throughout the war, including the exact location of every U-boat, warship, warplane and so on. The whole way through the war, Germany was playing at a tremendous disadvantage. I mean, imagine if you're playing cards with someone and the other person knows exactly what's in your hand. The person from behind says, you know, there's no secrets at all involved. The British knew every secret Germany had. The decrypts and analysis of enemy strength were accurate. However, as Hastings observes in his book, The Secret War, the incredible tenacity and fighting spirit of the German forces made them worth many times the number of Allied forces. So the analysts kept thinking, you know, what do you mean we were only facing one division or something? Yeah, looks more like five. Well, as Sir Max Hastings says, well, it's just as they fought better. They were better soldiers. It's not that they had more numbers. The darkest hour highlights Winston Churchill's extraordinary eloquence and showcases some of his most famous wartime speeches. In his first address to the House of Commons as Prime Minister, 13th of May, I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat. You ask, what is our policy? I say it is to wage war by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us. He wasn't averse to referring to God where it suits him, but he didn't believe in God. He called himself a pagan. He wrote to his mother, he didn't believe any religion on earth, although he thought the Protestants made more sense than the rest, but he didn't believe in any God and he didn't believe there's anything after death. And he quoted very positively from that hideous poem, Invictus, written by an Antichrist atheist. where Henley, and he would say in his speeches even, we're the master of our faith, we're the captains of our soul, echoing Henley's Invictus poem, which is very anti-Christian. He said that the most terrifying sound he ever heard in his life was the sound of psalms being sung by the Boers after he was captured. So he was not a Christian, but he could throw God's name in if it would help motivate people to die for him. to wage war against the monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark lamentable catalogue of human crime? Really? Was Germany the most monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark lamentable catalogue of human crime, worse than Stalin's Sovichiny? Really? worse than his own British Empire, worse than what the French were doing in the French Revolution, all that. Worse, really, than anything else. At that moment, it's said that at the time that he said that, Stalin's death toll was in the 7,000 times greater than the amount of people who died at the hands of the National Socialists in Germany up to that point. Stalin had killed 7,000 times more And yet, somehow or another, he says the most monstrous tyranny never surpassed in a dark catalogue of human crime is that of Germany. Well, that's obviously not true. You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word. Victory. Victory at all costs. Victory in spite of all terror. Victory however long and hard the road may be. If people were paying attention, taking notes, he made good on those promises at least. As an observer noted, Winston Churchill marshaled the English language and sent it off to war. And certainly his policy at all costs meant an extremely long and hard, ruinous road for the people of England, the people of Europe, and indeed for the whole British Commonwealth, including for ourselves in South Africa and Rhodesia, who didn't realise that his policy would mean the end of our homes and civilisation too. But the film Darkest Hour does raise the question, was it necessary? Could Britain have chosen the road of peace and negotiation? And of course they could have, and should have, and it would have been better for everyone concerned if they had. They shouldn't have got involved in the war in the first place, but it's better to admit that you made a mistake early on, before more people died, before more disasters were made, before you mortgaged more of the empire, That is the whole premise of Patrick Buchanan's book, Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War, How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World. One of the most important books in the Second World War I've ever read. As darkest hour depicts, most of the cabinet, including Neville Chamberlain, the previous Prime Minister, and Lord Hadley Fax, the Foreign Secretary, favoured a negotiated settlement immediately with Germany. And indeed, Germany offered most generous terms repeatedly. Very generous terms. And that's certainly what President Herbert Hoover and his Freedom with Trade book documents. Do you know that at one point after the German army had been victorious and the British army had been defeated and the French had surrendered, and when Lord Halifax heard the German terms, he said, We thought they'd demand back their colonies. They're not even asking for their colonies back. They're not asking for anything from Britain. They're just asking that we lift the blockade and stop bombing them. I mean, how easy is that? They're not asking for reparations. They're not asking for ships. They're not asking for anything. They just want to be left alone. These authorities, I'm talking about Herbert Hoover, Patrick Buchanan and others are convinced that Britain could have continued to be the greatest political, economic and military superpower in the world through to the end of the 20th century and beyond, had Churchill's policy of war at any price, in spite of all terror, however long and hard the road may be, had not been so doggedly perceived, because he was hell-bent on war, no matter what the cost to the Empire. sidelined itself, bankrupted itself. Britain, at the beginning of the 20th century, was the greatest power on Earth. It controlled one-fifth of the world's land surface and about a quarter of the world's population. And America was actually nothing. It was a backward nothing at that stage. And Russia was not too much better. Europe was the superpower, collectively and everywhere, and Britain was the greatest superpower of Europe. But because they didn't like competition, and because the Kaiser's Germany was now outstripping Britain in production, and because their chess master had beaten them at chess, and a few other things like that, there was this vindictive idea of bringing Germany down. You know, Germany and Britain could have advanced together as friends, as competitors. Competitors aren't bad. Competitors can make you do better in sports and all sorts of things. But his hell-bent idea to bring down Germany didn't realize that after a while Britain would be going cap in hand to America to borrow from them, and America's navy would outstrip Britain's. Britain could have continued to be the number one sea power and economic power in the world to this day. And yet, they blew it all, why? Out of a hell-bent mentality, we're going to keep fighting no matter what. And you can see here, just looking at the navies, how the Royal Navy outnumbered, and this is imagination, Germany never even had an aircraft carrier. They had a plan for an aircraft carrier but they never built it and they never even designed an aircraft that could land on its deck. So that's imagination. But you can see the proportion. The British Navy is colossal. The French Navy is about 40%. The German Navy is not even 10% of the Royal Navy size. When you talk about world domination, well France had world domination, Britain had world domination, Japan and America had world domination, Germany could only hope for European domination. There could never have been a world domination power unless they had four engine bombers and lots of aircraft carriers, which they had no plans to even have. Peter Padfield makes the same point in his Hess, Hitler and Churchill, the real turning point of the Second World War, a secret history book. This is a phenomenally important book. When Deputy Fuhrer Rudolf Hess settled for Britain on his peace mission in May 1941, it was the most dramatic of 16 major peace initiatives launched by Germany to end the war in the West. In a space of 18 months, Germany had tried 16 major peace initiatives, all of which were super reasonable, asking almost nothing of Britain except end the blockade and stop the bombing. The reason why this is called the real turning point of the Second World War is that the people of Britain were told they were fighting to defend England. And if they'd realized that there never was any intention to attack England, and England was not at stake, they would have said, then why are we fighting? But this fiction of Operation Sealine, German invasion of England, was keeping people going. So if they knew that this First World War war hero, Riddlefess, who had incredibly courageously flown at night and parachute. For the first time in his life he parachuted. He'd never parachuted before. Parachuted at night out of his aircraft, Messerschmitt 110, which is a double-engine plane. And he had come in unarmed. He didn't even have any ammunition in his plane. Unarmed plane, and he was personally unarmed. And he came as a peace emissary and landed in Scotland, close to where his friend was Lord Hamilton who was a pro-peace and pro-German and was hoping to personally deliver this peace offer to the British government and of course the number two in charge, Hitler's deputy, that's a very significant gestures of good faith, and if the people knew about this, this would have been a real turning point, because if the Allies had made peace with Germany in 1941, and Germany had been allowed a free hand in the East, and if the West hadn't given any aid to the Soviet Union through Lend-Lease, well, Germany would have defeated the Soviet Union, Russia would have been liberated, Ukraine, all those countries would have been freed for, wouldn't have had to go through the Cold War and Iron Curtain and all the Soviet Union's atrocities, Yalts and so on. And Britain could have kept her empire. And for that matter Rhodesia would still be where it is and South Africa would still be what it was. Yet, you can see there was already a cover-up from the very beginning. Churchill gave the cover-up. They are not allowed to talk to him. He's not allowed to talk to the press. He's not allowed to talk to any of the peace people. Churchill had locked up 6,000 people in the Second World War in Britain under his Emergency Powers Act of May 22, 1940, where he could basically do anything. He wanted to lock up anyone for whatever reason. And the reason is that he was coming with a peace offer, and if the British people knew that they could have peace, that they're not fighting to defend the island, that Germany isn't trying to invade them or destroy them or take away the empire, you know, all of that, then why would they have continued fighting? I mean, are they fighting for Poland? That's why they went into the war, they said, altruistic motive of just going on to help Poland, but they never did help Poland. In the end they betrayed Poland in the hands of the Soviet Union. So what are we fighting for? If not to protect our island from invasion. That was the lie. As made clear in multiple other offers through 1940-41 through neutral countries like Sweden and Switzerland, the German leadership was committed to evacuating all occupied European countries in the West in exchange for the ending of British naval blockade and aerial bombardment of Germany. Not asking for much. It's not even asking for South West Africa and Tanganyika back, which you would have thought would have been a reasonable request. What would Britain have to lose from accepting such an offer? Absolutely nothing. You stop the blockade, stop bombing Germany, they'll withdraw. Gee, how easy is that? There was so much to gain. However, Winston Churchill had everyone connected with the peace initiatives in Britain arrested and incarcerated under security legislation, including generals, admirals, and lords, and members of parliament. This one poor member of parliament got locked up for four years without charge and without trial. His, who is an unarmed peace emissary, should have been treated like an ambassador, was the last prisoner incarcerated in the Tower of London. Hiss was completely muzzled, never allowed to speak to anyone concerning the war or his peace initiative for the rest of his life. Considering that he is the last surviving senior leader of the Third Reich, it's extraordinary that neither historians nor journalists were allowed any access to interview him. Imagine how many journalists and historians would have loved to have asked him questions and gotten clarity on a whole range of things that only he would have been privy to. And so the flight of Rudolf Hess stands as the real turning point of the Second World War. It's before Germany began the pre-emptive strike on the Soviet Union, Operation Barbarossa, and if Britain had at that stage stopped the blockade and not helped the Soviet Union, well, the end result is clear. And what would we have had to lose? The real turning point of the Second World War. Because the Soviet Union had already been invading Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, taking all the way down Ukraine, down into, ready to invade Romania, Hungary. It was a bad situation. And Germany was facing a colossal build-up of Soviet forces. The Soviets, in fact this completely underestimates, the Soviets had 7 times more aircraft, 5 times more tanks. ten times more soldiers, huge amount of resources, and so Germany needed to fight. Operation Barbarossa had volunteers coming from as far afield as Sweden, which was neutral, Spain, even from South Africa, even Americans were volunteers in this great crusade against the Soviet Union. It was a bold, brave and necessary attempt. Nobody has fought the communists more intently than Germany did in the Second World War. No great attempt was ever made to free the Soviet Union from communism. They were not only phenomenally successful in the first many months, but they found the people responding with great enthusiasm that they were freed. Ukrainians, Belarusians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Estonians, even Russians were rejoicing and chopping down Lenin statues, Russian soldiers surrendered by the millions. Over three million Russian soldiers had surrendered to the Germans and were prisoners of war within the first five months of Operation Barbarossa. As Peter Padfield makes clear in his book, Hess, Hitler and Churchill, while the British people had absolutely everything to gain and nothing to lose from entering into such a peace agreement, Indeed many millions of lives would have been spared and much of the architectural treasures and art treasures of Europe would have escaped aerial destruction by bomber command, like Dresden. In fact, no soldiers needed to have died on the beaches of Normandy or on the Battle of Arnheim or any of the battles of the Dieppe Raid where 6,000 Canadian commanders were just thrown away on a pointless exercise to test German coastal defences and to provide an example to Stalin of tying up German divisions in France to relieve pressure on the Red Army on the Eastern Front. The Canadians have never forgotten or forgiven it. The worst nine hours in Canadian military history. They got slaughtered. And the terror bombings that incinerated 60 cities including Hamburg, Cologne, Dresden, Berlin, I mean, was this necessary? All of this would have been unnecessary if they'd made peace in 1940, in 1941, accepted Hess's offer. How many lives would have been spared? How many millions of people would have been alive? And tens of millions of their descendants to this day. one person would have lost, and that is Winston Churchill. He saw the war as his path to personal greatness and stature, and ending the war early was against his personal ambitions. The only other winners or beneficiaries of the disastrous Second World War were the international communists, and particularly Stalin's Soviet Union, we should add the bankers amongst them. Even admirers and biographers of Winston Churchill acknowledged that he was more of a war dictator than a prime minister. never has any British Prime Minister consolidated more power and exercised it with greater influence than Winston Churchill did from 1940 to 1945. He even made himself Minister of Defence. Sort of a reminder of General Smuts, who seized control of this country from the popularly elected General James Barry Herzog, who had won five elections, been our Prime Minister for 15 years, the most popular and successful Prime Minister in South African history, ousted out of his office, for no other reason than he refused to declare war on Germany. He said, Germany hasn't attacked us, they haven't even attacked Britain. This is not even necessary for Britain to be involved in this war. Why should Salafi get involved? And because he was thinking of Salafi's interests first, he got ousted and General Smuts, who had lost the last five elections, made himself Prime Minister of Salafi and Minister of Defence and Foreign Minister, by the way, as well. So he went even further than Churchill. And the first thing Churchill told him to do ship all South African gold to Simonstown, loaded in secret on the USS Quincy, which FDR is going to send you to go to New York in order to pay for Lend-Lease. And Smuts might have thought that Lend-Lease was going to come to Britain. What he didn't know is most of it was going to go to the Soviet Union. And we paid for it without gold. Churchill bypassed the Chiefs of Staff and the War Cabinet Secretary to issue personal commands directly to squadron leaders at Commander's Field. Never been done before. Highly unethical. He issued orders for a series of savage attack on the German capital Berlin in September 1941 and Bomber Command warned him, well such attacks will inevitably lead to counter-bombing of London. reprisal and Churchill just smiled and told him to go ahead. This is well documented in Churchill's war. He wanted the war and he had he launched multiple aerial bombardments of Berlin before Germany responded and I must say I think foolishly I don't believe Germany should have lowered itself to Britain's level of going to attack cities and just because they bombed Berlin It's understandable that they'd want reprisals, but unfortunately the way it's been twisted now is to try and blame Germany for bombing London, whereas it's quite clear from all the historic records, even Bomber Command admits, yeah, we started the bombing of cities. We initiated it. Churchill, in some ways, was something of a revolution. Formal hierarchies and normal procedures were no longer sacred in his administration. Anything that advanced the war effort was good. Anything that stood in its way was steamrolled or swept aside. Financial orthodoxy thrown out the window. Britain went for broke. In fact, as Paul Batham said, when he went to Britain as a missionary in 1951, he thought, this country looks like they lost the Second World War. And when he went to Germany, he said, it looks like this country won. He said, despite the destruction, Germany, the people are rebuilding. And Germany was in a better state in 1951 than Britain was. And Britain still had food rationing, and Germany no longer had food rationing in 1951. As Bill Bentham puts in his book going through, he said, it really looked quite strange. He said he thought the British won the Second World War, but when he went there, it looked like they'd lost. Indeed, they had lost. Limits on working hours in factories were ignored in the race for arms production. While Germany never allowed mothers to be mobilized into the factories in the Second World War, Winston Churchill had no such compunctions, and he moved the entire country into a total war footing. Immediately, twenty fires a day, seven days a week, factory production. Absolutely nothing was held back. For a healthy, happy job, join the Women's Land Army. And who's looking after your children? Don't worry, they go to daycare. Churchill wanted all the women, all the mothers, in the fields, in the factories, producing, for example, gas masks. And factories producing vast amounts of aircraft and bombs to be dropped on other mothers over on the other side. However Germany by way of comparison only moved on to such a total war footing as late as 1943 when it was actually too late and never allowed the mothers into factories. As Air Marshal Arthur Tedder to the rights of Eisenhower here. As he observed, Germany lost the war because she failed to wage total war. I was surprised when I heard that from Tedder because I thought both sides were doing total war from the beginning. But no, mothers in Germany were excluded from factory work. Albert Speer, the Reich Minister of Armaments and War Production, complained to Adolf Hitler personally about the exclusion of millions of mothers. I think he said, I could increase my workforce by, was it eight or nine million? If you'd allow the mothers to be conscripted into factories, and Adolf Hitler flatly overruled it and said, no, the primary duties of mothers is to raise the children in the home, and he would not allow it. And Albert Speer said, then we will lose the war. Because we need production. And we need these millions of extra people. Which Britain has. Britain was on a 24-hour cycle producing already from 1939. Germany only went into a 24-hour factory cycle in 1943. They didn't think they were needing to go to total war. Churchill had no problem drafting women into war work by the Ministry of Labour and even using women in combat. He had women in anti-aircraft positions, which of course is a combat position. And in Special Operations Executive, the SAE, which learned from the IRA how to basically be terrorists, he used many women in highly dangerous roles as secret agents, parachuting women into France to act as partisans, who of course many of them would get killed in the process. As Churchill put it, they had to set Europe ablaze. They had no problem putting women into combat positions and having the hard labor of their people go to the Soviet Union. Russia's lifesaver, as they said, Lend-Lease, which we paid for. And the destruction of how many cities? This was Churchill's war. Now here you can see Churchill with General de Gaulle of France, and there's General Sikorski of Poland. Polish government's in exile, and General de Gaulle representing the French government's in exile, so forth. So these were the allies. Over here it doesn't look like Churchill's too happy with old General Sikorski. And do you know why? because this is 1943 and the Bataan forest massacre has been known and General Sikorski wants the International Red Cross to do an investigation because he believes the Soviet Union did it, which is what all the evidence is saying, and even at that stage Churchill knows that Stalin did it, he admits it in his own writings, but that upset the alliance between the United States, United Kingdom and the Soviet Union. So he organized for Sikorski to get knocked off in Gibraltar. So much for allies and fighting for Poland. After passage of the Emergency Powers Act of 22nd of May, Churchill had the legal power to do almost anything he liked with the citizens of Britain and their property. And he did. His temper was vile and violent. He erupted and was happy to scream at anybody. He was abusive. The film shows some of this, actually. But as has been observed, Winston Churchill practiced a national socialism in Britain, in many cases far more severe than that practiced by wartime Germany. The general picture we have is, you know, Britain was free and Germany was not free. Well, actually, The Special Branch in Britain acted very much like the Gestapo did in Germany, and anyone they thought was a threat, and it could just be a pacifist, they locked them up. They locked up 6,000 people for opposing the war and for being effectively pacifists, including members of Parliament, admirals, generals, and people from the House of Lords, as we were told in a previous presentation last year by Stephen Mitford Goodson. In those desperate days, Churchill dominated the radio and the newspapers of Great Britain with calculated political acts and carefully prepared, well-rehearsed speeches designed to boost morale, delegate defeatism, as he called it, and to secure maximum work effort from factory workers, farm labourers, soldiers alike. His speeches were also intended to resound through the ages. As Churchill noted, he never forgot that he was an actor on the great stage of history. And this is one of the things that's concerning, is the people who put their lives at stake, including my parents, were actually actors in Churchill's great play that he is busy with. And the fact that millions were dying as a result of his policies didn't seem to bother him. Well, there's a lot more one can say, and I have prepared notes. You can see I've got down there 20 pages on Churchill. I've gotten this far. This is five pages of PowerPoint prepared in time for tonight. The rest will have to come next week to go further on to Churchill. But here's a great quote from him. Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm. Here he is with one of the bankers who was part of his focus group. He certainly did that. He went from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm. Here's a picture of Churchill being installed into the Albion Lodge of the Ancient Order of Druids. That's basically a witchcraft, Wiccan type of thing. He was a literal pagan. A correct understanding of the past is an indispensable aid in making a better future. The truth is not only stranger than fiction, it's far more gripping and far more impressive. One great source on Churchill's life is David Irving's two-part series, Churchill's War. Warlord is also very interesting. Exposés on his alliance with Stalin and Roosevelt and what he did behind closed doors in appeasing the worst dictator and worst anti-Christian person of the Church in history, Joseph Stalin. The sellout to Stalin, they call it tragic errors of Churchill Roosevelt. This is actually, he misunderstands, it wasn't an error at all, they knew what they were doing. they knew exactly what they were doing. This is one of the first books I ever read that opened up my eyes to the other story. I was 15 years old, 1975, I was in Rhodesia and I came across this book, The Last Secret. And it's not The Last Secret, there's a lot more to come, but this was Operation Kill Wall, the betrayal of 3 million Russians, Ukrainians and other East Europeans behind their own curtain into the hands of Stalin. There were people in the West, some of whom had been born in the West, their parents had moved there in 1919 or 1920, during the Bolshevik Revolution. And now, after a generation of living in the West, they were to be forced back at bayonet point, crossed at the hands of Stalin's NKVD, all of whom died in Stalin's concentration camps. And this was just shocking, but it exposed to me what Churchill was really like. Forced by the Allies. That's right, forced by the Allies, totally. The Germans protected them. The Allies betrayed them. And that's one of the things Patton was furious about. My father, who was all six years in the Royal Artillery in the Second World War, he had this feeling of they'd been lied to and they'd been on the wrong side. And I remember him saying, I can't believe we wasted our time fighting for the French twice. That was their history. You know, Churchill's first war, to read his description of his operations in Afghanistan, as a soldier in Afghanistan, he tells with relish, we killed every Afghan we came across. How they killed all the prisons. They killed men, women and children. We burned their villages. We destroyed every place of habitation. We chopped down every tree. We poisoned all the wells. And we burned the crops. We left behind nothing but destruction. It sounds like the recollections of a psychopath and a war criminal. He was a young man in his first war and has no sense of Christian conscience. And when you think his behavior in the Sudan and his behavior in the Anglo-Boer War, he was so positive about the Scorched Earth Campaign, about the concentration camps, he supported all of this. This man had no conscience in the beginning. And the most extraordinary thing to me is how he's been made an idol of Britain. Winston Churchill is to Britain what Martin Luther King and Lincoln is to America, what Mandela is to the ANC South Africa, what Lenin was to the Soviet Union, Mao was to the Communist Chinese. He is an idol of the New World Order. And that's why I'm sure that this film is going to get Academy Awards because it's exactly the hagiography that the New World Order wants. They want to lift him up. What did he ever do that was good? he helped to destroy Germany, and he helped to destroy the nationalist cause, and he helped to advance the internationalist cause, and he helped the Soviet Union to get half of Europe, and he helped save the Soviet Union with the Lend-Lease, and there's so many other things he did that the banksters and the New World Order people would want you to honour him for. I understand why a communist would honour a Lenin or a Mandela. I don't understand why a Christian would want to honour Lincoln or Churchill for that matter. So, that's just some backgrounds. Somebody brought out a book that Winston Churchill was actually homosexual and there's some very interesting information that looks extremely believable and just, in fact, some of the photographs of him with some other males looks highly suspicious. But I'll leave it there. Let's leave on that point.