When the RAF and Churchill Engaged in Terrorism

Salam Alaikum, Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh How are you guys doing? I'm here in Hamburg, the second most populated city in Germany, and a state in its own right here in Germany. Now, you might have seen the fate to me and Tony, were talking on piers Morgan's show. And we actually brought up the issue of Winston Churchill on the bombing of Dresden and Hamburg. And this city was bombed in World War Two, by the RAF under the command of Winston Churchill. And the instruction was, or the idea was to try and create a demoralizing effect by killing the civilian population. And this very suitable saw the destruction of about 40,000 civilians in World War Two. And this keyflower states and this

is something which I'm going to send out, put a link in the description box for more information, I choose a BBC link that you can look at, for your convenience, that this is not to be compared with what happened in Coventry in London, in World War Two. But in fact, this has to be compared with what happened in Nagasaki, you may know, the Americans dropped a bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and it was one of the most detrimental things that's ever happened in all of world history in terms of killing off civilian people, and leaving damage behind the same thing happened here. And of course, we don't speak about that, as much as we should do, because the events of the Holocaust here in this

country, it eclipsed all other catastrophes of a civilian nature that happened in Europe. But the point to be noted here is the following. That the reason why many Western politicians felt it Okay, or still do feel it okay to either aid or to actually perpetrate these kinds of things where the targeting of civilians is something which is an option is because of a crass, utilitarian judgment. It is a crass, utilitarian judgment. Utilitarianism is an ideology, which postulates that it's the greatest good for the greatest number of people. So you'll find some kind of argument that I could which would postulate the following go. And so if we didn't do this, then if we didn't do this, we

wouldn't win the war. So killing the civilians is a necessary thing to do. Now, this is very interesting, because the social liberal critique of Islam and its peoples has usually been that Islam inspires a kind of terrorism or killing of civilians for political gain. But this is not terrorism, according to that definition. What it what would it be, if not killing the civilians in Hamburg 40,000 of them in the city? So develop that this?

What would it be? So the point is that those, say, for example, Islamist Muslims, whatever you guys want to call it, because of course, these are all social constructs. And these individuals that do that actually employ very similar kinds of consequences reasoning, if you read the fetters of Osama bin Laden, he says they're killing our civilians, therefore, we have to kill their civilians, there's a kind of utilitarian or consequentialist reasoning. So there's more by way of consequentialist reasoning that unites military dictators, and political actors who decide to target civilians than there is by way of religion. But this is something which people do not comprehend or

understand. And it's time it's high time that we change the narratives on these issues. But knowing the history of what happened in World War Two, between European countries, and between the Europeans and the rest of the world, will give us a stronger idea of what to expect from Western politicians. What we expect from Western musicians is that they will perpetrate these crimes and they will do so because they are employing a kind of utilitarian judgment to do with the politics of that particular nation.