Islam
Under Scrutiny by Ex-Muslims
Winston Churchill On Islamism
10 April, 2007

The British leaders who have followed Churchill (with the
exception, perhaps, of Margaret Thatcher) have shown little of his
independence of spirit, or individualism. Five years ago,
Churchill was voted the greatest Briton of all time in a
BBC poll. Those who claim to support Churchill
think mainly of his role as a statesman, and as a warrior in the
battle against Hitler and fascism.
In today's politically correct Britain, few people are prepared
openly to criticize Islamism. A collective cowardice afflicts the
chattering classes. Too fearful of the stigma of being labeled "Islamophobe",
leaders and media figures would rather buy into the lies of Muslim
victimization than objectively analyze the threat that global
radical Islam poses to democracy. Few are aware of Churchill's
comments on Islam, and fewer still would dare repeat those words
in public today.
Churchill was born into privilege but he gained first-hand
knowledge of Islam in the army. He joined the Fourth Hussars in
1895, and was posted in the North-West Frontier of India (now
Pakistan), bordering Afghanistan. During this time, he became a
war correspondent, working with full approval of
Sir Bindon Blood,
chief staff officer of the Chitral relief force. Originally,
Churchill's reports were sent anonymously by telegram and letter
to the Pioneer Mail. Eventually he was writing for the
London Daily Telegraph under his own name. The first of
these reports was published on October 6, 1897. He was paid five
pounds per article.
He wrote of his experiences in the borderlands with Afghanistan
in a book titled
The Story of the Malakand Field Force. This
book detailed not only the conflict of the region, but also its
cultural and military history, with notes on natural history. When
his mother informed him in late 1897 that Longmans had agreed to
publish this tome, he noted:
that "the publication of this book will certainly be the most
noteworthy act of my life. Up to date (of course). By its
reception I shall measure the chances of my possible success in
the world." The book appeared the following year.
In this book, when describing a local imam, Churchill coined the
term "Mad Mullah". Speaking of the Pathan and Beluchi tribesmen of
the border regions, he noted with some sarcasm that "the
Mullah will raise his voice and remind them of other days when the
sons of the prophet drove the infidel from the plains of India,
and ruled at Delhi, as wide an Empire as the Kafir holds to-day:
when the true religion strode proudly through the earth and
scorned to lie hidden and neglected among the hills: when mighty
princes ruled in Bagdad, and all men knew that there was one God,
and Mahomet was His prophet. And the young men hearing these
things will grip their Martinis, and pray to Allah, that one day
He will bring some Sahib (prince) - best prize of all - across
their line of sight at seven hundred yards so that, at least, they
may strike a blow for insulted and threatened Islam."
Churchill wrote: "Indeed it is evident that Christianity,
however degraded and distorted by cruelty and intolerance, must
always exert a modifying influence on men's passions, and protect
them from the more violent forms of fanatical fever, as we are
protected from smallpox by vaccination. But the Mahommedan
religion increases, instead of lessening, the fury of intolerance.
It was originally propagated by the sword, and ever since, its
votaries have been subject, above the people of all other creeds,
to this form of madness."
After 9/11, George W. Bush famously described Islam as a
"religion of peace". Churchill entertained no such fancy
notions. In his history of the Malakand Field Force, Churchill
wrote that "civilisation is confronted with militant
Mahommedanism. The forces of progress clash with those of
reaction. The religion of blood and war is face to face with that
of peace. Luckily the religion of peace is usually the better
armed."
By the time his first book was published, Churchill had taken
part in active service, fighting in Bangalore. He joined Lord
Kitchener's army in the Sudan, and took part in the Battle of
Omdurman on September 2, 1898. This battle took place in what is
now a suburb of Khartoum, and pitted British troops against 50,000
belonging to a local warlord, Abdullah al-Taashi. This man called
himself the Khalifa or "Caliph", and was the successor of Muhammad
Ahmad. Ahmad had been the self-styled "Mahdi" (Muslim Messiah) who
had beheaded General Gordon at Khartoum in 1885. The war in Sudan
was a religious war. The region had been exploited by the
Egyptians from 1819 to 1883. Originally the "Mahdi" had waged war
against Muslim Egypt but, irritated by the presence of 150 British
troops in Sudan, he soon declared Jihad (Holy War) against all
Christians. The Mahdi himself had died of typhus in 1885. The
Battle of Omdurman was not the last decisive battle in this war,
but it signaled the last time a cavalry charge was mounted by
British troops.
Churchill wrote of the Mahdi's jihad, the succession of the
Khalifa and Omdurman in a two-volume book published by Longmans in
1899. Entitled "The River War: An Account of the Reconquest of
Sudan", Churchill wrote on pages 248-250 of the second volume: ""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.
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. 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 proselytising 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."
This contentious passage became abridged in a
shorter version published in 1902. However, the
abridged version still contained some harsh words for the
fanaticism of Islam. In Chapter One, Churchill wrote: "Fanaticism
is not a cause of war. It is the means which helps savage peoples
to fight. It is the spirit which enables them to combine - the
great common object before which all personal or tribal disputes
become insignificant. What the horn is to the rhinoceros, what the
sting is to the wasp, the Mohammedan faith was to the Arabs of the
Soudan - a faculty of offence or defence."
In Chapter Two, Churchill stated: "All the warlike operations
of Mohammedan peoples are characterised by fanaticism" and in
its third chapter he observed: "After the fall of Khartoum and
the retreat of the British armies the Mahdi became the absolute
master of the Soudan. Whatever pleasures he desired he could
command, and, following the example of the founder of the
Mohammedan faith, he indulged in what would seem to Western minds
gross excesses. He established an extensive harem for his
own peculiar use, and immured therein the fairest captives of the
war."
Churchill entered politics in the same year that "The River War"
was originally published. As his eponymous grandson pointed out
last March, Churchill noted the threat of Wahhabism
on June 14, 1921 at the House of Commons. His grandson stated in
an address to the Locke Foundation that this speech "followed
"hard on the heels of the Cairo Conference, at which he had
presided over the re-shaping of the Middle East". This was the
March 1921 Cairo Conference, rather than the better
known Cairo Conferences of 1943.

What is less well known is that he also said on that day: "A
large number of Bin Saud's followers belong to the Wahabi sect, a
form of Mohammedanism which bears, roughly speaking, the same
relationship to orthodox Islam as the most militant form of
Calvinism would have borne to Rome in the fiercest times of
[Europe's] religious wars.
The Wahhabis profess a life of exceeding austerity, and what
they practice themselves they rigorously enforce on others. They
hold it as an article of duty, as well as of faith, to kill all
who do not share their opinions and to make slaves of their wives
and children. Women have been put to death in Wahhabi villages for
simply appearing in the streets.
It is a penal offence to wear a silk garment. Men have been
killed for smoking a cigarette and, as for the crime of alcohol,
the most energetic supporter of the temperance cause in this
country falls far behind them. Austere, intolerant, well-armed,
and blood-thirsty, in their own regions the Wahhabis are a
distinct factor which must be taken into account, and they have
been, and still are, very dangerous to the holy cities of Mecca
and Medina.

Winston Churchill was fully aware of the potential for fanaticism
and warfare, inherent within Islam since the time of the founder
and his successors. He did not choose to dilute his words. His
experiments at nation building in the Middle East may not have
been as successful as he would have wished. He knew that war had
attended Islam since its origins, and a century ago fanatics were
exploiting this. Today, the world is still threatened by Islamic
terrorism and the war of jihad is still being fought, even in the
mountains and valleys of Malakand. Our leaders today, unlike
Winston Churchill, are too conciliatory to acknowledge publicly
the true nature of the beast that threatens us.
When he was describing Nazism, Churchill said: "An appeaser is
one who feeds the crocodile hoping it will eat him last." He also
said: "Victory will never be found by taking the line of least
resistance." Those words should be heeded. In the current struggle
against the spread of Islamism, they are as true today as they
were 65 years ago.
Adrian Morgan is a
British based writer and artist who regularly contributes in
Family Security Matters. His essays also appear in
Western Resistance,
Spero News and
Faithfreedom.org.