Winston Churchill On The Religion Of Peace

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries!  Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the  Prophet rule or live.  A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and  refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity.  The fact that in Mohammedan  law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

– Winston Churchill  1899

burka_graduation

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

31 Responses to Winston Churchill On The Religion Of Peace

  1. aussie says:

    Thank you for having the courage to print this. It is as applicable now as it was in 1899.

    • Olaf Koenders says:

      True that. How far Islam has come since inception – about 3 feet. The only things that have improved are the weapons, supplied by richer nations.

      • Gail Combs says:

        Islamists have come a lot further they now OWN Sweden.

        Sweden belongs to the immigrants, not the Swedes – Former Prime Minister, Fredrik Reinfeldt says

        On Christmas eve, the Former Prime Minister of Sweden, Fredrik Reinfeldt, … said that Sweden’s borders are fictional and the Native Swedish are “uninteresting”.

        “There is a choice of which country Sweden will be,” he told TV4.

        “Is this a land that is owned by those who have lived here for three or four generations,” he asked, “or is Sweden [a country] where people who come here in mid-life makes it to be and develops it?“

        “To me, it is obvious that it should be the latter and that there is a stronger and better society if it will be open [to more immigration].”

        He also told TV4 “What is Sweden as a country? Is this a country owned by those who lived here for four generations or those found on any limit?“

        “It’s what they [immigrants] do in Sweden that is Sweden.”

        …..Despite the danger of holding a differing view on immigration, especially with a new law coming very soon which will criminalize criticism of immigration; many Swedes are waking up, even if they are still too scared to vote for their views.

        • Olaf Koenders says:

          My measurement base should have been IQ I suspect. Islam’s war is simply to coerce the West to enforce Sharia law upon itself. It’s been happening for some time through self-censorship. A weakness currently a fad and worse in 2014 than any other time.

          England’s all too aware of this, but how quickly learned lessons are forgotten by the rest of the world.

  2. Chris Barron says:

    In 1922 Churchill wrote about how ungrateful Iraq was for the British presence there. I suspect his dislike of Muslims had more to do with their dislike of Birtish Empire than anything else.
    http://historynewsservice.org/2007/10/churchill-on-iraq-living-on-an-ungrateful-volcano/

    • Your reading comprehension skills appear to be close to zero.

      You are not only a prophet of future statistics, but a mind reader of the dead.

    • Daavid A says:

      What is the purpose of your response? Are you implying that the world has no reason to be concerned with the radical Islam?

      Do you acknowledge the fact that in much of Europe, and the US, hate crimes against Jews are far more common and likely then hate crimes against Muslims.

    • gator69 says:

      I didn’t realize that the British Empire had offended Mohammad. So that is why he taught his followers to kill infidels, it was the Brits and their 6th century Empire. 😆

      • Gail Combs says:

        And here I thought it was Richard Cœur de Lion!!!

        Of course that was in response to Muslim conquests before that from 622-750.

      • Robertv says:

        Why exactly did your country separate from the British Empire ?

        • gator69 says:

          Because we could.

        • KuhnKat says:

          Robertv,

          why exactly did your brain separate from your body??

          You are talking about the 1700’s. How about catching up with reality?? Britain actually stopped slavery. Islam still promotes it.

      • Ben Vorlich says:

        Are you serious about that? One can never be sure, even the Brits know little of their history. In case you are.

        In the 7th century England was a heptarchy and Scotland was 4 kingdoms, Wales was several principalities and Cornwall was an independent Celtic enclave.

        Richard I (The Lionheart) was an early Plantagenet king of England who spoke Occitan and died in 1199. He spent most of his reign on crusades.

        • gator69 says:

          I thought laughter would cover the ‘are you serious’ issues. I am a history addict, and that is why I find these absurd assertions funny.

        • Gail Combs says:

          Richard I was in the Third Crusade not the First and yeah, it was said sort of in jest. It was the Popes who wanted to toss the Muslims out of Europe and other lands. They also instigated the Crusades to recapture the Holy Lands well before Richard The Lionheart was born. (My Syrian Grandfather claimed his red beard was a legacy of the Crusades)

          It is the idiocy of blaming Churchill for an on-going clash that tripped my sarcasm.

          There was also The Anglo-Egyptian War in 1882 that was started by an Egyptian army officer, Ahmed ‘Urabi, who mutinied and initiated a coup in 1878. That was a tad bit closer to Churhill’s time.

          As far as the Arabs go, you should talk to my husband’s father. He was a sea captain during WWII and the biggest complaint among the ships caring Algerian soldiers was the toilet habits of the Arab troops. They left feces all over the ships.

          Since Lars spoke French, he out-foxed the French troop commanders and got them to toilet train their men.

        • gator69 says:

          Gail, my father attended the Air War College in Alabama, and westerners were astonished by the behaviors and attitudes of their Arab classmates. At the end of the year, one Saudi prince invited the entire graduating class to a five star dinner, seven course, with beautiful and pricey custom gifts at each place setting. Open bar, band and dancing…

          Everyone was having a wonderful time until they noticed the prince had left early, and left them with the bill for the entire affair, gifts included.

    • GoneWithTheWind says:

      The problem with this kind of philosophy is that it is a lose/lose theory with no possible solution. The idea that because 2 or 3 (or 10 or 20) generations ago someone from your tribe offended someone from my tribe so therefore I can do anything I want to you and I’m justified, is ludicrous. No one can go back and fix a wrong from 100 years ago and it would be even more difficult to identify who was truely wrong/wronged since in every conflict both sides antagonized and both sides sufferred injury. What matters is what people who are alive today do or fail to do.

      • Gail Combs says:

        The desire is for Wealth, Land and Power everything else is excuses to get the peons riled-up so they will fight for you.

        • KuhnKat says:

          GWTW,

          “No one can go back and fix a wrong from 100 years ago and it would be even more difficult to identify who was truely wrong/wronged since in every conflict both sides antagonized and both sides sufferred injury.”

          In many cases you are more or less right. In the case of the expansionist, violent whacktards called Islam, they were the agressors then and are again. Just read their own history. Bloodier than any Khan. Just the deaths from the Caliphs invading India surpass most other conflicts on earth. Now,

          “Islam divides the world into two parts. The part governed by sharia, or Islamic law, is called the Dar al-Islam, or House of Submission. Everything else is the Dar al-Harb, or House of War, so called because it will take war—holy war, jihad—to bring it into the House of Submission. Over the centuries, this jihad has taken a variety of forms. Two centuries ago, for instance, Muslim pirates from North Africa captured ships and enslaved their crews, leading the U.S. to fight the Barbary Wars of 1801–05 and 1815. In recent decades, the jihadists’ weapon of choice has usually been the terrorist’s bomb; the use of planes as missiles on 9/11 was a variant of this method.”

          http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_2_cultural_jihadists.html

          Try not to spread you poor understanding of multiple cultures too far. it can get us killed.

        • DD More says:

          KuhnKat says: Two centuries ago, for instance, Muslim pirates from North Africa captured ships and enslaved their crews, leading the U.S. to fight the Barbary Wars of 1801–05 and 1815.

          And an interesting quote from on the the men who fought in that war.

          Eaton?s stark and stereotyping view of Islam and Muslims can be seen when he describes these segments of society as being not only “abject slaves to the despotism of their government,” but also “humiliated by tyranny, the worst of all tyranny, the despotism of priestcraft. They live in more solemn fear of the frowns of a bigot who has been dead and rotten above a thousand years, than of a living despot whose frown would cost them their lives.”
          73 William Eaton, 10 August 1799, 123.

          I like his use of ‘Priestcraft’. Reminds me of some CAGW’ers.

  3. If they hadn’t been siting on top of all that oil, we wouldn’t be having this problem.

  4. Robertv says:

    Fanaticism is always dangerous.

  5. Ben Vorlich says:

    Later in life Churchill didn’t have a great relationship with Britain’s first women MP, the Virginian Lady Astor.

    Lady Nancy Astor: Winston, if you were my husband, I’d poison your tea.
    Churchill: Nancy, if I were your husband, I’d drink it.

    One of their better known clashes.

    • gator69 says:

      Of course drinking was Churchill’s second best attribute…

      Bessie Braddock: Winston, you are drunk, and what’s more you are disgustingly drunk.

      Winston Churchill: Bessie, my dear, you are ugly, and what’s more, you are disgustingly ugly. But tomorrow I shall be sober and you will still be disgustingly ugly.

      I miss him.

  6. geologyjim says:

    Now we know the real reason Obama banished the Churchill bust from the White House

    [good quote-catch, Tony. Happy New Year]

  7. janets says:

    Alas, Great Britain is no longer great other than in the geographical sense. We are so dhimmified that reading that quotation out loud in a public place will get you arrested for hate speech 😦
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2614834/Arrested-quoting-Winston-Churchill-European-election-candidate-accused-religious-racial-harassment-repeats-wartime-prime-ministers-words-Islam-campaign-speech.html

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s