The Washington Post offers this dismal article from Lynn Olson trying to bash Bush for his fondness for Churchill. The piece is so pathetic that a point-by-point rebuttal would be tedious.
A look at one sentence will do. Olson: "Churchill would snort, I believe, at the administration’s equation of ’Islamofascism,’ an amorphous, ill-defined movement of killers forced to resort to terrorism by their lack of military might, to Nazi Germany, a global power that had already conquered several countries before Churchill took office in 1940."
Here’s what WSC wrote about Islam in 1900 in the original edition of The River War(an edition generally not available for reasons too long to go into here):
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. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die. But the influence of the religion paralyzes 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 proseltyzing 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.
Now, just imagine what Ms. Olson would say if Bush dared to quote this passage.
Thank you, Steve, for answering the call.
One of my colleagues sent me a link to this article this morning and asked me what I though of the article. Part of my reply was as follows (more measured than Steve's, though I did send the River War quote):
"Thanks,----. This piece sure has been making the rounds of the blogs this morning. I don't find it very compelling--not sure how much she really knows about WSC. On a couple of her more substantive points, WSC's "Arms and the Covenant" campaign in the late 30's to form an alliance against Hitler was really last ditch, after the Britain and France has allowed Hitler to rearm, and of course it was the left's pacifism and Baldwin's fear of losing elections to the socialists that paralyzed Britain in the 30's. Churchill's advocacy of treaty alliances, including his campaign for European unity after the war, was always aimed at the preservation of the spiritual essence of the great nations and the survival of western civilization. And of course, he saw a special provenance in the unity of the English Speaking Peoples. On the degree of the threat posed by Islam, I wonder if you have ever read the following passage of his book, The River War.......
"In my view Churchill would indeed see a serious threat from the combination of resurgent Islamism, the fruits of modern science and technology, and the lethargy and demographic peril of Europe. What he would have done or would now do exactly is another question, and I do not make it a practice to make WSC fit whatever I currently think should be done. Where GWB of course falls way below Churchillian standards is in the lack of energy and facility with which he exercises executive power. Churchill would not abide delay, insufficient force or bureaucratic obstructionism."
"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"
The hubris and utter ignorance which the elite exhibit with regards to Christianity is at times disheartening, but always frightening given the power they wield. An EU Constitution which fails to even mention the contributions of Christianity to the birth of a civilized Europe, is but one small example. Our current preoccupation with "the threat of Islam," is simply a phobia of mass obedience to an authority other than the elites; an obediance that cannot be manipulated by bread and circuses, or pictures on the wall of the cave. Religious obedience is the last barrier to their goals, and do not rest in the delusion that it will all end after subduing the threat of Islam.