In his letter ‘Anti-Churchill spin’ (March 17), Kevin Hodkin, who charges me with attending spin doctors, missed the point of my writings entirely and conveniently failed to address any points I raised, quoting Winston Churchill himself extensively, and other reliable primary sources. He resorts to the standard riposte “none of you would be free if it were not for Churchill”.

My main point was that leaders should not be put on pedestals in some blind allegiance that makes humans excuse horrific deeds. It is good for people to also know or be reminded of the darker side of a person like Churchill, not just one side portrayed by the establishment that elevates him to heroic status.

Churchill’s attitude to India, Gandhi, carpet-bombing and the destruction of entire cities, and his cavalier and shocking attitude to the native Americans and Aborigines who were exterminated, should not be swept under some rug and forgotten. These points remain valid, regardless of other widely-publicised aspects of the man related to WWII.

Regarding Dunkirk, I was showing the French perspective and how they felt betrayed. One might disagree but one cannot just publicise the standard British perspective, even through biased films like Dunkirk, released last year, without also seeing the French one. Surely, Hodkin would agree that, after fighting WWII, we have a right to show that French perspective and people should not be shot down for doing so.

It is also ironic that the world is, rightly, so concerned about the nerve agent recently let loose in the UK yet it is considered offensive by some when one highlights the fact that Churchill was insisting on dropping thousands of anthrax bombs.

Thankfully, the military refused and he did not have his way. One shudders to think what Europe would have suffered had the top brass in the British military not kept Churchill in check on this one.

Thumbs up to them but not to Churchill.