About this website

SydWalker.Info is a personal website. I live in tropical Australia near Cairns. I oppose war, plutocracy, injustice, sectarian supremacism and apartheid. I support urgent action to achieve genuine sustainability and a fair and prosperous society for all. I rely upon - and support - free speech as defined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (see below).

with the dawg

"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers"

Blog Issues

Unless otherwise indicated, material on this website is written by Syd Walker.

Anyone is welcome to re-publish material sourced from this site, as long as the source is acknowledged with a hyperlink.

Material from other sources reproduced here is presented on a 'Fair Use' basis. I try to cite references accurately. Please contact me if you have queries, comments, broken link reports, complaints - or just to say hello.

Boycott Apartheid!
Misc Menu
June 2009
« May   Jul »
Search this website
Churchill’s Corrupt Palestine Spin
Jun 21st, 2009 by Syd Walker

After being seduced by Zionist cash in the mid 1930s, the corrupted British politician Winston Churchill proceded to sell out British national interests – and the interests of people under British protection by Leaugue of Nations mandate – to his sponsors.

It’s true that Churchill had the most repulsive supremacist attitudes to most people in the Briitsh Empire. Even so, his bias towards the Zionist cause in Palestine – to the detriment of the indigenous Arab population – stands out like the proverbial ‘dogs balls’.

Peel Commission Palestine division proposal, 1937

A scenario for partition suggested by the 1937 Peel Commission: were Zionist aspirations the real trigger for World War Two?

Here’s an extract from David Irving’s biography of Churchill (vol i) –Struggle for Power – about the 1937 Peel Commission into the future of Palestine. This was the inquiry that led to a House of Commons vote in March 1939, strongly opposed by Churchill, that put severe limits on further Jewish immigration to Palestine out of respect for majority opinion in the British Protectorate.

In the following comments, we hear a ‘bought-and-paid-for’ politician. In contemporary  vernacular, consider Churchill’s behaviour ‘cash for comments’ – or a quintessential MP’s ‘expenses scandal’: (emphasis added)

He (Winston Churchill) testified to the Peel Commission on March 12th, 1937. His startling proposal was that all Palestine be turned over to the Jews. He spoke of their right to immigrate and Britain’s ‘good faith’ toward them.

When Peel’s deputy Sir Horace Rumbold spoke of the injustice done to the Arabs by this invasion of a ‘foreign race’, Churchill expressed outrage at that phrase, then offered a novel concept of ‘just invasions’ of which the incumbents of Berlin’s Wilhelmstrasse might have been proud:

Why is there harsh injustice done if people come in and make a livelihood for more, and make the desert into palm groves and orange groves? Why is it injustice because there is more work and wealth for everybody? There is no injustice. The injustice is when those who live in the country leave it to be desert for thousands of years.

As for the ‘invasion’, it was the Arabs who had come in after the Jews, he maintained, and they had allowed the Jewish hill terraces to decay. “Where the Arab goes”, he generalised, “it is often desert”.

Focus on Winston Churchill
Jun 21st, 2009 by Syd Walker

By the 1930s, it seemed the long political career of Winston Churchill was all but over.

He was a man out of time – an old imperial War Horse in an era when the patience of the British people for war-mongering was wearing thin. While Winston fulminated against Indian independence and beat the old imperial drum for more military spending, the world seemed to be moving on.

Winston Churchill

Winston Churchill: catspaw for Zionist interests?

The Great War of 1914-18 had bled the British people dry. Gandhi’s non-violent campaign for Indian independence was earning widespread respect. The peace movement was on the ascendant, having won support from some of the country’s finest intellects such as Aldous Huxley. Many hoped the age of British militarism was drawing to a close – and a slow, dignified decolonisation process lay ahead. In that scenario, Britain would remain a prosperous, productive and uniquely well-connected society – but a nation at peace.

Yet by May 1940, Britain was again at war and Churchill was Prime Minister. Rejecting German peace overtures, he immediately committed the British Empire to a ‘no holds barred’ fight-to-the-death: total war with the Axis powers. Eventually, after forging alliances with the USA and Soviet Union, Churchill led an exhausted, bankrupt nation to ‘victory’ five years later.

Winston Churchill suffered decisive electoral defeat in the 1945 post-war general election, then returned to power in 1951 for an undistinguished finale as Prime Minister.

Iranians have a special reason for remembering Churchill’s leadership; he was the prime mover behind Britain’s invasion in the 1940s – and in the British meddling in Iranian internal affairs after nationalization of the Anglo-Iranian Oil company in the early 1950s.

When next you hear about the Anglo-American sponsored  ‘coup’ against Prime Minister Mossadeq in 1953, for which US President Obama recently made a public apology, think of Winston Churchill (and Gordon Brown, yet to apologize to Iran for his own country’s imperial malfeasance).

But I digress. I intended to focus on one of modern history’s puzzles… How did Winston Churchill get a new lease of political life in the late 1930s?

David Irving, the British historian who’s allegedly so dangerous that the Australian Government won’t even let him visit his daughter in Brisbane, has been suggesting an answer for some time. His comments about the ‘Weizman letter’ of 1941 are of particular interest:

I don’t have an exact date for the video, but it was probably filmed during one of Mr Irving’s 1990s north American tours.

In 1986, Harvard-trained historian Ted O’Keefe wrote a fascinating article entitled Irving on Churchill. O’Keefe relates some of the British historian’s findings about Churchill, after he’s undertaken an extensive trawl through original source documents from the 1930s and 40s while researching a biography of the British wartime leader. Not all of Britian’s official archives from the period were available at that time for scrutiny; significantly, that remains the case to this day – more than 60 years after the end of World War Two!

The entire article by O’Keefe is intriguing. Here’s an excerpt on Churchill’s mysterious financial backers, which in the 1930s centered around ‘The Focus’:

Irving on the Focus:

The Focus was financed by a slush fund set up by some of London’s wealthiest businessmen. Principally, businessmen organized by the Board of Jewish Deputies in England, whose chairman was a man called Sir Bemard Waley Cohen. Sir Bernard Waley Cohen held a private dinner party at his apartment on July 29, 1936. This is in Waley Cohen’s memoirs … The 29th of July, 1936, Waley Cohen set up a slush fund of 50,000 pounds for The Focus, the Churchill pressure group. Now, 50,000 pounds in 1936, multiply that by ten, at least, to get today’s figures. By another three or four to multiply that into Canadian dollars. So, 40 times 50,000 pounds — about $2 million in Canadian terms — was given by Bernard Waley Cohen to this secret pressure group of Churchill in July 1936. The purpose was, the tune that Churchill had to play was, fight Germany. Start warning the world about Gennany, about Nazi Germany. Churchill, of course, one of our most brilliant orators, a magnificent writer, did precisely that.

For two years, The Focus continued to militate, in fact, right through until 1939. And I managed to find the secret files of The Focus, I know the names of all the members. I know all their secrets. I know how much money they were getting, not just from The Pocus, but from other governments. I use the word “other governments” advisedly because one of my sources of information for my Churchill biography is, in fact, the Chaim Weizmann Papers in the State of Israel. Israel has made available to me all Churchill’s secret correspondence with Chain Weizmann, all his secret conferences. It is an astonishing thing, but I, despite my reputation, in a kind of negative sense with these people, am given access to files like that, just the same as the Russian Government has given me complete access to all of the Soviet records of Churchill’s dealings with Ivan Maisky, Joseph Stalin, Molotov and the rest of them. I am the only historian who has been given access to these Russian records. It is a kind of horse trading method that I use when I want access to these files, because it is in these foreign archives we find the truth about Winston Churchill.

When you want the evidence about his tax dodging in 1949 and thereabouts, you are not going to look in his own tax files, you’re going to look in the files of those who employed him, like the Time/Life Corporation of America. That’s where you look. And when you’re looking for evidence about who was putting money up for Churchill when he was in the wilderness and who was funding this secret group of his, The Focus, you’re not going to look in his files, again you’re going to look in the secret files, for example, of the Czech government in Prague, because that is where much of the money was coming from.

Irving then revealed further details of Churchill’s financing by the Czechs, as well as the facts of Churchill s financial rescue by a wealthy banker of Austro-Jewish origins, Sir Henry Strakosch, who, in Irving’s words, emerged “out of the woodwork of the City of London, that great pure international financial institution.” When Churchill was bankrupted overnight in the American stock market crash of 1938, it was Strakosch, who was instrumental in setting up the central banks of South Africa and India, who bought up all Churchill’s debts. When Strakosch died in 1943, the details of his will, published in the London Times, included a bequest of £20,000 to the then Prime Minister, eliminating the entire debt.

There’s further background on this rather important nuance of recent history in David Irving’s Churchill’s War vol i – Struggle for Power. Refused publication by MacMillan, this book was first published in Australia in 1987, where it stayed for some weeks on the Sydney Morning Herald best-seller list including a spell at No. 1 (not a fact you’re likely to be reminded about anytime soon by Australia’s mainstream media.)

Churchill’s War vol i was subsequently published by Hutchinson (Arrow Books, London) and Avon Books (New York). It’s available via – or through Mr Irving’s website, either in printed or electronic form as a free download. You won’t however, find it in mainstream booksellers in Australia these days. The anti-free speech Zionist Lobby has seen to that.


Is it possible that the very public Zionist angst over ‘The Holocaust’ is something of a smokescreen to forestall re-opening broad-ranging discussion about the real origins and history of World War Two?:

Here’s more about that memorable letter from Zionist leader Chaim Weizman to Prime Minister Churchill in September 1941, a letter mentioned in the video above and discussed in Triumph in Adversity, Volume ii of Irving’s Churchill biography:

Excerpt from Chapter 5: ‘We Did It Before – and We Can Do It Again!

On September 10th 1941, Weizmann therefore wrote an outspoken letter to the prime minister in which he recalled how the Jews of the United States had pulled their country into war before; he promised that they could do it again – provided that Britain toed the line over Palestine. Two years had passed since the Jewish Agency had offered the support of the Jews throughout the world – the Jewish ‘declaration of war’ on Germany; a whole year had passed, he added, since the P.M. had personally approved his offer to recruit Jews in Palestine for service in the Middle East or elsewhere.

For two years the Agency had met only humiliation. Ten thousand Palestinian Jews had fought in Libya, Abyssinia, Greece, Crete, and Syria, he claimed, but this was never mentioned. ‘Tortured by Hitler as no nation has ever been in modern times,’ Weizmann continued, ‘and advertised by him as his foremost enemy, we are refused by those who fight him the chance of seeing our name and our flag appear among those arrayed against him.’Artfully associating anti-Zionists with the other enemies populating Churchill’s mind, Weizmann assured him that he knew this was not of his doing – it was the work of those responsible for Munich and the ???? White Paper on Palestine. ‘We were sacrificed, in order to win over the Mufti of Jerusalem and his friends who were serving Hitler in the Middle East.’

Then Weizmann came to his real sales-pitch: ‘There is only one big ethnic group [in the USA] which is willing to stand, to a man, for Great Britain, and a policy of “all-out aid” for her: the five million Jews. From Secretary Morgenthau, Governor [of New York State] Lehmann, Justice [Felix] Frankfurter, down to the simplest Jewish workman or trader, they are conscious of all that this struggle against Hitler implies.’ British statesmen, he reminded Churchill, had often acknowledged that it was these Jews who had brought the United States into the war in 1917. ‘They are keen to do it – and may do it – again.’ All that he and the Jews of the United States were asking for, therefore, was the formation now of a Jewish Fighting Force

Finally, two mere footnotes re: ‘other losses’ during World War Two

  1. Other Losses‘ by James-Bacque is mentioned in the video above.
  2. See also An Eye for an Eye by John Sack.

In total, more than 50 million human beings died as a direct result of World War Two.

Never again!


»  Substance:WordPress   »  Style:Ahren Ahimsa