There was not need. I was going to explain kindly the facts of my country .

"I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. We have definitely adopted the position at the Peace Conference of arguing in favour of the retention of gas as a permanent method of warfare. It is sheer affectation to lacerate a man with the poisonous fragment of a bursting shell and to boggle at making his eyes water by means of lachrymatory gas."

In other words, Churchill was advocating what has essentially become common practice in crowd control. In fact, during the 1926 London General Strike, as Chancellor of the Exchequer in the Baldwin government he did authorize the use of tear gas to disperse the strikers.

Hope I am not being too bold putting my point across here.  Some of the flack that Britain is getting may have been applicable in the past but is no longer i.e. Britain blaming Spain for everything?  Ok it may have been applicable in the past but not anymore.  We have enjoyed good relations with the Spanish for years and since the EU integration, these have never been so strong.  Had to get that across.  I think the main problem Britain really has nowadays is its own people.  Despite it being a united country of 4 major nations, there is still underlying spite due to conflicts which happened hundreds of years ago.  The mind boggles.  For example, I know a few people who are big Scottish nationalists and the issue of Scottish independence is very topical over here.  I asked them why do u want Scotland to be independent.  The majority say because they want to live in a country free from the English at last, referring back to the days of William Wallace etc.  I think this is not a concrete reason but hey its their opinion.  I believe that history should be about learning from the past not dwelling on it. 

All this sounds like a load of bollocks and overcooked ones served without any sauce. If you have do some hardcore Brit bashing then please try to be more tasteful about it. First of all the worst and most unsuccessful states are one that blunder along and then wipe themselves out by their self-made errors like the comic opera Austro-Hungarian Empire. To talk about the nation of "Iroquois" (I think that is who you mean) is a misnomer for as said they never became a nation.

The “Confederacy of Five Nations” (Nations meaning tribes with common agreement among themselves) began centuries before the British arrived, the 11th century I believe. When the British did come many ages later they formed an alliance with the Iroquois to kick the stuffing out of the French who did an even worse job of ruling the place as in later situation called Vietnam.

The Norse were in Newfoundland for over a hundred years and even had a Bishop. But did they ever grow grapes there? No, it’s too cold. The yet undiscovered Vinland site must have been further south and never in Newfoundland. That’s like someone saying they have found a colony of wild polar bears in South America.

We have to examine what’s obvious. The longhouses, the sweat lodges, even the way of government show some Norse influence. The Norse historical reports describe the Indians as the enemy when they were attacking and a friendly when they were trading with them. All reports tell of a network of trading. It’s a no-brainer to say they had trading posts staffed by those who could maintain friendly relations through marriage or did whatever it took to please the customers.

What did displease their Indian customers was the show of iron. Not like they didn’t want it, they wanted it too much and would kill to get it. So sending blacksmiths to man the posts meant the whole lot got burned down overnight. Even an insensitive numbskull would sooner or later realize the etiquette of dealing with their customers was going along with the native customs rather than their own.  

So what were the advantages of going out to live in Stone Age conditions and leaving your own culture behind? Frankly, an endless supply of sex and drugs. All reports confirm the Indians smoked herbal mixture consisting of more than tobacco. The Viking knew about mescaline and called it “Odin’s blood”. They used it freely during their raiding parties across Europe until banned in the 12^th Century. However in Vinland they had a much wider range for substance of choice and far less of a rough trip. Embarrassing I suppose and a chapter of history their descendants obviously don’t want to know.   

Pinquin, where did I get my information about Vinland? From the catholic encyclopaedia on the net. Whoops? Tell them if you have a problem in understanding what Vinland means.

In quoting Churchill one must look that little bit further than what suits them. Here is some examples of the most brilliant public speaker of the 20^th Century.

Eating words has never given me indigestion.

If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time-a tremendous whack.

All the great things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope.

Although prepared for martyrdom, I preferred that it be postponed.

For my part, I consider that it will be found much better by all parties to leave the past to history, especially as I propose to write that history myself.

Attitude is a little thing that makes a big difference.

However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.

I am prepared to meet my Maker. Whether my Maker is prepared for the great ordeal of meeting me is another matter.

If I was only the servant of my country and had I, at any moment, failed to express her unflinching resolve to fight and conquer, I should at once have been rightly cast aside.

It is a good thing for an uneducated man to read books of quotations... The quotations, when engraved upon the memory, give you good thoughts. They also make you anxious to read the authors and look for more.

Winston Churchill