So what if he didn't like Indians? How do you go from that claim, to the claim that he perpetrated a "holocaust" against them? It's a monstrous calumny.
'Not liking' is not the same as 'hostility' & 'hate' ! I don't know what's your source of information but you are quite misinformed about how British ruled in India. There's no point in debating all this here. This is not the right forum. But you are wrong about your statements. You need to read more on British Indian history.
You forget, this guy is western, and must be guilty of anything he could prevent.
By that standard, of course, Gandhi would also be worse than Hitler, as he could have prevented massacres during the partition that killed much more people than Hitler ever did. In fact, he is accused of directly instigating several massacres, a hell of a lot "more guilty" than Churchill would be even if this were true. If this is true, Churchill refused to get people out of a big mess they got themselves into (which, granted, does sound like something he might do).
