Most Helpful Customer Reviews
438 of 496 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
The Comparisons are Glaring, September 28, 2006
This review is from: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) (Paperback)
This book obliterates simplistic, politically correct views about Islam. The word-for-word comparisons between the teachings of Muhammed and the teachings of Christianity, Buddhism, and other religions, are stunning. Take, for example, the famous story of Jesus' intervention when a crowd was about to stone an adulterous woman. His words, to let the person "who is without sin cast the first stone", sent the mob retreating in shame. He then told the woman to, "Go and sin no more." As the autor quotes from the Quran, Muhammed was confronted with a similar situation. A pregnant adulterous woman had come to him requesting that he pray with her for forgiveness. He sent her away until the baby was born. When she came back months later, he sent her away until the child was weened. When she came back as directed, he took the child and gave it to one of his men as a gift. Muhammed then ordered the mother buried up to her shoulders and stoned to death. It really is time for media pundits, college professors, and self-serving politicos to stop making shallow moral equivalence statements about Islam, the Quran, and the Crusades. This book needs to be read and studied by those who now are in a position to give away our birthright. It took the ancient Greeks, the Judeo-Christian tradition, the Magna Carta, the U.S. Constitution, and hundreds of years of Western Civilization to produce the most beneficent and free society in history. Here, Muslims and others can practice their beliefs without fear. We must insist that spokesmen and apologists for Islam demand that this "religion of peace" grant its neighbors the same rights the Western democracies have gladly given to them. Read the book. Its an eye-opener.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
119 of 132 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
worth reading, but check other sources as well., May 12, 2007
This review is from: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) (Paperback)
I just finished this book, and I think it's worth reading as a balance to a great many works out there which are slanted in the other direction (ie: "Christians bad - Muslims good, yada, yada). I'm not a scholar on any of the subjects Spencer covers here, so I will allow that he might not be 100% right on every point. After reading many of the other reviews here, I'm convinced that many of these folks have not read the book at all. Spencer certainly has serious misgivings about Islam and, yes, I think one could call him "biased" to some extent. But what's wrong with that? I personally don't believe there is any such thing as a completely unbiased scholar, so I just try to get my information from multiple sources (this is the 3rd book on Islam I've read this year). That's why I bought this book - to get another view - one that is not heard much in our ever increasingly PC world. Why do some reviewers have such a problem with that? Some seem to think that only one view is valid (theirs), and that Spencer should not be allowed to enter the debate at all. If you believe some of these reviewers, anyone who says anything positive about this book is just one step away from picking up a sniper rifle and heading over to the nearest mosque. What condescending idiocy is that? I'm not a "hater", or a "bigot" or a "narrow-minded zealot", just a seeker of multiple points of view. That used to be called being "liberal".
I was particularly amused by one typical negative review written by Ms. Martie D. Kelley. It sounds to me that she's more biased than Robert Spencer, just in the other direction. Kelley trumpets her "higher education" and status as a "scholar" holding a BA in Religious Studies (doesn't say from where), but Robert Spencer holds an MA (that's a master's degree, Martie!) in Religious Studies from University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and has been researching and writing on the subject of Islamic theology, law, and history for 27 years! So, by any objective standard, Spencer is a scholar, and he deserves to say his piece without being labeled a bigot! If he's wrong about something, then let's hear the counter argument - not dismissive insults. The only bit of evidence Ms. Kelley offers to show that Spencer is wrong is the laughable assertion that, "in the Qur'an it is explicitly stated that it is the duty of Muslims to protect People of the Book (Jews & Christians)" Now why does this tidbit come as no comfort to me? Would Ms. Kelley defend a male chauvinist who says that patriarchy states that it is the duty of every man to "protect" women? I doubt it. If Ms. Kelley had bothered to do more than just "skim through various parts" of Mr. Spencer's book, she would have realized that this inane comment plays right into one of the more salient points Spencer talks about in his section on Dhimma (chapter 4). The Muslim idea of "protection" of non-muslims is a far cry from what most Westerners know as religious tolerance and freedom of worship. It's more like how the Mafia dons used to describe shaking down the store owners in the neighborhood. "We're not taking their money and making them live in abject fear. No, we're just offering these good people 'protection'. There's no injustice going on here". Tell me, Ms. Kelley, just who should the other "people of the Book" be protected from, hmmm? I'm also wondering what kind of comfort and assurance Ms. Kelley would offer to a Hindu, Buddhist or an Animist (or any other person not "of the Book") because as Spencer points out, these people have been regarded as no better than animals by Muslims. How can any intellectually honest person make such excuses for a religious system that claims to be religiously tolerant, yet is so narrowly selective in it's tolerance? It just amazes me how far some "educated" people will go to defend the indefensible. Is Ms. Kelley saying that we need not be concerned about how the other religious groups are treated by Muslims as long as the Christians and Jews are "protected" (whatever that means)???
This book might not be the last word on Islam, but it is worth a read, and I think Spencer is bringing some good points to a very important contemporary debate. I recommend the book but, by all means, keep reading and decide for yourself.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
2,333 of 2,735 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A crucial and timely analysis., July 30, 2005
This review is from: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) (Paperback)
The cover of this study carries the declaration that the contents refute "popular myths" and reveal "facts" that will not be heard on the news.
From the outset this proves to be very much the case as the reader is taken into a courageous investigation of Islam.
Replete with references as well as quotations and examples direct from former practising, learned Muslims, the claims that Islam is a "peaceful" and "tolerant" religion are examined in considerable depth for a book of this nature.
Many quotes are provided which reveal fundamental differences between the statements made by Jesus Christ and Muhammed. This is done with the declared intent of providing the reader with an opportunity to visualise what is cited as the "fallacy" of those who claim that Islam and Christianity are basically "equal" in their ability to inspire good or evil.
Furthermore, these quotes are provided for the reader to understand that a "distinction" can be drawn between what are described as the "core principles" that guide faithful Muslims and Christians.
Beginning with an examination of the life and character of Muhammed himself, the study proceeds to discuss a plethora of other subjects including the alleged Islamic "oppression" of women, historical revisionism, the Crusades, the purported "dangers" of criticising Islam, "Islamophobia" and "Jihad".
The reader is provided, in no uncertain terms, with a visualisation of what allegedly faces the US, Europe, the West & indeed the International arena, should we fail to come to terms with the consequences of what is described as the "real" message and implications of Islam, which are purportedly being denied the public by the powers that be.
One former Muslim is quoted as saying that the theory and practice of Jihad was "....not concocted in the Pentagon....it was taken from the Koran, the Hadith and Islamic tradition...".
This statement is then elaborated and clarified by stating that it is the "divinely ordained duty" of Muslims to fight in the literal sense until man-made law has been "replaced by God's law". (The latter being described as Sharia and Islamic law).
Further to the subjects already mentioned, the book analyses a series of issues which many readers will find disturbing, such as the investigation of the much-publicised promise of "virgins" in Paradise to Islamic martyrs.
Many concerns are echoed towards the end of this work, including a call for what is described as "responsible reporting" from the media and honesty from law enforcement officials about jihadist attacks in the US. This is made whilst still recognising the need to confront an official fear pertaining to vigilantes who would victimise innocent Muslims should certain information be publicised.
Concern is also expressed with reference to the post September 11th statement by US President Bush who warned the world that "...you are either with the terrorists or you're with us...". The book alleging an official refusal to acknowledge who the terrorists really are and what they are fighting for that has subsequently seen the US administration still counting as friends and allies, many states where jihadist activities are extensive.
Many will perceive this book and it's message to be highly contentious and perhaps even offensive, but I feel that it is required reading at this time, irrespective of the reader's personal views. Thank you.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
![[Start the discussion]](http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/communities/discussion_boards/start-new-discussion-sec._V192250339_.gif){kind=small}
