• Why Jihad Watch?
  • About Robert Spencer and Staff Writers
  • FAQ
  • Books
  • Muhammad
  • Islam 101
  • Privacy

Jihad Watch

Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Independent: Churchill’s family begged him not to convert to Islam

Dec 28, 2014 8:56 am By Robert Spencer

Winston ChurchillWhy is the Independent publicizing this letter now, even while burying within the story that Churchill never seriously considered converting to Islam? Probably to blunt the force of Churchill’s remarks about Islam, which have become a rallying point for the few remaining Britons who are seriously resisting Islamization. The remarks are quoted in truncated form in the piece below. Here they are in full, from The River War, pp. 248-250:

“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. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die: but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.”

“Sir Winston Churchill’s family begged him not to convert to Islam, letter reveals,” by Matilda Battersby, the Independent, December 28, 2014:

The family of Sir Winston Churchill urged him to “fight against” the desire to convert to Islam, a newly discovered letter has revealed.

The Prime Minister who led Britain to victory in World War Two was apparently so taken with Islam and the culture of the Orient that his family wrote to try and persuade him not to become a Muslim.

In a letter dated August 1907 Churchill’s soon to be sister-in-law wrote to him: “Please don’t become converted to Islam; I have noticed in your disposition a tendency to orientalise, Pasha-like tendencies, I really have.

“If you come into contact with Islam your conversion might be effected with greater ease than you might have supposed, call of the blood, don’t you know what I mean, do fight against it.”

The letter, discovered by a history research fellow at Cambridge University, Warren Dockter, was written by Lady Gwendoline Bertie who married Churchill’s brother Jack.

“Churchill never seriously considered converting,” Dr Dockter told The Independent. “He was more or less an atheist by this time anyway. He did however have a fascination with Islamic culture which was common among Victorians.”

Churchill had opportunity to observe Islamic society when he served as an officer of the British Army in Sudan. In a letter written to Lady Lytton in 1907 Churchill wrote that he “wished he were” a Pasha, which was a rank of distinction in the Ottoman Empire.

He even took to dressing in Arab clothes in private – an enthusiasm he shared with his good friend the poet Wilfrid S. Blunt. But Dr Dockter thinks Churchill’s family need never have worried about his interest in Islam.

“[Lady Gwendoline Bertie] would have been worried because Churchill was leaving for an African tour and she would have known Churchill had been seeing his friend Wilfrid S. Blunt. Who was a renowned Arabist, anti-imperialist and poet. Though he and Churchill were friends and dressed in Arabian dress at times for Blunt’s eccentric parties, they rarely agreed.

In 1940, when Churchill was leading Britain’s fight against Nazi Germany, he gave his support to plans to build what became the London Central Mosque in Regent’s Park – putting aside £100,000 for the purpose – in the hope of winning the support of Muslim countries in the war.

He later told the House of Commons that “many of our friends in Muslim countries” had expressed appreciated for this “gift”.

But while he was vocal in his admiration for Islam, Churchill was not uncritical. “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,” he wrote in his 1899 account of Sudan, The River War.

“Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralizes the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith.”…

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Follow me on Facebook

Filed Under: Featured, journalistic bias, United Kingdom Tagged With: Winston Churchill


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. Rita says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 9:04 am

    Tommy Robinson might not be a modern Churchill, but he is at the very least a modern Socrates. Yes, the UK has some men still standing, and it’s not the politicians or the police.

    http://littlenotesfromparis.blogspot.com.au/2014/12/tommy-robinson-at-oxford.html

    • terry says

      Dec 28, 2014 at 12:17 pm

      When reading the whole piece above, Winston Chuchill wasn’t even anywhere near that! To the contrary, in the last two paragraphs, it shows clearly how he thought of it, its detrimental effect on social life and all humanity!

      I think that those behind this kind of fancy, erroneous and marketing-for-Islam titles, should be exposed and their motives put under the microscope!

  2. Aion says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 9:10 am

    The atrocious grammar which is distinctly the kind Persians/Pakistanis/Indians who think they speak good English but in reality do not betrays it. No native English speaker constructs sentences like that, while every halfwit self professed Mehdi/Swami/Acharya from Tehran to Bengal talks like that.

    • sencit says

      Dec 28, 2014 at 10:34 am

      Aion, absolutely correct !!
      It stands out a mile.

  3. mortimer says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 9:26 am

    Any bona fide Churchill scholar would no doubt find this claptrap a howler. Churchill focused on and absorbed completely every subject that he examined. His fascination with Islam was that of a politician and his writings in ‘The River War’ correctly depict the degrading effects of Islam on the human personality.

    • Angry says

      Dec 28, 2014 at 12:08 pm

      Correct mortimer, to quote from ‘The River War’ (First Edition, Vol 2), Churchill wrote:

      “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. Individual Moslems may show splendid
      qualities – but the influence of the religion paralyses the social
      development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists
      in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and
      proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa,
      raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity
      is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it
      had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell
      the civilization of ancient Rome.”

      And let’s not forget that Churchill’s mother was Jewish.

      The left-wing rag (Independent) proclaims its political alignment as “Liberal/radical centre”. The radical left-wing rag is a national paper for haters of Right Wing politics and Right-Wing voters, in ALL its forms.

      Also, let’s not forget that radical left-wing students are taught to HATE Churchill, and showed it during their hateful protest over student fees in 2010. Here’s the evidence of the radical left-wing filth showing extreme hate in the center of London during their disgusting protests.

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1337315/TUITION-FEES-VOTE-PROTEST-Thugs-deface-Cenotaph-urinate-Churchill.html

      • Wellington says

        Dec 28, 2014 at 12:22 pm

        Churchill’s mother, Angry, was Jennie Jerome, an American whose father was quite wealthy. I know of no Jewish ancestry for Jennie Jerome. If you have information to that effect I would be most interested in reading it.

        • Angry says

          Dec 28, 2014 at 1:04 pm

          Sure Wellington, here ya go:

          http://www.fpp.co.uk/History/antisemitism/ChurchillonJews_6.html

        • Wellington says

          Dec 28, 2014 at 1:48 pm

          Thank you, Angry, for that link to David Burbridge’s article, which I read in its entirety. I am not surprised in the least that he concludes in that article that there is “no worthwhile evidence to support the claim of Jewish ancestry” for Winston Churchill. I remember reading Ralph Martin’s very fine two-volume work on Jennie Jerome many years ago and in that work Martin went way back in Jerome’s lineage, tracing it to French Huguenots, one of whom came to America around 1700 via England. What makes it all the more incredible a claim is that it would have been highly unlikely that an English aristocrat such as Lord Randolph Churchill, Winston Churchill’s father, would have married anyone with even a hint of Jewish ancestry in them since there was a soft bigotry against Jews in the Anglo-Saxon world that would have almost certainly precluded such a marriage as occurred between Jennie Jerome and Lord Randolph.

        • Kepha says

          Dec 29, 2014 at 8:54 am

          Wellington, re your comment below, while there was a lot of soft bigotry against Jews among English aristocrats (and ordinary people, too), it was not so hard to prevent Benjamin Disraeli, a Christian of completely Jewish origins, from becoming Prime Minister, or for others of Jewish origins to assimilate.

          But I’m another who never heard of the possibility that Churchill had Jewish forbears until today.

      • Jay Boo says

        Dec 28, 2014 at 1:30 pm

        @Angry
        Angry listed a link to Wellington about Churchill’s mother being Jewish
        In reply directly to Angry’s first comment above:
        “And let’s not forget that Churchill’s mother was Jewish.”
        That is quite a bold assertion however, the ‘evidence’ that Angry listed is disappointedly not sufficient to support the claim.
        The link begins
        (From an Internet page) — not a good sign
        it speculates and then it discusses the search for tidbits which is very interesting but is far from conclusive.
        Until something better turns up it would appear that the jury is still out on this one.

        • RonaldB says

          Dec 28, 2014 at 2:11 pm

          WTF? Don’t you people read?

          This is the concluding sentence of the article both of you use to conclude there are possible “tidbits” pointing to the Jewish ancestry of Winston Churchill:

          “I conclude that there is no worthwhile evidence to support the claim of Jewish ancestry, and there seems to be strong documentary evidence against it. I say seems, because I have not examined the archival sources for myself. But the burden of proof is on those who wish to show that the official account is false.”

          The ONLY evidence offered of Churchill’s Jewish ancestry is that the author had not exhaustively searched ALL the records to support his conclusion from the records and documentaries that he had searched, that there was no evidence for Jewish ancestry.

          This is like saying, I have not examined ALL the fossil evidence for evolution: I have only examined 10% of the total fossils available, and all show strong evidence for evolution. Still, because I have not gotten around to every single fossil, there is a tidbit of evidence for creation.

        • Jay Boo says

          Dec 28, 2014 at 3:59 pm

          Don’t you read RonaldB
          Why are you preaching to the choir.
          I clearly stated that the jury is still out on this one.
          Sorry if I didn’t rub that last section in Angry’s face
          By including me in this reply you are making a deceptive false equivalence attack and clearly misrepresenting what I wrote.
          That is worse than what Angry did in the first place.
          Kinda shady

        • Jay Boo says

          Dec 28, 2014 at 4:06 pm

          Now that I see Wellington’s follow up it appears that Angry used a separate attention getting provocative statement as sarcasm but left just enough vagueness to entice the initial response.

        • Jay Boo says

          Dec 28, 2014 at 4:31 pm

          Note that my initial reply was at 1:30 and that I did not comment after the link comment but left that alone to comment on the first comment.

  4. Annie Oakley says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 9:31 am

    Robert, correct me if I’m wrong but Churchill’s life would have overlapped Marmaduke Pickthall’s life and that of Lawrence of Arabia.

    Lawrence was a figure that certainly would have set the imaginations of many European boys & men on fire, due in part to the rigid social structure that demanded everyone stay in their place. Lawrence had less impact on America and Canada because we already had a large array of cultural heroes and a society that openly encouraged people to venture forth and meet whatever challenges or dangers came our way.

    Pickthall also broke the European social mold when he traveled to the Middle East, immersed himself in that society, converted to islam and translated the koran into a readable format. Again, an adventurous figure who ventured out, lived among the savages, learned their ways and survived to tell the tale. His conversion to islam must have caused quite a stir.

    As far as Churchill’s habit of dressing up as an Arab goes, I think Arab garb probably was a lot more comfortable than the English fashions of the day. Also much draftier, too, in England’s cooler climate. Frankly, a preference for dressing in women’s clothing would have worried me a lot more.

    • Buraq says

      Dec 28, 2014 at 11:47 am

      @ Annie Oakley

      You say that Churchill’s life might have overlapped those of Marmaduke Pickthall and Lawrence of Arabia.

      In fact, as a young lad, Pickthall attended Harrow – a fee paying private school – where his closest friend was Winston Churchill!
      However, it’s difficult for Americans to understand (no offence intended) that the English aristocracy took to exotic belief systems quite easily. In 1913, while dining at Claridges, Lady Evelyn Cobbold, a rich heiress and traveller, tried to convert Pickthall to Islam during dinner, explaining that the waiters would do perfectly well as witnesses. He politely declined her bizarre suggestion.

      Obviously, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi would choke on his dates and milk if anyone suggested that any Lady So-and-So dining at Claridges could really be called a Muslim! But that’s the English for you. I know, I’m one.

  5. Michael Copeland says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 9:46 am

    “No stronger retrograde force exists in the world”, Churchill on Islam.
    Print your own wallet cards:
    http://libertygb.org.uk/v1/index.php/home/root/news-libertygb/6066-churchill-on-islam-wallet-cards

  6. Russell says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 9:51 am

    “…he was vocal in his admiration for Islam…”
    “No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.”

    What a remarkably foolish piece of journalism. The above two statements cannot be reconciled, yet the article expects the reader to engage in precisely this sort of doublethink.

    This is another shoddy attempt to deceive the British people into thinking Islam is benign. Suffice it to say there are 2-3 times as many UK-born Muslims fighting for ISIS, than are in the British Army.

  7. Tim says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 9:54 am

    Ha ha ha! Churchill converting to Islam?? That must be one of the largest tripe the left-wing propaganda paper has tried to pull on its audience to date. They must be desperate for new buyers. Their readers are declining. Will probably file chapter 15 any day.

  8. Alarmed Pig Farmer says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 10:08 am

    You can have your own opinion, but you can’t have your own facts. Unless you’re running a fictive reality, like that Islam is a religion of peace and only a tiny minority of extremists are causing the trouble and will gradually disappear.

    This claim about Churchill reminds recalls the episode where our first ever Moslem congressman was sworn in on Jefferson’s Holy Ko-Ran, which he owned because he was fascinated with the religion, and wanted to learn more.

    There is no limit on the amount of irony that can be ladled onto a topic without it being mocked as an obvious lie.

    • Rob Crawford says

      Dec 28, 2014 at 1:36 pm

      Jefferson read the Koran for the same reason Obama studied the Constitution: to know his enemy.

  9. mihai says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 10:11 am

    Classic dizinformatsya (Disinformation)

  10. F.R. Duplantier says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 10:12 am

    Someone needs a course in reading comprehension. The tone of Lady Gwendoline Bertie’s letter to her brother-in-law is clearly ironic. (Liberals don’t get irony and rarely have any real sense of humor.)

  11. cs says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 10:38 am

    The independent has Bob FiskzzzzzZZZZzzzz (It is all Israel’s fault) working for them, then you can guess why the article.

  12. Buraq says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 10:39 am

    “If you come into contact with Islam your conversion might be effected with greater ease than you might have supposed, call of the blood, don’t you know what I mean, do fight against it.” (Lady Gwendoline Bertie)

    There two important points; firstly, she says ‘IF’ you come into contact with Islam, and, ‘the call of the blood.’

    So, he hasn’t *yet* come into contact with Islam, she supposes, and her second reference is to a book by Robert Smythe Hichens who wrote dramatic, short stories for bored readers – sort of Jeckyll and Hyde stuff.
    Being from the privileged, upper classes, she would have had a lot of time to kill and her imagination was shaped by the equivalent of the ‘dime novel’.
    Yes, the illiberal Left and assorted clowns will be wetting themselves over this, but it’s a storm in an English tea cup. Changes nothing.
    Churchill abhorred Islam!

    A clown, is a clown, is a clown. (Gertrude Stein) And Churchill certainly never even came close to putting on the grease paint.

  13. lebel says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 11:13 am

    This shows that reducing someone’s thoughts on a complex subject to a few lines is nonsensical. Churchill said things about jews (not to mention Indians) that would get the average jwatcher to call for Nuremberg 2 if it was said today. Of course, people were not worried about political correctness in those times.

    It is possible that Churchill liked some parts of Islam and disliked others or disliked it more at first, then grew to like it. He was not tied down to the jwatch creed of “all Islam is always evil, evil, evil”.

    • Salah says

      Dec 28, 2014 at 11:35 am

      “all Islam is always evil, evil, evil”

      Yes, it is. ALL of it. Why? because its founder was evil, evil, evil.
      Can you really pretend that a man is faithful to his wife if he cheats on her once a week and is faithful six days a week? Muhammad had indeed some good qualities, but is it enough? can we really forget the atrocities and perversions he commited?
      Muhammad was a false prophet, this makes Islam, ALL of it, evil, evil, evil.

      http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2010/12/perfect-man-of-islam.html

      • cs says

        Dec 28, 2014 at 1:35 pm

        I don’t think he was a fake prophet, he was a true prophet of a jinn, not a true prophet of a good being. He was a servant on a bad game, besides his craziness who make it all worse.

  14. Angemon says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 11:19 am

    But while he was vocal in his admiration for Islam

    Hum, what?

    • Phil says

      Dec 28, 2014 at 10:20 pm

      Churchill’s admiration (?) for Islam is evident in his many writings, most succinctly summarized in ‘The River War : An account of the reconquest of the Sudan’ Vol II. He wrote :

      “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. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die: but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome”

      Is the official consensus so fatuous as to pretend this is a ringing endorsement?

  15. MKG says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 12:00 pm

    Typical leftwing BS. Trying to shape the future by editing the past.

  16. wallace says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 12:37 pm

    Muhammed has been re-incarnated as J.K Rawling. I just love it , the stories of talking donkeys and ants make me chuckle so much you can see my back molars. When I speak to muslim folk, and try and have a laugh with them about stuff like this they get angry with me. A few have actually tried to lay hands on me, I find that the years of training I had to do to earn my black belt has so far stood me in good stead. I read somewhere that they have trouble with peripheral vision and an elbow to the jaw sets them on the backfoot, I will still try and inject a little humour into their lives. I don’t believe that smelly old ayatollah who said there is no fun in Islam, nobody can read that funny little book without having a few bellylaughs

  17. Rezali Mehil says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 12:53 pm

    Peoples…..I don’t know whether to laugh or cry????…but it is so funny dont’ya think?…My My…how revealing is this ????

    Churchill’s sister in law – “If you come into contact with Islam your conversion might be effected with greater ease than you might have supposed, call of the blood, don’t you know what I mean, …

    do fight against it dear.” …there’s a good christian (she said with fingers and legs crossed).

    In a letter written to Lady Lytton in 1907 Churchill wrote that he “wished he were” a Pasha, which was a rank of distinction in the Ottoman Empire.

    He even took to dressing in Arab clothes in private – an enthusiasm he shared with his good friend the poet Wilfrid S. Blunt.

    Perhaps Churchill should have set up ISIL …instead of this modern sunni rabble…Calipha Churchill…kinda has a ring to it…don’t you think?

    So many of you here have said that he hated Islam….infact the dark horse loved it….no wonder Prince Charles and the Queen love it too.

    MORE Later ….

    Rezali

    • Rob Crawford says

      Dec 28, 2014 at 1:38 pm

      He loved what he said was an unmatched force for backwardness and slavery?

      You Muslims is nuts.

      • Jay Boo says

        Dec 28, 2014 at 4:25 pm

        Rob Crawford
        Now Now,That is not entirely fair
        Not all Muslims are nuts, Just the ones who read the Koran, pray to Allah and believe that Muhammad was actually a prophet.
        The others are merely unbalanced.

    • Buraq says

      Dec 28, 2014 at 1:42 pm

      @ Rezali Mehil – No 1 Clown!

      You five star fool! The British considered the Arabs to be ‘noble savages’- just the way the Americans perceived the Red Indian. That’s why Lawrence of Arabia and other British public school oddballs felt sympathy for them in their fight against the Turks.
      Lawrence of Arabia and Churchill admired the Arabs as a people in a semi-mystical way, as noble savages. Their sympathy and empathy did not extend to accepting Islam as a religion. Why not? The Anglican Church in Britain was an extension of the governing class. Accept Islam and you would be a pariah; end of political career!

      But I wouldn’t expect a clown like you to understand these subtleties because you are a baggy trousered, red-nosed, wire wigged clown! (Idiots like you justify nuclear war. Melting clowns like you would almost be worth a few billion innocents as collateral.)

  18. The Truth says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 1:54 pm

    Churchill was very critical on Islam. After WW2 he called Mein Kampf “the new Koran of faith and war: turgid, verbose, shapeless, but pregnant with its message.” And in the 1950s, he campaigned against Muslim immigration.

  19. David says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 2:17 pm

    I am more concerned today with Prince Charles’ seeming obsession and indulgence with islam.

  20. Champ says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 2:28 pm

    Excellent refutation, Robert, you have the Independent in checkmate …

    And Churchill’s remarks about islam, from “The River War”, clearly reveal a man who understands the evil nature of islam, very well, and that he was not even *close* to converting to evil islam–quite the contrary. Yes, Churchill had a very clear understanding of islam.

    I especially like this observation about islam from Churchill:

    “No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.”

    Bravo!

  21. Savvy Kafir says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 4:18 pm

    Churchill was a religious skeptic who was refreshingly candid in his criticism of Islam. The idea that he would ever consider converting to that religion is absurd.

    The most popular page on my website is one describing his interactions with the Muslim world and his opinion of it. http://www.handbookforinfidels.com/churchill-on-islam.html

    • Isabella says

      Dec 28, 2014 at 9:10 pm

      I also think it is absurd.

  22. Wellington says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 6:13 pm

    I would assert, when considering all the evidence, that Winston Chuchill was very much a skeptic, though he was not an atheist. He allowed for the possibility of a higher power but, contra Pascal, thought it a bad bet and not a good one. He certainly understood, as many of America’s Founding Fathers who were not conventional Christians understood, for example Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, that an enlightened religion was a sine qua non for the optimal performance of a body politic, and in particular a democratic one.

    In other words, while non-religious, he was not anti-religious. I also have no doubt he was a great admirer of Anglicanism as an institution, which was an essential element in the overall make-up of the British character and nation. I can fully understand this appreciation by Churchill of the Anglican Church.. Though I am an agnostic myself, I am a great admirer of the institution of the papacy. Not only the Catholic Church is benefitted by its existence but, I would argue, all of humanity is (though occasionally a particular pope is a disappointment, for instance the one right now occupying the throne of St. Peter’s). The world would be worse off, not better off, were the papacy to become no more. There will be those who will disagree with me here but I would deem them wrong.

    Winston Churchill was a very subtle human being. He had many layers as well as many gifts. The idea, though, that he would have ever seriously considered converting to Islam is a preposterous one, in part for the reasons I have already mentioned. Even though he may have admired certain features of the committed Muslim (while disdaining several others), he no more, I submit, seriously contemplated a conversion to Islam than did certain Union officers on the Indian frontier, like Generals Custer and Howard, who, while admiring many features of the overall American Indian belief system, never once themselves thought of “going native.”

    A final comment. Revisionist history in theory is not a bad thing. On occasion it can be correct. But the vast majority of the time it comes with an agenda, and usually an awful one at that. The serious study of the past should never come with an agenda. Rather, such study must have a ruthless pursuit of the truth, elusive though the truth often is.

    • voegelinian says

      Dec 29, 2014 at 11:33 am

      See:

      http://forchristandculture.com/2013/02/25/winston-churchill-some-agnostic-some-atheist-part-1/

      The writer there presents an actual argument, with evidence and reasoned interpretation; a rare thing on the Internet.

  23. profitsbeard says

    Dec 28, 2014 at 10:56 pm

    This seems like a misunderstanding of the tone and period of the letter.

    It sounds more like light banter between friends about not “going native”. Teasing one another, not being serious.

    Churchill’s judgment of Islam is well known.

    Joining a “retrograde force” would have been absurd..

  24. Mladen Andrijasevic says

    Dec 29, 2014 at 3:38 am

    How exactly does the Independent article square with page 26 of the Gathering Storm , VOL 1 of Churchill’s The Second World War ?

    “Hitler’s sentence was reduced from four years to thirteen months. These months in the Landsberg fortress were however sufficient to enable him to complete in outline Mein Kampf, a treatise on his political philosophy inscribed to the dead of the recent Putsch. When eventually he came to power, there was no book which deserved more careful study from the rulers, political and military, of the Allied Powers. All was there – the programme of German resurrection; the technique of party propaganda;the programme of German resurrection;the technique of party propaganda;the plan for combating Marxism;the concept of a National-Socialist State;the rightful position of Germany at the summit of the world. Here was the new Koran of faith and war: turgid, verbose, shapeless, but pregnant with its message.”

    • No Fear says

      Dec 29, 2014 at 3:49 am

      Thanks for that quote. Haven’t seen that one before. I have often thought Mein Kampf and the Quran were similar.

  25. No Fear says

    Dec 29, 2014 at 3:47 am

    I have a respect for Ebola. It is ruthless and efficient. That does not mean I want to be infected by it.

  26. Edward Cline says

    Dec 29, 2014 at 5:23 am

    Men and women of outstanding integrity and character are usually targets of the envious and the hateful who wish to find “feet of clay.” Thomas Jefferson,Michelle Bachmann, Ayn Rand, Clarence Thomas, so many others. The “logic” is that if something untoward can be found in their lives, then whatever they had to say can’t be true and can be disregarded. In this instance, the next thing you know, somebody will find a letter “proving” that Churchill was a secret Nazi and had a gay affair with Josef Stalin.

  27. Lisa says

    Dec 29, 2014 at 5:25 am

    To know why the Independent has done this, and why its generally very pro-Islamism/pro-immigration, look up its Editor.

    He’s a Muslim, and a good friend of Mehdi Hasan.

  28. David Woolmer says

    Dec 29, 2014 at 6:54 am

    I believe that posters on here will be very interested in the videos(Videos uploaded by Pat Condell) of this famous Irish born blogger,writer and former comedian. His videos-particularly those featuring his loathing of Islam have received MILLIONS of viewings. He is very knowledgeable on this fascist ideology.

  29. Barnaby says

    Dec 29, 2014 at 7:31 am

    “Few remaining Britons”… We’re one of the most atheist countries in the world. Islam is dying people, chill out! And this story is just bizarre. Churchill’s sister in law clearly didn’t know him very well.

    • nothosaur says

      Dec 29, 2014 at 1:19 pm

      Barnaby says “…We’re one of the most atheist countries in the world. Islam is dying people, chill out!…”

      Explain your optimism in light of the facts of this study (Fertility and Religiousness Among European Muslims, Charles F. Westoff and Tomas Frejka, 2007):

      Assuming patterns of net immigration do not change significantly, there will be over 5.5 million British Muslims, representing 8.2 per cent of the UK population, by 2030.

      The 2005-10 fertility rate among UK Muslims is approximately 3.0, which means that the average British Muslim had exactly three children in her lifetime, compared to 1.8 children for non-Muslim women.

      By 2030 the rate is predicted to be 2.5 for Muslims and remain at 1.8 for non-Muslims.

      Also, the traditional punishment for apostasy in Islam is death. If the death penalty is not enforced, then there is at least a very strong discouragement in the form of physical beatings, acid attacks, and the threats of such. The discouragement of apostasy in Islam is stronger than in any other religion in modern times. Therefore, the children of the British Muslims cited in the above study are very likely to remain Muslim, and to pass the faith onto their own children.

      The confluence of culture and birthrate will determine the future of the UK just like everywhere else.

      • Rebecca says

        Dec 30, 2014 at 10:42 pm

        Exactly. The socialists in Briton don’t have children. This should tell you something, people.

  30. GKP says

    Dec 29, 2014 at 1:35 pm

    TAQUIYA is what the lies anti human element says to spread themselves which ultimately led them to get heaven with 72 virgin pussy.
    Disguiesting

  31. somehistory says

    Dec 29, 2014 at 1:42 pm

    From personal experience with the *press,* I know it is possible to say something with a clear meaning, and after the *edit* by the *journalist,* what was said seems to mean the exact opposite. I’ll take his word for it that his thoughts on islam are much like my own. My own is, it would have been better if mo had never been born, if islam had never been invented by the devil and if no one followed those evil words from the evil beast, today.

  32. Brian Hoff says

    Dec 29, 2014 at 3:14 pm

    Churchhill have to help built the mosque to paid back for the Islamist nation that help him fight WWII most of the Indian troop where muslim.

  33. Mild Bill Hickok says

    Dec 29, 2014 at 11:54 pm

    You can choose your friends, but you are stuck with your in laws. Looks like Churchill got stuck with a real looser.

  34. kourosh says

    Feb 24, 2015 at 7:13 am

    some day west thought if they let east to have its own religion and just give them their resources then they would have a good life but now they are looking at the fruits of this decision. it is mostly like an apple you cannot keep one side when the other side is being rancid.

FacebookYoutubeTwitterLog in

Subscribe to the Jihad Watch Daily Digest

You will receive a daily mailing containing links to the stories posted at Jihad Watch in the last 24 hours.
Enter your email address to subscribe.

Please wait...

Thank you for signing up!
If you are forwarding to a friend, please remove the unsubscribe buttons first, as they my accidentally click it.

Subscribe to all Jihad Watch posts

You will receive immediate notification.
Enter your email address to subscribe.
Note: This may be up to 15 emails a day.

Donate to JihadWatch
FrontPage Mag

Search Site

Translate

The Team

Robert Spencer in FrontPageMag
Robert Spencer in PJ Media

Articles at Jihad Watch by
Robert Spencer
Hugh Fitzgerald
Christine Douglass-Williams
Andrew Harrod
Jamie Glazov
Daniel Greenfield

Contact Us

Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Archives

  • 2020
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2019
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2018
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2017
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2016
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2015
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2014
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2013
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2012
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2011
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2010
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2009
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2008
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2007
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2006
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2005
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2004
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2003
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • March

All Categories

You Might Like

Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Recent Comments

  • Infidel on Uighur leader: ‘We’re actually quite worried’ about what Biden might let China get away with
  • Mojdeh on Audio: Robert Spencer on Muslim Brotherhood influence in a Biden/Harris administration
  • Henry Mansfield on Audio: Robert Spencer on Muslim Brotherhood influence in a Biden/Harris administration
  • Crusades Were Right on New study reveals that Muslim religiosity strongly linked to hatred towards the West
  • Naildriver on Uighur leader: ‘We’re actually quite worried’ about what Biden might let China get away with

Popular Categories

dhimmitude Sharia Jihad in the U.S ISIS / Islamic State / ISIL Iran Free Speech

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Books by Robert Spencer

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to their respective owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and you do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.

Our mailing address is: David Horowitz Freedom Center, P.O. Box 55089, Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.