Recent Posts

Shout It Out Loud!



2021 Jan 01 18:45:47
Happy New Year and Racial Greetings to all my racial family, from Br. Dustin Fletcher. 23/23

#17222545 Snake River C.I., Oregon.


2020 Nov 27 05:45:55

PM Joe Free in 23


2020 Nov 27 00:49:23
Nature's Eternal Religion by Ben Klassen

$45 from our friends at the National Alliance:


2020 Nov 24 10:14:17
If you didn't know it before, understand it now: WE ARE AT WAR FOR THE SALVATION OF THE WHITE RACE.


2020 Nov 23 05:48:13


2020 Nov 11 15:42:52


2020 Nov 10 04:25:19
Mr Bean and Happy Days' Chachi to defend Freedom of Speech


2020 Nov 09 09:15:38


2020 Oct 13 12:50:51

Vote Trump!
4 More Years of Prepping
. . .
War is Coming


2020 Oct 03 10:54:41


2020 Sep 29 17:02:06
Hello, welcome to the forum


2020 Sep 29 16:11:50
Hello all.838


2020 Sep 27 02:16:14


2020 Sep 19 07:26:44


2020 Sep 02 12:22:24
Hail Rittenhouse!  :ok


2020 Aug 28 12:34:03
Kenosha gunman Kyle Rittenhouse a national treasure Watch Video:


2020 Aug 18 08:29:37
NA Radio below has been updated. They have a new radio connection/IP Address.


2020 Aug 10 14:28:04
PM Joe's prison has changed its eCommunication methods for prisoners. PM Joe now phones me every day. If you want him to ring you, write to PM Joe. Send him your email address and he'll invite you to where you can send him money and he'll call you.


2020 Aug 06 01:59:05


2020 Jul 27 07:06:50
New White Rangers Calling Card - for the Enemies of the White Race ...


2020 Jul 27 01:32:30
Rahowa!  ;D


2020 Jul 25 16:34:16
Never in my political activism have I been with or visited our Enemy the Creativity Movement and boom! Check my Emails today and I have 5 days worth of Emails from the Movement talking and posting * about the Kike and their TalMud. WTF?



2020 Jul 24 21:29:10
Do your part to aid in the survival, expansion, and advancement of our beautiful White race. Join the Church of Creativity today.


2020 Jul 18 12:13:14


2020 Jul 18 11:59:56
Good news everybody! There was an update to the Shoutbox addon for the Forum, so I quickly updated the Shoutbox and now ... The Shoutbox is Back! All hail and rejoice.

N.A. Radio

Author Topic: Movie Review: The Darkest Hour (2017) Churchill Propaganda

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Private

  • Church Administrator, Creativity Alliance
  • Forum Administrator
  • Posts: 7,711
  • Total Likes: 1415
  • The Church of Creativity South Australia
    • Private
    • My Awakening as a White Racial Loyalist
In short, standard WWII propaganda from a fraud ...

Finest hour for actor who was Churchill's radio voice
The Guardian (UK) | 29 October 2000

Extract: PROOF THAT some of Winston Churchill's most famous radio speeches of the war were delivered by a stand-in has emerged with the discovery of a 78rpm record. The revelation ends years of controversy over claims - repeatedly denied - that an actor had been officially asked to impersonate the Prime Minister on air.

The record makes it clear for the first time that Norman Shelley's voice was used to broadcast some of the most important words in modern British history - including 'We shall fight them on the beaches'. It is marked 'BBC, Churchill: Speech. Artist Norman Shelley' and stamped 'September 7, 1942'.

Review: 'Darkest Hour,' or the Great Man Theory of History (and Acting)
A. O. Scott  | The New York Times (USA)

Extract: Considered as history, "Darkest Hour," written by Anthony McCarten ("The Theory of Everything"), offers the public a few new insights and details about the practice of statecraft in a time of crisis ... Like "The King's Speech," Mr. Wright's film is a serviceable enough historical drama. But like "Dunkirk," it falls back on an idealized notion of the English character that feels, in present circumstances, less nostalgic than downright reactionary, and as empty as those ubiquitous "Keep Calm and Carry On" internet memes. Rather than invite the audience to think about the difficulties of democratic governance at a time of peril, the filmmakers promote passivity and hero-worship, offering not so much a Great Man Theory as a great man fetish.

Oldman's Performance of Churchill in 'Darkest Hour' Gets 'Extraordinary' Standing Ovations in Cinemas
The Independent (UK)

Extract: Gary Oldham's performance of Winston Churchill is capturing the imaginations of film fans as well as awards voters. The rendition of the British Prime Minister's most rousing speech in new film Darkest Hour is reportedly generating spontaneous standing ovations around the world since its release last week. Churchill's "magnificent oration" which saw him famously call to "fight on the beaches" in 1940 arrives towards the end of Joe Wright's film with producer Eric Fellner telling The Telegraph that Working Title Films has received reports of "extraordinary" applause ... Fellner added that he believes the film may tap into "a zeitgeist where people are fascinated by and feeling a need for leadership" in a post-Brexit Britain.

Deflating the Churchill Myth
Eric Margolis

Extract: In his powerful new book, Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War, veteran politician and author Pat Buchanan challenges many historic taboos by claiming that Winston Churchill plunged Britain and its empire, including Canada, into wars whose outcomes were disastrous for all concerned. Other writers, me included, have made the same point for decades, but Buchanan has marshalled a formidable array of facts and historians to support his case ... Buchanan's book strips away lingering war propaganda and shows the cynicism, lust for power and foolishness of the "saintly" Allied war leaders and their "good" war.

'Darkest Hour': Great Movie, Defective History

Mark Weber | IHR | April 2018

“Darkest Hour” – a portrayal of Winston Churchill during grim days of World War II – is a box office success, and an inspiration for jaded and hero-hungry viewers. For his outstanding portrayal of the wartime British leader, Gary Oldman has justly earned an Oscar. But while it’s an artistic achievement and grand entertainment, “Darkest Hour” is badly flawed history.

The film’s story unfolds over a few weeks in the spring of 1940. Following the stunning German success against British and French forces in Norway, parliament has lost faith in the ability of Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain to continue leading the nation. Churchill, who is well known for his fierce hostility toward Hitler and Germany, is called on to head a new and more broad-based government. In spite of grave misgivings about his judgment and temperament – shared by the King and many colleagues, including leaders in his own party – Churchill becomes prime minister.

On the battlefield things quickly go from bad to worse. German forces overwhelm the British and French on the European mainland, and the remaining hard-pressed British troops are forced to retreat across the Channel from Dunkirk. With the country facing a military disaster without parallel in modern history, key members of his own inner circle press Churchill to open peace talks with Germany before their negotiating position weakens further.

Not entirely sure of what to do next, Churchill seeks to understand the mood of ordinary citizens, above all to gauge their willingness to endure much greater suffering and hardship if Britain keeps fighting, including the horrors of a possible invasion.

In a key episode of the film, and one that is entirely fictional, he abruptly gets out of his chauffeur-driven car on a busy street to descend – for the first time in his life – into an Underground station to meet with ordinary Londoners. The people he speaks with unanimously express their determination to carry on the fight, no matter what. Fortified by this supposedly representative sampling of the public spirit, Churchill then delivers his famous “We Shall Never Surrender” speech to a cheering parliament, a masterful oration that concludes the film on a rousing note.

In fact, Churchill had little respect for public opinion. Throughout his career, his views on the great issues of the day were often at odds with those of most citizens, or even most members of his own Conservative Party. He was justifiably regarded as a maverick.

When Chamberlain returned from Munich in September 1938 after concluding a settlement of the “Sudetenland” crisis with the leaders of Germany, France and Italy, most Britons welcomed him home with feelings of gratitude and relief. The public overwhelmingly approved what most regarded as a reasonable settlement of a crisis that had threatened to set off a new European war. Churchill’s outspoken scorn for the Munich agreement and, more generally, for Chamberlain’s “appeasement” policy toward Hitler’s Germany was sharply at odds with the general mood. It was precisely because his zealous hostility toward Hitler and Germany had been so drastically out of step with the attitude of most members of his own party that he was chosen to replace the less belligerent Chamberlain as prime minister.

Perhaps the most humiliating expression of just how out of touch Churchill was with the concerns and hopes of most Britons came in July 1945, some weeks after the end of the war in Europe. In the first general elections since before the outbreak of war, British voters decisively rejected Churchill and the Conservatives in a surprising upset that put the Labour Party into power.

“Darkest Hour” reinforces the widespread belief that Churchill’s speeches played a crucial role in sustaining British morale. A scholar who has carefully looked into the matter has found that this view is largely a myth. After examining government documents and surveys, as well as contemporary diaries of ordinary people, professor Richard Toye of the University of Exeter concluded that there is “little evidence” that Churchill’s oratory was important in bolstering British wartime resolve.

“Churchill's first speeches as prime minister in the dark days of 1940 were by no means universally acclaimed,” says Prof. Toye. “Many people thought that he was drunk during his famous 'Finest Hour' broadcast, and there is little evidence that they made a decisive difference to the British people’s will to fight on.” As he explains in his book, The Roar of the Lion, Toye was surprised by the results of his research.

He also examined Home intelligence reports and mass observational archives to learn what people thought of Churchill’s speeches at the time compared with what they later remembered, or thought they remembered. His famous “Never Surrender” address in parliament was never broadcast, but people convinced themselves they heard it. “It was never broadcast, though it was reported on the BBC by an announcer and quoted in the press,” Prof. Toye points out. “However, people claim to remember having heard this famous speech from June 1940, even though they hadn't. It was recorded for posterity along with others of his wartime speeches nine years later.”

Churchill’s reputation as a great orator is based on a handful of often-repeated passages from just a few of his many addresses. While those memorable phrases are undeniably stirring, they are also exceptional. All too often his speeches were verbose, meandering, difficult to understand, and sprinkled with misrepresentations and factual errors.

The rousing “Never Surrender” speech that concludes “Darkest Hour” is pure theater. In fact, Hitler never asked for, or sought, Britain’s capitulation. He only wanted Britain to cease its war against Germany.

As one who for years had voiced great admiration for the British, Hitler as chancellor worked for German-British friendship. He was immensely pleased when the two countries concluded an important naval agreement in 1935. When Britain declared war against Germany in 1939, he was shaken and dismayed. Still, he continued to reach out to Britain’s leaders, both in public and through diplomatic channels, to somehow bring an end to the fighting.

After the spectacular German victory over French and British forces in May-June 1940, and French acceptance of an armistice, Hitler made a bold effort to end the war. In a major address that was broadcast on radio stations around the world, he dramatically appealed to the leaders in London, and to the British people, for an honorable end to the conflict. It was Churchill who insisted on continuing, as he put it, to “wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might” in pursuit of “victory at all costs.”

In the historic address that concludes “Darkest Hour,” Churchill rouses support for his war policy by suggesting that peace with Hitler would mean swastika banners flying over London. This is nonsense. Even in countries that were allied with Germany during World War II, such as Finland and Bulgaria, swastika flags never waved over their cities.

Churchill had been contemptuous of his predecessor’s conditional appeasement policy toward Germany. But after he became prime minister, Churchill adopted his own policy of even more far-reaching appeasement – this time toward the Soviet Union. Although Churchill told the world that Hitler could not be trusted, he repeatedly proclaimed his whole-hearted trust and confidence in Soviet dictator Stalin.

When Britain declared war against Germany in 1939, leaders in London claimed that they were obliged to do so because the Hitler regime threatened Poland’s independence. But after five and a half years of war, and in keeping with Churchill’s policy of collaboration with Stalin, Poland’s independence was stamped out, this time by the Soviet regime.

“Darkest Hour” reinforces the widely held impression, which Churchill himself encouraged, that an honorable or lasting peace with Hitler was simply not possible. But as he himself later acknowledged, that’s simply not true. In a confidential message of Jan. 24, 1944, Churchill wrote to Soviet premier Stalin: “I am sure you know that I would never negotiate with the Germans separately ... We never thought of making a separate peace even in the years when we were all alone and could easily have made one without serious loss to the British empire and largely at your expense.”

Especially in 1940 or 1941, a British leader could readily have reached an agreement with Hitler whereby Britain would have kept its sovereignty, its great naval fleet, and its empire. To be sure, this would have meant acknowledging German hegemony in eastern Europe. But at the end of the war, Britain accepted Soviet Russia’s harsher and more alien dominion over this region.

Given Hitler’s respect for the independence and neutrality of Sweden and Switzerland throughout the war years, he certainly would have respected the sovereignty of the much more solidly defended Britain. As it was, Britain emerged from the death and destruction of World War II not so much a victor, but rather as a subordinate ally of the real victors – the United States and the Soviet Union.

The British leader’s famous “We shall never surrender” speech was little more than “sublime nonsense,” says British historian John Charmley. “In sharp contrast to all those admirers who have strenuously denied that an honourable peace could have been made in 1940 or 1941,” Charmley explains, “Churchill knew better. Peace could have been made. It would not have depended upon 'trusting' Hitler, but rather upon the presumption that he would be bound to come into conflict with Stalin.”

Alan Clark -- historian and one-time British defense minister – has given a similarly harsh verdict of Churchill's war policy: “There were several occasions when a rational leader could have got, first reasonable, then excellent, terms from Germany ... The war went on far too long, and when Britain emerged the country was bust. Nothing remained of assets overseas. Without immense and punitive borrowings from the U.S. we would have starved. The old social order had gone forever. The empire was terminally damaged. The Commonwealth countries had seen their trust betrayed and their soldiers wasted ...”

British journalist and author Peter Millar affirms this assessment: “... The accepted view that his [Churchill's] 'bulldog breed' stubbornness led Britain through its 'finest hour' to a glorious victory is sadly superficial ... In no sense, other than the moral one, can Britain be said to have won. She merely survived. Britain went to war ostensibly to honour an alliance with Poland. Yet the war ended with Poland redesigned at a dictator's whim, albeit Stalin's rather than Hitler's, and occupied, albeit by Russians rather than Germans. In reality Britain went to war to maintain the balance of power. But the European continent in 1945 was dominated by a single overbearing power hostile to everything Britain stood for. Britain, hopelessly in hock to the United States, had neither the power nor the face to hold on to her empire ... The 'evil genius bent on world conquest' that most Americans believe Hitler to have been, is a myth. The evil genius had more precise aims in eastern Europe. A Britain that would have withdrawn from the fray and from all influence in Europe to concentrate on her far-flung empire would have suited him admirably.”

Given all this, it’s perhaps not surprising that Churchill later reflected with some chagrin on the war’s outcome. A few years after the end of the fighting, he wrote in this memoirs: “The human tragedy reaches its climax in the fact that after all the exertions and sacrifices of hundreds of millions of people and of victories of the Righteous Cause, we have still not found Peace or Security, and that we lie in the grip of even worse perils than those we have surmounted.”

Further Reading ...

Patrick J. Buchanan, “Did Hitler Want War?,” Sept. 1, 2009.

Christopher Hitchens, “The Medals of His Defeats: Winston Churchill,” The Atlantic, April 2002.

Adolf Hitler, Reichstag address of July 19, 1940

Kevin Myers, “Everything People Believed About Hitler's Intentions Toward Britain Was a Myth Created by Churchill,” Irish Independent (Ireland), June 19, 2012.

Michael Phillips, “'Darkest Hour' Review: For Gary Oldman, Churchill Role is V for Victory,” Chicago Tribune, Dec. 6, 2017.

M. Robinson, “Winston Churchill’s Wartime Speeches Did Not Inspire ...,” Daily Mail (Britain), August 20, 2013.

David Sims, “Darkest Hour Is a Thunderous Churchill Biopic,” The Atlantic, Nov. 27, 2017

David Smith, “Churchill 'In the Year of Trump': Darkest Hour Feeds America’s Love for Winston,” The Guardian (Britain), Nov. 26, 2017.

F. Stieve, What the World Rejected: Hitler’s Peace Offers, 1933-1939.

V. Thorpe, “The Actor Who Was Churchill’s Radio Voice,” The Guardian/ Observer (Britain), Oct. 29, 2000.

Mark Weber, “The 'Good War' Myth of World War Two,” May 2008.

Mark Weber, “Winston Churchill: An Unsettled Legacy,” The Journal of Historical Review, July-August 2001

Reverend Cailen Cambeul, P.M.E.
Church Administrator, Creativity Alliance
Church of Creativity South Australia
Box 420, Oaklands Park, SA, Australia, 5046

Business: |

Creator Flags, the Holybooks of Creativity, Shirts & More ...

"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." Mark Twain.

Offline Private

  • Disabled by Request
  • *****
  • Posts: 324
  • Total Likes: 432
  • The Church of Creativity North Carolina - U.S.A.
    • Private
Re: Movie Review: The Darkest Hour (2017) Churchill Propaganda
« Reply #1 on: 23 April 2018 at 04:10 »
Oh boy, more fluff for that race traitor. Thanks Churchkill, for giving us the world we live in today.

*ing Jew loving scumbag

Build a Whiter, Brighter World

Reverend Peter Sturm
N.C. U.S.A.


Will a Sex Pistols Movie Revive Swastika Fashions?

Started by Private

Replies: 4
Views: 443
Last post 26 March 2019 at 13:04
by Private
Skin: Another Anti-White Movie

Started by Private

Replies: 0
Views: 225
Last post 15 September 2019 at 12:19
by Private