BBC (again)

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

BBC (again)

Visit the current forum | Forum Rules

Page 13 of 261 < 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 >

Eaglecoops CR3 22 Jul 20 5.53pm
Originally posted by Badger11 Naga Munchetty says the license fee is worth it. Well she would as she earns nearly £200,000 pa. Try saying that when you are on minimum wage Naga. [Link] If nothing else it’s a damn fine name, it kind of reminds me how I used to feel as a kid when I’d smoked too much weed.

Eaglecoops

CR3 22 Jul 20 5.53pm

Originally posted by Badger11

Naga Munchetty says the license fee is worth it. Well she would as she earns nearly £200,000 pa.

Try saying that when you are on minimum wage Naga.

[Link]

If nothing else it’s a damn fine name, it kind of reminds me how I used to feel as a kid when I’d smoked too much weed.

palace_in_frogland In a broken dream 22 Jul 20 10.14pm
Originally posted by Eaglecoops If nothing else it’s a damn fine name, it kind of reminds me how I used to feel as a kid when I’d smoked too much weed. The midnight munchettys!

palace_in_frogland

In a broken dream 22 Jul 20 10.14pm

Originally posted by Eaglecoops

If nothing else it’s a damn fine name, it kind of reminds me how I used to feel as a kid when I’d smoked too much weed.

The midnight munchettys!

Badger11 Beckenham 23 Jul 20 2.41pm
They can't help themselves can they. The BBC are at it again claiming that Churchill was responsible for the 1843 Bengal famine that killed 3 million people. As usual the BBC gave a one sided view to a disaster that divides historians, distinguished people on both sides of the argument disagree. [Link] My points are this: 1. Why only a one sided approach why no input from those who say he was constrained by the war in Asia. 2. And more importantly why was this an item on BBC News at 10? This is not news but a debate that has been going on for 70 years. What next tune in to the 6 o'clock news to find out if Boudica has a chance against the Romans. Defund the BBC One more point

Badger11

Beckenham 23 Jul 20 2.41pm

They can't help themselves can they.

The BBC are at it again claiming that Churchill was responsible for the 1843 Bengal famine that killed 3 million people.

As usual the BBC gave a one sided view to a disaster that divides historians, distinguished people on both sides of the argument disagree.

[Link]

My points are this:

1. Why only a one sided approach why no input from those who say he was constrained by the war in Asia.

2. And more importantly why was this an item on BBC News at 10? This is not news but a debate that has been going on for 70 years.

What next tune in to the 6 o'clock news to find out if Boudica has a chance against the Romans.

Defund the BBC

One more point

Rudi Hedman Caterham 23 Jul 20 2.48pm
They had ‘Churchill’s Finest Hour’ with Gary Oldman playing Churchill on BBC1 a month ago. They’ll have ‘The Enigma Code’ on again when Britain and Churchill had to let German victories and British deaths continue for the long term goal of keeping it secret we’d cracked the enigma code. Maybe my relative who worked in the French Radio dept at Bletchley Park shouldn’t have bothered in case someone got hurt defending our freedom and the world from tyranny. Could’ve ended up being a better option in a few generations’ time. COYP

Rudi Hedman

Caterham 23 Jul 20 2.48pm

They had ‘Churchill’s Finest Hour’ with Gary Oldman playing Churchill on BBC1 a month ago. They’ll have ‘The Enigma Code’ on again when Britain and Churchill had to let German victories and British deaths continue for the long term goal of keeping it secret we’d cracked the enigma code. Maybe my relative who worked in the French Radio dept at Bletchley Park shouldn’t have bothered in case someone got hurt defending our freedom and the world from tyranny. Could’ve ended up being a better option in a few generations’ time.

COYP

steeleye20 Croydon 23 Jul 20 3.51pm
Churchill can hardly be held responsible for a weather- induced famine. It's like saying Johnson is personally responsible for excess covid-19 deaths. Could have done better, but we don't seriously think it was done on purpose.

steeleye20

Croydon 23 Jul 20 3.51pm

Churchill can hardly be held responsible for a weather- induced famine.

It's like saying Johnson is personally responsible for excess covid-19 deaths.

Could have done better, but we don't seriously think it was done on purpose.

eagleman13 On The Road To Hell & Alicante 23 Jul 20 3.52pm
Originally posted by Badger11 They can't help themselves can they. The BBC are at it again claiming that Churchill was responsible for the 1843 Bengal famine that killed 3 million people. As usual the BBC gave a one sided view to a disaster that divides historians, distinguished people on both sides of the argument disagree. [Link] My points are this: 1. Why only a one sided approach why no input from those who say he was constrained by the war in Asia. 2. And more importantly why was this an item on BBC News at 10? This is not news but a debate that has been going on for 70 years. What next tune in to the 6 o'clock news to find out if Boudica has a chance against the Romans. Defund the BBC Just refuse to pay your unfair & illegal TV tax, What can they do? NOTHING. As long as you say you dont & wont watch them in any shape or form they cant do owt. They WILL threaten, but cant enforce, IF, & its a mahoosive IF, 'enforcement officers' turn up on your doorstep, 1) You can deny them entry & 2) unplug TV's & say you aint watching them. This operation, will make the 'Charge Of The Light Brigade' seem like a simple military exercise.

eagleman13

On The Road To Hell & Alicante 23 Jul 20 3.52pm

Originally posted by Badger11

They can't help themselves can they.

The BBC are at it again claiming that Churchill was responsible for the 1843 Bengal famine that killed 3 million people.

As usual the BBC gave a one sided view to a disaster that divides historians, distinguished people on both sides of the argument disagree.

[Link]

My points are this:

1. Why only a one sided approach why no input from those who say he was constrained by the war in Asia.

2. And more importantly why was this an item on BBC News at 10? This is not news but a debate that has been going on for 70 years.

What next tune in to the 6 o'clock news to find out if Boudica has a chance against the Romans.

Defund the BBC

Just refuse to pay your unfair & illegal TV tax, What can they do? NOTHING. As long as you say you dont & wont watch them in any shape or form they cant do owt. They WILL threaten, but cant enforce, IF, & its a mahoosive IF, 'enforcement officers' turn up on your doorstep, 1) You can deny them entry & 2) unplug TV's & say you aint watching them.

This operation, will make the 'Charge Of The Light Brigade' seem like a simple military exercise.

steeleye20 Croydon 23 Jul 20 4.48pm
Originally posted by Badger11 They can't help themselves can they. The BBC are at it again claiming that Churchill was responsible for the 1843 Bengal famine that killed 3 million people. As usual the BBC gave a one sided view to a disaster that divides historians, distinguished people on both sides of the argument disagree. [Link] My points are this: 1. Why only a one sided approach why no input from those who say he was constrained by the war in Asia. 2. And more importantly why was this an item on BBC News at 10? This is not news but a debate that has been going on for 70 years. What next tune in to the 6 o'clock news to find out if Boudica has a chance against the Romans. Defund the BBC I didn't find that report unfair and unbalanced and Churchill's problems were explained. I don't follow these historians who weigh in with praise for Churchill's war effort, typical Max Hastings deflections. In fact historians seem to always err on the British version of events, unable to face up to the truth. The British Empire in respect of this disaster and many others, was responsible by its stripping of the colonies for home consumption. We ransacked them, in the case of India they were worse off when we departed than they had been 200 years earlier when Clive arrived to strip them bare. The BBC view was not one-sided, it is your education that is false, as our education system produces a totally one-sided and completely distorted view of history. Recommended viewing:- Dr.Worsley on 'history's greatest fibs', just for starters, and included an episode on India. And it is on BBC2........

steeleye20

Croydon 23 Jul 20 4.48pm

Originally posted by Badger11

They can't help themselves can they.

The BBC are at it again claiming that Churchill was responsible for the 1843 Bengal famine that killed 3 million people.

As usual the BBC gave a one sided view to a disaster that divides historians, distinguished people on both sides of the argument disagree.

[Link]

My points are this:

1. Why only a one sided approach why no input from those who say he was constrained by the war in Asia.

2. And more importantly why was this an item on BBC News at 10? This is not news but a debate that has been going on for 70 years.

What next tune in to the 6 o'clock news to find out if Boudica has a chance against the Romans.

Defund the BBC

I didn't find that report unfair and unbalanced and Churchill's problems were explained.

I don't follow these historians who weigh in with praise for Churchill's war effort, typical Max Hastings deflections.

In fact historians seem to always err on the British version of events, unable to face up to the truth.

The British Empire in respect of this disaster and many others, was responsible by its stripping of the colonies for home consumption.

We ransacked them, in the case of India they were worse off when we departed than they had been 200 years earlier when Clive arrived to strip them bare.

The BBC view was not one-sided, it is your education that is false, as our education system produces a totally one-sided and completely distorted view of history.

Recommended viewing:- Dr.Worsley on 'history's greatest fibs', just for starters, and included an episode on India.

And it is on BBC2........

eagleman13 On The Road To Hell & Alicante 23 Jul 20 5.24pm
Originally posted by steeleye20 I didn't find that report unfair and unbalanced and Churchill's problems were explained. I don't follow these historians who weigh in with praise for Churchill's war effort, typical Max Hastings deflections. In fact historians seem to always err on the British version of events, unable to face up to the truth. The British Empire in respect of this disaster and many others, was responsible by its stripping of the colonies for home consumption. We ransacked them, in the case of India they were worse off when we departed than they had been 200 years earlier when Clive arrived to strip them bare. The BBC view was not one-sided, it is your education that is false, as our education system produces a totally one-sided and completely distorted view of history. Recommended viewing:- Dr.Worsley on 'history's greatest fibs', just for starters, and included an episode on India. And it is on BBC2........ So you would rather, like BLM, erase OUR ie GB's history just to appease the bbc & snowflakes? Coz thats how THAT looks to me . . . JEEZ This operation, will make the 'Charge Of The Light Brigade' seem like a simple military exercise.

eagleman13

On The Road To Hell & Alicante 23 Jul 20 5.24pm

Originally posted by steeleye20

I didn't find that report unfair and unbalanced and Churchill's problems were explained.

I don't follow these historians who weigh in with praise for Churchill's war effort, typical Max Hastings deflections.

In fact historians seem to always err on the British version of events, unable to face up to the truth.

The British Empire in respect of this disaster and many others, was responsible by its stripping of the colonies for home consumption.

We ransacked them, in the case of India they were worse off when we departed than they had been 200 years earlier when Clive arrived to strip them bare.

The BBC view was not one-sided, it is your education that is false, as our education system produces a totally one-sided and completely distorted view of history.

Recommended viewing:- Dr.Worsley on 'history's greatest fibs', just for starters, and included an episode on India.

And it is on BBC2........

So you would rather, like BLM, erase OUR ie GB's history just to appease the bbc & snowflakes?

Coz thats how THAT looks to me . . . JEEZ

This operation, will make the 'Charge Of The Light Brigade' seem like a simple military exercise.

Badger11 Beckenham 23 Jul 20 5.41pm
Originally posted by steeleye20 I didn't find that report unfair and unbalanced and Churchill's problems were explained. I don't follow these historians who weigh in with praise for Churchill's war effort, typical Max Hastings deflections. In fact historians seem to always err on the British version of events, unable to face up to the truth. The British Empire in respect of this disaster and many others, was responsible by its stripping of the colonies for home consumption. We ransacked them, in the case of India they were worse off when we departed than they had been 200 years earlier when Clive arrived to strip them bare. The BBC view was not one-sided, it is your education that is false, as our education system produces a totally one-sided and completely distorted view of history. Recommended viewing:- Dr.Worsley on 'history's greatest fibs', just for starters, and included an episode on India. And it is on BBC2........ But it's not news ! One more point

Badger11

Beckenham 23 Jul 20 5.41pm

Originally posted by steeleye20

I didn't find that report unfair and unbalanced and Churchill's problems were explained.

I don't follow these historians who weigh in with praise for Churchill's war effort, typical Max Hastings deflections.

In fact historians seem to always err on the British version of events, unable to face up to the truth.

The British Empire in respect of this disaster and many others, was responsible by its stripping of the colonies for home consumption.

We ransacked them, in the case of India they were worse off when we departed than they had been 200 years earlier when Clive arrived to strip them bare.

The BBC view was not one-sided, it is your education that is false, as our education system produces a totally one-sided and completely distorted view of history.

Recommended viewing:- Dr.Worsley on 'history's greatest fibs', just for starters, and included an episode on India.

And it is on BBC2........

But it's not news !

One more point

ASCPFC Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 23 Jul 20 6.13pm
Originally posted by steeleye20 I didn't find that report unfair and unbalanced and Churchill's problems were explained. I don't follow these historians who weigh in with praise for Churchill's war effort, typical Max Hastings deflections. In fact historians seem to always err on the British version of events, unable to face up to the truth. The British Empire in respect of this disaster and many others, was responsible by its stripping of the colonies for home consumption. We ransacked them, in the case of India they were worse off when we departed than they had been 200 years earlier when Clive arrived to strip them bare. The BBC view was not one-sided, it is your education that is false, as our education system produces a totally one-sided and completely distorted view of history. Recommended viewing:- Dr.Worsley on 'history's greatest fibs', just for starters, and included an episode on India. And it is on BBC2........ None of this is truth either. Nor is Worsley's stuff. You will find, for instance, there is Marxist history/ feminist history - all kinds of history. The truth is somewhere in between. I would like, however, any kind of explanation of how India was better off, whereas India had regular famine and it was all Princely States, where many were serfs, or worse, before British rule. Some Princes were decent rulers, some not so. Some worked with the English, others with the French. It is hardly a one size fit all history, particularly in India which had, and still has, massive regional differences. Red and Blue Army!

ASCPFC

Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 23 Jul 20 6.13pm

Originally posted by steeleye20

I didn't find that report unfair and unbalanced and Churchill's problems were explained.

I don't follow these historians who weigh in with praise for Churchill's war effort, typical Max Hastings deflections.

In fact historians seem to always err on the British version of events, unable to face up to the truth.

The British Empire in respect of this disaster and many others, was responsible by its stripping of the colonies for home consumption.

We ransacked them, in the case of India they were worse off when we departed than they had been 200 years earlier when Clive arrived to strip them bare.

The BBC view was not one-sided, it is your education that is false, as our education system produces a totally one-sided and completely distorted view of history.

Recommended viewing:- Dr.Worsley on 'history's greatest fibs', just for starters, and included an episode on India.

And it is on BBC2........

None of this is truth either. Nor is Worsley's stuff. You will find, for instance, there is Marxist history/ feminist history - all kinds of history. The truth is somewhere in between.
I would like, however, any kind of explanation of how India was better off, whereas India had regular famine and it was all Princely States, where many were serfs, or worse, before British rule. Some Princes were decent rulers, some not so. Some worked with the English, others with the French. It is hardly a one size fit all history, particularly in India which had, and still has, massive regional differences.

Red and Blue Army!

Nicholas91 The Democratic Republic of Kent 23 Jul 20 6.17pm
Originally posted by Badger11 But it's not news ! Which I had assumed was your point. It also begs the further question - what is the point in promoting things like this? I don't given a flying monkeys about any moral take on history, I couldn't care less if a little island nation was responsible for purging half the world. What I do take offence to however is a media organisation trying to provide justification for minority groups to hold resentment against the country and culture within I live and the possible consequences of that. When did Treason stop being a crime? #defundthebbc and all that. Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

Nicholas91

The Democratic Republic of Kent 23 Jul 20 6.17pm

Originally posted by Badger11

But it's not news !

Which I had assumed was your point.

It also begs the further question - what is the point in promoting things like this?

I don't given a flying monkeys about any moral take on history, I couldn't care less if a little island nation was responsible for purging half the world.

What I do take offence to however is a media organisation trying to provide justification for minority groups to hold resentment against the country and culture within I live and the possible consequences of that. When did Treason stop being a crime?

#defundthebbc and all that.

Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

Badger11 Beckenham 25 Jul 20 11.42am
BBC Panorama was guilty of political bias [Link] And yet again the BBC has to admit it made errors. Funny if the BBC is as unbiased as they say they are why do they never makes errors the other way around e.g. pro Brexit pro right wing? One more point

Badger11

Beckenham 25 Jul 20 11.42am

BBC Panorama was guilty of political bias

[Link]

And yet again the BBC has to admit it made errors. Funny if the BBC is as unbiased as they say they are why do they never makes errors the other way around e.g. pro Brexit pro right wing?

One more point

JRW2 Dulwich 25 Jul 20 4.42pm
Originally posted by Badger11 BBC Panorama was guilty of political bias [Link] And yet again the BBC has to admit it made errors. Funny if the BBC is as unbiased as they say they are why do they never makes errors the other way around e.g. pro Brexit pro right wing? Thanks for posting that judgment by the ECU - if you can call it a judgment. They say, "(her) political affiliation......might have been relevant to the audience's evaluation of her contribution." A few lines later they say, "information about her political affiliations would not have called the validity of her concerns into doubt in the minds of viewers." Blimey, talk about wanting it both ways.

JRW2

Dulwich 25 Jul 20 4.42pm

Originally posted by Badger11

BBC Panorama was guilty of political bias

[Link]

And yet again the BBC has to admit it made errors. Funny if the BBC is as unbiased as they say they are why do they never makes errors the other way around e.g. pro Brexit pro right wing?

Thanks for posting that judgment by the ECU - if you can call it a judgment. They say, "(her) political affiliation......might have been relevant to the audience's evaluation of her contribution." A few lines later they say, "information about her political affiliations would not have called the validity of her concerns into doubt in the minds of viewers." Blimey, talk about wanting it both ways.

Badger11 Beckenham 25 Jul 20 4.51pm
Originally posted by JRW2 Thanks for posting that judgment by the ECU - if you can call it a judgment. They say, "(her) political affiliation......might have been relevant to the audience's evaluation of her contribution." A few lines later they say, "information about her political affiliations would not have called the validity of her concerns into doubt in the minds of viewers." Blimey, talk about wanting it both ways. What I find annoying is that the BBC loves to over egg the pudding. Th point of the program was that shambolic supply of PPE and it is a valid criticism. I would have got the most unbiased unimpeachable expert I could find but no they go for one of their mates in the Labour party. Do they not get that they then become the story not the failing of the government. For a media company they really do not understand "the media". Idiots. One more point

Badger11

Beckenham 25 Jul 20 4.51pm

Originally posted by JRW2

What I find annoying is that the BBC loves to over egg the pudding. Th point of the program was that shambolic supply of PPE and it is a valid criticism.

I would have got the most unbiased unimpeachable expert I could find but no they go for one of their mates in the Labour party. Do they not get that they then become the story not the failing of the government. For a media company they really do not understand "the media".

Idiots.

One more point

JRW2 Dulwich 25 Jul 20 5.11pm
Originally posted by Badger11 What I find annoying is that the BBC loves to over egg the pudding. Th point of the program was that shambolic supply of PPE and it is a valid criticism. I would have got the most unbiased unimpeachable expert I could find but no they go for one of their mates in the Labour party. Do they not get that they then become the story not the failing of the government. For a media company they really do not understand "the media". A very good point, if I may say so. The problem with that for the BBC, however, is that the unimpeachable experts (scientists, medics, professors) refuse to join in the political game. I can't remember which expert was on the Today programme this morning, but Nick Robinson tried every way he knew to get him to criticise the government. Far from doing so, he actually at one point praised the government. I doubt whether he'll be invited back (sorry, that's probably going too far).

JRW2

Dulwich 25 Jul 20 5.11pm

Originally posted by Badger11

What I find annoying is that the BBC loves to over egg the pudding. Th point of the program was that shambolic supply of PPE and it is a valid criticism.

A very good point, if I may say so. The problem with that for the BBC, however, is that the unimpeachable experts (scientists, medics, professors) refuse to join in the political game. I can't remember which expert was on the Today programme this morning, but Nick Robinson tried every way he knew to get him to criticise the government. Far from doing so, he actually at one point praised the government. I doubt whether he'll be invited back (sorry, that's probably going too far).

The Dolphin 26 Jul 20 7.22am
I just found this thread. The BBC is a disgrace and should be defunded. It's bias is embarrassing and everyone bar them knows it. Anyway - any business that pays Gary Lineker £2m a year should be shut for that reason alone!

The Dolphin

26 Jul 20 7.22am

I just found this thread.
The BBC is a disgrace and should be defunded.
It's bias is embarrassing and everyone bar them knows it.
Anyway - any business that pays Gary Lineker £2m a year should be shut for that reason alone!

Spiderman Horsham 26 Jul 20 7.54am
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman They had ‘Churchill’s Finest Hour’ with Gary Oldman playing Churchill on BBC1 a month ago. They’ll have ‘The Enigma Code’ on again when Britain and Churchill had to let German victories and British deaths continue for the long term goal of keeping it secret we’d cracked the enigma code. Maybe my relative who worked in the French Radio dept at Bletchley Park shouldn’t have bothered in case someone got hurt defending our freedom and the world from tyranny. Could’ve ended up being a better option in a few generations’ time. I am hoping to be the first family member to visit my grandfather’s grave in Italy ( he left a widow and 5 children behind) but I don’t want to be condemned as a racist/facist for dining this. Can’t understand why he went to fight for a country being governed by Churchill the racist.

Spiderman

Horsham 26 Jul 20 7.54am

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

I am hoping to be the first family member to visit my grandfather’s grave in Italy ( he left a widow and 5 children behind) but I don’t want to be condemned as a racist/facist for dining this. Can’t understand why he went to fight for a country being governed by Churchill the racist.

Spiderman Horsham 26 Jul 20 8.02am
Originally posted by steeleye20 I didn't find that report unfair and unbalanced and Churchill's problems were explained. I don't follow these historians who weigh in with praise for Churchill's war effort, typical Max Hastings deflections. In fact historians seem to always err on the British version of events, unable to face up to the truth. The British Empire in respect of this disaster and many others, was responsible by its stripping of the colonies for home consumption. We ransacked them, in the case of India they were worse off when we departed than they had been 200 years earlier when Clive arrived to strip them bare. The BBC view was not one-sided, it is your education that is false, as our education system produces a totally one-sided and completely distorted view of history. Recommended viewing:- Dr.Worsley on 'history's greatest fibs', just for starters, and included an episode on India. And it is on BBC2........ So are you saying no-one in India is starving or living in poverty? Pay a cost sometime and have women try to thrust young babies through taxi windows. Did the British not build the railways and sewage system? Not saying we were innocent but...

Spiderman

Horsham 26 Jul 20 8.02am

Originally posted by steeleye20

I didn't find that report unfair and unbalanced and Churchill's problems were explained.

I don't follow these historians who weigh in with praise for Churchill's war effort, typical Max Hastings deflections.

In fact historians seem to always err on the British version of events, unable to face up to the truth.

The British Empire in respect of this disaster and many others, was responsible by its stripping of the colonies for home consumption.

We ransacked them, in the case of India they were worse off when we departed than they had been 200 years earlier when Clive arrived to strip them bare.

The BBC view was not one-sided, it is your education that is false, as our education system produces a totally one-sided and completely distorted view of history.

Recommended viewing:- Dr.Worsley on 'history's greatest fibs', just for starters, and included an episode on India.

And it is on BBC2........

So are you saying no-one in India is starving or living in poverty? Pay a cost sometime and have women try to thrust young babies through taxi windows.
Did the British not build the railways and sewage system? Not saying we were innocent but...

dannyboy1978 28 Jul 20 11.04am
Errr BBC, did you ever think it's the idiots that won't learn English [Link]

dannyboy1978

28 Jul 20 11.04am

Errr BBC, did you ever think it's the idiots that won't learn English
[Link]

Hrolf The Ganger 28 Jul 20 3.12pm
Originally posted by steeleye20 I didn't find that report unfair and unbalanced and Churchill's problems were explained. I don't follow these historians who weigh in with praise for Churchill's war effort, typical Max Hastings deflections. In fact historians seem to always err on the British version of events, unable to face up to the truth. The British Empire in respect of this disaster and many others, was responsible by its stripping of the colonies for home consumption. We ransacked them, in the case of India they were worse off when we departed than they had been 200 years earlier when Clive arrived to strip them bare. The BBC view was not one-sided, it is your education that is false, as our education system produces a totally one-sided and completely distorted view of history. Recommended viewing:- Dr.Worsley on 'history's greatest fibs', just for starters, and included an episode on India. And it is on BBC2........ That's not what a lot of Indians think. Many of them 'hated' us so much that they came to Britain when they needed help or to escape poverty.

Hrolf The Ganger

28 Jul 20 3.12pm

Originally posted by steeleye20

I didn't find that report unfair and unbalanced and Churchill's problems were explained.

I don't follow these historians who weigh in with praise for Churchill's war effort, typical Max Hastings deflections.

In fact historians seem to always err on the British version of events, unable to face up to the truth.

The British Empire in respect of this disaster and many others, was responsible by its stripping of the colonies for home consumption.

We ransacked them, in the case of India they were worse off when we departed than they had been 200 years earlier when Clive arrived to strip them bare.

The BBC view was not one-sided, it is your education that is false, as our education system produces a totally one-sided and completely distorted view of history.

Recommended viewing:- Dr.Worsley on 'history's greatest fibs', just for starters, and included an episode on India.

And it is on BBC2........

That's not what a lot of Indians think.
Many of them 'hated' us so much that they came to Britain when they needed help or to escape poverty.

Page 13 of 261 < 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 >

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

BBC (again)

Site Map