It wan't called "Islam" when this was writ.....

[theDoctorisIn]

From your personal library?

No, I don't have the first edition. My copy looks like this:

 

[HenryBHough]

A, the abridged version. I see you failed to read the Wikipedia article through. A limited attention span is rarely improved by imbibing.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Which was, as noted, over a century ago.

Certain truths really DO stand the test of time, don't they?

It was observed a century or more ago that sharks swim, bats fly and Democrats lie. Equally time-tested and as true today as when first observed.

For those in denial, there remains controversy whether as to whether Churchill first delivered the poignant and timeless message first in a speech while touring after his fact-finding in strange lands or first included it in a book and later quoted from it in the "road show" that produced more income than the book.

In any case, the "where" is not important - it's the content which the left seems yet unable to comprehend. That really is unfortunate as, had it been heeded, so much pain could have been averted - so many heads would still remain attached to bodies.

I have intentionally mis-puctuated a sentence in the above so the fueling on box wine will not go unwasted and some other diversion can be devised to entertain us all. Can you find it?

There's no "controversy" over where it came from - some conservo-spam email called it a speech, and you rolled with it. No such "speech" was ever given, nor am I aware of any "road show" that the young Churchill went on in which he read from it after it's publication.

But it's ok, I understand that you're just not man enough to admit you were wrong. It's ok.

 

[Timmy]

Thanks for reminding us how the west has been fucking with the Mid East for 100 years !

 

[HenryBHough]

Whether I might have been right or wrong is unimportant.

It's the content of Churchill's analysis that is important and, obviously you're only trying to obscure that.

Point missed through drunkenness? Stupdity? Or party edict?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I'm aware that I have the abridged version. I'm not sure what your point is.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Whether I might have been right or wrong is unimportant.

It's the content of Churchill's analysis that is important and, obviously you're only trying to obscure that.

Point missed through drunkenness? Stupdity? Or party edict?

You've been embarrassing yourself for the last half hour or so, calling me names and insisting that I was wrong, and now that it's finally sunk it to your head that you were wrong, it's "unimportant".

 

[HenryBHough]

I'm aware that I have the abridged version. I'm not sure what your point is.

Your failure to sustain attention long enough to have finished the Wikipedia article is not my concern. Your attempting to deflect the eternal truth of Churchill's words are amusing but hardly in the interest of American security.

 

[Kondor3]

I haven't a clue...

But I recognize the verbiage of the era...

H.G. Wells?

Rudyard Kipling?

Samuel Clemens?

Winston Churchill?

Teddy Roosevelt?

It was a 25 year old Winston Churchill, in his 1899 book The River War.

Yay... I got it right, before I added Leo XIII... I've read bits and pieces of his early work, and he is one of those turn-of-the-(last)-century Imperialists that came to mind...

I'm a big fan of the historical works he wrote later in his life - his biography of his ancestor the Duke of Marborough is fascinating and staggeringly comprehensive.

I've thoroughly immersed myself in years past in his more famous WWII -related works, and I own the River War, but I could never get through it. I know he wrote a biography of the first Marlborough (Churchill) but I never thought to pick it up. Given the recommendation, I guess I'll have to look for it. Thanks.

 

[HenryBHough]

The thinner version has much omitted; the original (2 volume set) is complete but may be more difficult to obtain. The 1899 version is the original; Churchill's publisher did the first revision in about 1902 and I don't know whether the quoted text is included in that one.

In any case, for those with sufficient attention span to read the antiquated style, there is a free ebook available:

The River War, by Winston S. Churchill

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I haven't a clue...

But I recognize the verbiage of the era...

H.G. Wells?

Rudyard Kipling?

Samuel Clemens?

Winston Churchill?

Teddy Roosevelt?

It was a 25 year old Winston Churchill, in his 1899 book The River War.

Yay... I got it right, before I added Leo XIII... I've read bits and pieces of his early work, and he is one of those turn-of-the-(last)-century Imperialists that came to mind...

I'm a big fan of the historical works he wrote later in his life - his biography of his ancestor the Duke of Marborough is fascinating and staggeringly comprehensive.

I've thoroughly immersed myself in years past in his more famous WWII -related works, and I own the River War, but I could never get through it. I know he wrote a biography of the first Marlborough (Churchill) but I never thought to pick it up. Given the recommendation, I guess I'll have to look for it. Thanks.

It's very comprehensive - the four volumes combined are probably 4,000+ pages.

I'm facinating by that period of time, though.

 

[Kondor3]

I haven't a clue...

But I recognize the verbiage of the era...

H.G. Wells?

Rudyard Kipling?

Samuel Clemens?

Winston Churchill?

Teddy Roosevelt?

It was a 25 year old Winston Churchill, in his 1899 book The River War.

Yay... I got it right, before I added Leo XIII... I've read bits and pieces of his early work, and he is one of those turn-of-the-(last)-century Imperialists that came to mind...

I'm a big fan of the historical works he wrote later in his life - his biography of his ancestor the Duke of Marborough is fascinating and staggeringly comprehensive.

I've thoroughly immersed myself in years past in his more famous WWII -related works, and I own the River War, but I could never get through it. I know he wrote a biography of the first Marlborough (Churchill) but I never thought to pick it up. Given the recommendation, I guess I'll have to look for it. Thanks.

It's very comprehensive - the four volumes combined are probably 4,000+ pages.

I'm facinating by that period of time, though.

If it's by WSC, I'm sure it is (comprehensive), judging by his other works. And, little known, the fellow had a serviceable sense of humor, as well. I just downloaded the Amazon Prime (Kindle) version of Volume 1 on an Android tablet, although I doubt I'll get through it before the end of the year. Still, off on another adventure. Much obliged.

 

[MACAULAY]

Everybody knows Churchill said that. And you turds have turned this thread into a pissing contest over whether he said it in speech or a book...at least one of you is trying to avoid a discussion as to whether he was right or not.

I say the Islamic history before he said it, justified the opinion...and Muslims behavior has since validated it....yet fools everywhere in New York, New England and California want Muslims in the USA in whatever numbers they can get for the crass, disgusting political motive of adding Democrat Voters.

Mohamed wrote his Koran in a cave. Not evidence of good mental health. John of Patmos wrote that nonsense called Revelations in a cave.

Two good reasons to assume nothing worth a shit ever comes out of a cave. And this thread is evidence that no legitimate discussion ever occurs on this board if even one know-it-all liberal pinhead is involved. Deflect, deflect, obfuscate, deflect some more.

May as well discuss Malplaquet & Oudenarde.