i dont know what this is refering to. but it did remind me of the boston bombers, so i guess however long ago that was my minds occupied with too much recent shit anything past 2 years ago seems like an eternity
There was some half assed cell in france iirc, they didn't amount to anything due to the premature blow though
my government terrorizes me every time they require me to use government services that aren't online.
canadian politics is much funnier nowadays. american politics is just depressing and void of any substance
did you miss how saudi arabia lost their shit over a routine press release and for weeks railed on their state tv about how canadians love to have sex with dogs and how we kill more women than them also that a gay conserative went on their tv to agree with them. and thats barely the tip of the iceberg. much more entertaining than a toad penis sorry
saudi arabia drones were going hard on twitter criticizing canada about the missing aboriginal women... which they failed to realize that it's perfectly legal to criticize our government in our press while in saudi arabia you get beheaded for criticizing the government.
im voting donald trump to stop creeping sharia law 24 months later: mohammed based salman choke me zaddy
taken from someone else -----> I just want to make some comments on this article. Firstly it implies that India received barely any shipments of food grain during the course of the famine; this is not true. Whereas in 1942 India received only 30,000 tons of grain, in 1943 this was 303,000, in 1944 it received 639,000 and in 1945 871,000 [Behrens, Merchant Shipping and the Demands of War, (London: HMSO, 1955), p.356]. The author also does not note that Churchill’s opinions on the famine were contradictory and changed over time. If we are going to quote Churchill’s worst statements on the famine it makes sense to note some of his better ones. Amery reported at a cabinet meeting on May 18th 1945 that Churchill supported Amery’s case for Indian food imports, despite the negative attitude of Leathers. On November 10th 1943 (the same cabinet meeting he made the comparison between Greeks and Indians) Anthony Eden argued that even the 50,000 ‘’token’’ shipment was too much and could damage imports to the Middle East. Churchill overruled Eden. On 12th February Amery recorded that Churchill was stirred by Wavell’s telegrams that he contacted Butler to say that Leathers must try and do something for India. The author focuses on Cherwell’s lecture and speculates (without offering hard evidence) that Churchill may have agreed. Its possible, but then consider Churchill’s telegram to Lord Linlithgow on May 7 1936 in which he writes that he feels sorry for the people of India, particularly as they are faced with near constant hunger and threat of famine [Gilbert, The Coming of War, Companion Documents, pp.143-144]. The major reason behind the Churchill’s (and the cabinet’s) reluctance to meet the demands of the Government of India was the shortage of shipping during 1943 and 1944. These weren’t made up. When a request was made to the United States for help it was also found to be impractical, if not impossible [Foreign Relations of the United States, 1944, The Near East, the South Asia, and Africa, the Far East, pp.272-274]. Madhusree Mukerjee's placing responsibility for the Begal famine of 1943 on Wiston Churchill would apear to be something of an oversimplification. Her blaming an individual (whatever his part in this)thereby takes the famine out of social and political context. As argued by Amartya Sen ("Poverty and Faimines" 1981), responsibility for the famine lay in the refusal of the Bengal Government of British ruled India to tackle stockpiling by rice merchants and thereby to interfere with the operation of the'free' capitalist market, leaving poor peasants to die of hunger. There is a good parallel with the similar policies that killed hundreds of thousands in the Irish "Potato Famine" of less than a century earlier in British-ruled Ireland. Throughout that famine the British government refused to take measures to limit the vast exports of wheat from Ireland that continued during the famine,to feed England's consumers, thus, like in Bengal, leaving people to die. Yes, actions by important individuals (such as Churchill in 1943) must be understood but, more so, the capitalist market ideology that motivated them. ----------------"BUT WYTPIPO.. OH MY GAWD, JUST. I CANT EVEN. JUST. NO."
I'm glad that we can agree that Churchill, capitalism and white people are all fucking awful. Churchill apologia - and general fascist/imperial apologia - is always so desperate and pathetic, usually employed by the pallid and spotty sort that would use the word 'technically' in a discussion on morality.