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’.

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”.