Have you seen any stonking examples this month of appeasement of Islam by British citizens or politicians local or national, quangocrats, churchmen, judges or others?
Have you had a WTF! moment when some political personage has insisted that ‘Islam is a religion of peace’ despite much evidence to the contrary?
If you have, then send the details to us and we’ll take the mickey out of them for you. Please provide as much detail as possible and explain why the person in question is a (un)worthy potential winner of February’s ‘British Neville Chamberlain of the Month Award’. Please note that all the ‘Neville’ nominees have to be operating within the UK or the Republic or Ireland.
At the end of the month the winning recipient will receive a certificate, calling them the ‘Appeaser of the Month’ like the one below and all those who submit Neville nominations will be entered into a prize draw so that one lucky punter can win a £5 token that can be redeemed for a beer or a bacon sandwich in the pub or greasy spoon cafe of your choice.
Please send your ‘Neville’ nominations to
ed****@fa***********.net
“>
ed****@fa***********.net
Here’s the January 2013 ‘Neville Chamberlain of the Month’ winner
Neville Chamberlain has been stigmatized for his “I have in my hand a piece of paper”speech but was he as politically naive as history suggests? At the time there was nothing to stop Hitler invading Britain and the supposed agreement gave this country time to organise some form of opposition. Chamberlain acknowledged that he was a peace-time politician and was out of his depth in an internationally confrontational situation. Rather than continually humiliate his name, he should be praised for sacrificing his reputation for the good of the nation. How many of today’s politicians would do the same? Answers on the pointy bit of a pin.
Hi penseivat, I agree that NC has been stigmatized and that NC was a terrible war leader, and that he did buy time to rearm by negotiating with Hitler. However, he is a personal embodiment of an appeasement policy that looked good on paper, especially to those who had survived the trenches of WW1, but was an utter disaster for many in Europe. Like it or not his name has become associated with appeasement of that which should not be appeased and he has become a handy shorthand for foolish politicos who believe that monsters can be fed so that they eat you last. They cannot, the monster will eat you as soon as they can, look what happened to the Leftists and secular reformers who backed the Mullahs during the fight against the Iranian Shah, they were all butchered as soon as the Islamists got power.
“Like it or not, his name has become associated with appeasement of that which should not be appeased….”. That this is fact, just shows how history can become distorted by others for political gain and naive values. Your points are well made but one other example is the number of T-shirts and posters with the image of Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara, a psychopathic Argentinian murderer and torturer whose political aims followed a, then, popular left wing ideal. I wonder how many students and so-called intelligentsia have posters of him on their walls and consider him a hero? I doubt if the surviving relatives of the families he butchered and tortured would have the same views? Same for those who have images of Mao or Castro, each of whom were responsible for thousands of unnecessary deaths. Perhaps some form of balance should be made with images of Hitler, Vlad the Impaler, or Ghenghis Khan being more common. The problem is that history is now politically motivated, at least in this country, and those who should be villified are held up as cultural icons while those who should be honoured are villified. For instance, we can start with a ‘ban all reference to Stephen Fry’ campaign. Apart from being a leftist tw*t, he continues to be a common or garden tw*t.
I completely agree with you that Chamberlain did buy us time. However, for good or ill, he has been seen as an archetype of the appeaser and sometimes shorthand like this is necessary to get a point over. You are right about Che, who was a murderous nasty psychopath. There is a double standard where dictators are concerned, some such as Castro and Mao are lauded or excused by the leftist twaterati whilst others,such as the aformentioned Adolf are quite rightly not lauded or excused. I once knew a guy from the Cuba Solidarity Campaign and nice bloke though he was, he had a blind spot where Castro was concerned and excused and prevaricated when Communist oppression in Cuba was brought up. There was always a reason for the oppresion, such as those who were being oppressed were mafia types or US agent provocateurs etc.
Stephen Fry is clever with words and entertaining but I think he should keep his nose out of politics.