5 comments about While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within.

1. This book raises very important issues facing Europe and the West and its confrontation with forces of radical Islam. Having lived extensively in Denmark, I have seen first-hand the "culture clash" that is going on there.
   
   But this book -- although certainly engaging -- is extremely disappointing and flawed.
   
   First: argument by anecdote. Time after time after time the author uses some powerful anecdote, and then draws major sociological conclusions from it. But this is no way to make generalizations about the social world.
   
   Second: watch how he perpetually uses the term "many." He will profile some random Muslim immigrant who is clearly exploiting the welfare system in Norway, and then the author will conclude by saying: "many others do this." But what exactly is "many"? 5? 15? 500? 5,000? And what percentage of Muslims cheats the system: 5%? 25%? The author never tells us because this actually isn't a work of social science at all. It is an anecdotal rant. The only "facts" are what the author happens to personally experience or think.
   
   Third: the author often has a given conversation in a restaurant, and then extrapolates that what he hears is somehow indicative of what all Europeans think. Someone says something negative about America in France -- and viola, all French people feel this way. Someone says something anti-Jewish in Norway, and viola -- all Norwegians feel this way...etc..this method of argumentation is constant throughout the book. It is atrocious social science.
   
   Fourth: the author argues that if Europeans elect left-wing political parties who are against the American occupation of Iraq, they somehow are "for the terrorists." Please. One can be both against the immoral and bogus occupation of Iraq and still hate the evil terrorists.
   
   
   Fifth: the author's rosy-colored view of Americans is borderline absurd. He argues that Americans love immigrants and that "Americans can generally accept almost anyone from anywhere as a fellow American." Is this guy on crack? He clearly has no clue about the current anti-immigrant movement in America, nor the struggles that Asians and African Americans have endured for hundreds of years to be seen as truly and fully American. Well again, this is just a personal rant -- so facts don't really matter.
   
   Granted, it is true that certain Muslims are homophobic, anti-Semitic, violent, intolerant of democracy and secular values -- and to deny or ignore this is indeed blind. But this book provides very little helpful insight or sociological analysis concerning these matters.
   
   Ultimately, this is a very angry and provocative book written by a fearful author who had plenty of time to rant, but not enough time engage in reasonable, intelligent, or fact-based social science.
   
   Enjoy!



2. Solely as a recitation of recent events in Europe that are under-reported in Europe and the US, this is a must read. Bawer is a journalist who spent quite a bit of time living, working, and traveling in Europe, and his insight into how real events are morphed as they find their way into the evening news or morning paper can help one make sense of what's going on in Europe, the UK, and the US.
   
   This is not an academic excercise in "what's wrong with Europe". For that, perhaps try Weigel's "The Cube and the Cathedral".



3. This book contains a rich collection of chilling facts on the growth of radical Islamic thought in western Europe and how Multiculturalist thought encourages many "political correct" individuals to refuse to acknowledge that this is becoming a serious problem. The author has spent a large amount of time living in both the United States and Europe as an openly gay man. I mention the author's sexual orientation because I think it supports how even though the author is very sensitive to discrimination against minorities, he still sees the spread of radical Islam as a serious problem.
   
   Although this book is a quick read with a dense amount of information, it is really written as just one endless stream of facts. I think that the author could have organized all of this valuable information into a much better book. In its current form, using this book for reference is near impossible.
   
   Nevertheless, I still strongly recommend this book as a primer on the growth of radical Islam in western Europe and the moral paralysis induced by the dominance of Multiculturalist thought throughout the continent.



4. There are many who will blast this book as being antiMuslim propaganda. That is complete nonsense (but as the author points out in the book, anything less than complete submission to the teachings of Islam will be viewed by Islamic extremists as being antiMuslim). This is a book that desperately needed to be written, and now needs to be read by every freedom loving person in the precariously free world. It is interesting to learn the bio of the author: he is an openly gay man originally from New York who, after taking the Christian Right to task for several years, decided to live in the Netherlands with his partner in order to experience a whole new way of life and the freedom to be gay in a culture that warmly embraces homosexuality. In other words, he's not a Coulter-O'Reilly clone who believes that the world needs to be ruled by the Bible and that the US is the only nation of the planet. We needed an unbiased, nondogmatic view on this subject, and for the most part Mr. Bawer gives us just that. As we read in his book, the evolution of the Europe to which he first moves (a lovely, accepting if a bit snobbish and antiAmerican place) into a callipate in all but name is laid bare for all to see. Like many of the other reviewers, I wish that Mr. Bawer had included endnotes if for nothing else but to allow the reader to view the ghastly comments of the political and intellectual elite of Europe in their own words (I defy anyone to read the comment of Unni Wikan who basically said that if Norwegian women wish to avoid being raped, they must learn to conform to the Muslim ideal. In other words, nonMuslim women must put on a burka or else face their "deserved" punishment of being assaulted). This is a very scary book because it is true. The fate of France as a Muslim state under sharia is all but certain, and most Scandinavian countries seem hellbent on following Her path. I enjoyed Mr. Bawer's writing style (other than lack of footnotes) very much; he makes the reader feel as if an old friend who has been living abroad showed up for a chat about these issues. If the reader wants pure stats, he/she should goggle them or look at a spreadsheet. This is written to appeal to a public who reads "Time" or "Newsweek", not "Consumer Reports". One can only hope that Europeans read this book and take it seriously (which, since it was written by an American, I doubt they will). They need to reevaluate their entire immigration policy (for instance, an American brain surgeon probably couldn't obtain citizenship in Britain, but an iman who doesn't even speak English and openly calls for the overthrow of the secular government and establishment of an Islamic state is welcomed with open arms? I don't get it) and realise that they are harming all of their citizens (including law abiding Muslims) when they allow these monsters to take up residency. Militant Islam may be the biggest threat in history (much more so than Nazism or Communism, since it combines the philosophy of both of them with a lust for conquering and ending the world). Now is the time for the world to wake up and start taking it seriously.



5. It is true that most European coutries have ignored the issue of immigration and integration for far too long, causing a certain ghettoization and the emergence of parallel societies. Particularly immigrants of Islamic countries frequently hardly speak their host country's language, perform poorly in school and often end up unemployed. There are also problems with violence, fanaticism and the oppression of women in this particular class of population (left-behind muslim immigrants).
   
   However, it is populist, inconsiderate and hasty to blame Islam for all of this and to predict Europe's downfall (or even the entire West's!). There are several other explanations for intolerance and violence among Muslims in Europe: a large share of them is poorly educated (high correlation with violence and fanaticism for low education in all population segments), socioeconomically disadvantaged and often unemployed (again high correlation with violence and fanaticism for those attributes regardless of religion or ethnicity). There is no evidence that poor, uneducated, unemployed Muslims have a higher crime rate or affinity to extremist ideologies than e.g. poor, uneducated, unemployed Catholic French or Atheist Germans. This is an interesting and important question / field of study, but the author does nothing to bring to light some empric evidence from comprehensible trustworthy sources.
   
   Also, many European countries have failed to design processes for integration (education about rights and duties, language classes, coaching), relocating immigrants to gloomy suburbs with already high crime rate. This is another factor that is hardly mentioned in the book.
   
   Rather than providing new insights based on a thorough analysis, this book is merely exploiting xenophobia and airing itself as the skryer of a dark future...every bit as intolerant and undifferentiated as the fanaticism it attacks.

5 comments about The Qur'an Translation.

1. If Arabs read this book, they wouldn't be out to kill Jews. I can't believe that a short way into the text there is a statement that Jews are acceptable to Allah because they worship Him (although by another name).



2. I finally got around to reading this translation of the Qur'an. I gave it five stars to counter act some of the one star reviews. Im a Christian and still am. But I will admit I no longer view Islam as evil, or the Qur'an as a bad book. Quite the contrary I was pleasently surprised with beauty of the poetry, and the core message is very similar to Christianity. I would have a lot more in common with a Muslim than I would with an atheist for example. Taking the time to read through the book, I realize that living for God, regardless if you call Him Jehovah, or Allah, will lead you to live a more righteous life and to a better path on which to travel the hard road of life. The core morals taught by Muhammad line up with those taught by my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Of course I disagree with Muslims over the Deity of Christ, I still find their religion agrees with my morals, and is more peaceful than the media frenzy would have someone believe. I believe these terrorists are the exception, and most Muslims are good religious people if they are following the teachings in this book. God bless you.



3. I really haven't got to read this book yet but am influenced by the comment that it is considered to be the "Best" Translation of all.
   This book isn't like a Novel which you can sit down and read but one which you read a small bit at a time as it is very detail so theres is a limit as to how much you can digest at one time.



4. "Christianity hasn't produced any extremists or fanatics who use the name of their God to kill, murder, dictate, terrorize, or otherwise harm other human beings."
   
   Did you at least study High School history?
   
   Maybe one should read the "Holy Bible" and the "Torah" to pick up the context and cohesion that you are missing in the story lines.
   
   One can use the holy texts of all religions to condone violence but that is irresponsible abuse of the text. One must remember that violence is committed by human beings and the responsibility lies on their shoulders and can't be blamed on the Koran or any other text.
   
   If one reads a text for the purpose of literary examination, they must be objective rather than subject the work to their own experience alone.
   
   I am a Muslim and a patriotic American. I have no heart for violence of any kind.



5. Don't let the pretty cover design fool you, this book is violent, terrifying, and teaches hate and bigotry. Good thing none of it is true, or I would have nightmares. If someone or some country were to take this book seriously, man oh man there would be trouble a brewin!!

5 comments about Snow.

1. One of the wonderful things abour reader reviews on Amazon.com is that you can find affirmation from SOMEBODY no matter what you think of what you are reading. However, in the case of Orhan Pamuk's "Snow," I can't help wondering how many laudatory reviewers realized that the man had received a Nobel prize, and reasoned that there must be something more to it than meets the ennui. I myself was relieved to read the negative reviews, because I sure am bored and disappointed. There is no possible way I will be able to get through this book. I think that I will keep it, though, since it certainly is better than drugs for inducing sleep. A few minutes of Pamuk at bedtime and I am out like a light! There is absolutely nothing that grabs me, moves me, excites me, or elicits my admiration. I was most interested in the Turkish reviewer who said that it was even worse in the original Turkish. I would not have thought that was possible. What is there to look for in a "great" book? Theme? Characters? Language? Plot? We don't even get to read these perfect poems that are dropping into Ka's brain like raindrops. The story skips and starts and hops from place to place like a demented rabbit. Ipek produces such admiration in Ka, but to us she is cut from cardboard. The language is repetitive and unimaginative (it calls to mind Hemingway's "Oh, little rabbit. Oh. Oh."). For me, the upshot is that I will not buy another book because the author received an award. I will read the reviews on Amazon first.



2. Orhan Pamuk's novel "Snow" is a meditation on Religion, Poetry, Love, Gender relations, and Politics. It is a difficult, challenging work. Although the author himself described "Snow" as a political novel, it is much more. I learned something of Turkey and its politics fron the book, but I was moved far more by the author's reflections on issues that transcend the politics of a particular place.
   
   "Snow" is the story of a man known as Ka. Raised in a secular home in Istanbul, Ka is 42 and unmarried when the book begins. He has just returned from a 12 year political exile in Frankfurt, Germany to attend his mother's funeral. While in Istanbul, Ka arranges to visit a border Turkish city named Kars to cover the upcoming local elections (the mayor of Kars has just been assassinated), to investigate a rash of suicides among young Muslim women, and to try to kindle a romance with a beautiful woman named Ipek with whom he had been acquainted as a student and who has recently been divorced. Ka is a poet. During his years in Frankfurt, he never learned German but continued to write in Turkish. He had not been able to compose poetry during his final four years in Frankfurt and, during that time, he had had no romantic involvements. Ka's story is related in the voice of a writer named Orhan - creating some distance and some sense of irony -- who describes himself as a novelist and an old friend of the poet. He visits Kars four years after the death of his friend and tells his story.
   
   Ka spends all of three days in Kars before returning again to Frankfurt, but the short time is eventful for the city and for the protagonist. He witnesses a murder in a cafe and a coup in which the military takes control of the city and suspends the upcoming elections. He becomes, briefly, sexually involved with Ipek. Although a secularist, he becomes drawn to religion and meets with a Shiek. He also has fateful encounters with a charismatic Islamic terrorist, Blue, with whom Ipek and her younger sister Kadiffe have been romantically involved. Perhaps most importantly, Ka finds himself able to write poetry again. In his few days in Kars, he composes 19 poems in bursts of inspiration, all but one of which he writes in a faded green notebook.
   
   During Ka's visit, Kars is in the midst of a three-day snowstorm which closes access to the city. The falling snow is the critical symbol of the book which appears in virtually every chapter with many meanings. It symbolizes,variously, silence, isolation and loneliness, cold, purity, innocence, sadness, and much else. Ka becomes captured by the six-sided figure of the snowflake. The individuality of each snowflake becomes emblematic to him of the human condition. When he returns to Frankfurt after his three days in Kars, he devises an elaborate symbolism for the classification of the 19 poems he composed in the city based upon the six sides of the snowflake. Another pervasive symbolic object in the book is the dog -- both as a family pet and as a stray. Dogs appear on the streets as an object of affection and compassion.
   
   Ka's short and tangled love affair with Ipek is at the center of this novel as Ka hopes to have her return with him to Frankfurt. This hope is dashed against Ka's own weaknesses and ambivalences, together with politics and chance. When he returns to Frankfurt, he becomes a lonely, alienated figure, unable to write poetry, who wanders the streets and becomes addicted to pornography. Four years after his return he is murdered under circumstances suggesting political motivation.
   
   "Snow" has a great deal to say in its long discussions of the search for God, the nature of creativity, and the need for love. Pamuk's treatment of these universal human themes is intertwined carefully with his particularism -- his discussion of the streets, places and people of Kars. Pamuk also focuses upon the complex political situation of Turkey, torn by the wish to become part of the European community and retaining its religious, Muslim character. Secularism and religion are each represented in this book in several alternatives rather than by just two diametrically opposed groups. The tension in the local political situation becomes a symbol of range of choices that individuals in all cultures must face, as part of being human.
   
   This book has recieved a variety of reviews on this site. It is a slow, difficult work that may not be to everyone's liking. For those readers with a bent for philosophical and religious reflection, this is an outstanding novel.
   
   Robin Friedman



3. When I first began reading this book (My first taste of Orhan Pamuk, who friends had been urging on me for YEARS), my first response was awe, amazement, adoration. By about a third of the way through, it began to strike me that the snow was a very convenient literary device for angst, and so I began to wish the blizzard would be over.
   
   I found the glimpses of Ka's life in Frankfurt tantalizing and mysterious. But his long-lost love never came to life for me as a character, and frankly the descriptions of lovemaking in this book are -- well, let's just say that if you could get a high school kid to pour out his fantasy of what a first sexual experience might be like, it might be something like what we have here, though in much more graphic terms (Here the scenes are rather misty. . . ) They did not cause me to open my eyes or sit up straighter or whatever. OK, enough with the impassioned kissing.
   
   I relished the philosophical sparring with Blue, as I don't see that in many (Western) novels. I also loved the melancholy of the city he describes (even though I did find the many mentions of snow very labored, by the end). The thread of the girl suicides was lost halfway through, and so I guess it was just a "hook." Too bad, because the interviews with the girls' families were VERY interesting to me.
   
   I loved that all throughout the book the main character would feel urges to write a poem, and these sections (where he just had to rush back to his hotel and write) were really the best parts of the book for me.
   
   Now I've started to read MY NAME IS RED, and already just the first line disappoints me, but I will definitely finish it.



4. If the contents of the book didn't happen in the real world, this book could be read as a work of Science Fiction or even extreme fiction. Unfortunately, the ideas and practices of what is written happen in the real world. Even though, this part of the world is so remote from my reality, that it seems almost like a science fiction: such issue as whether or not to wear a head scarf, face cover in public or school. Cables are strung and hooked up ad hock through out the neighbor hood just to c...more If the contents of the book didn't happen in the real world, this book could be read as a work of Science Fiction or even extreme fiction. Unfortunately, the ideas and practices of what is written happen in the real world. Even though, this part of the world is so remote from my reality, that it seems almost like a science fiction: such issue as whether or not to wear a head scarf, face cover in public or school. Cables are strung and hooked up ad hock through out the neighbor hood just to catch the live broad cast of a television show. It is almost a work of dystopia but this is the real world that Orhan Pamuk is writing about.
   
   When reading about exotic locales, I'm often reminded of the works of Paul Bowls. He was an American who went to live in Tangiers and wrote novels about those foreign places. There is certainly an element of expatriation and distance as the narrator Ka goes back to his place of birth to explore his past relationships. While, Bowls explores cultural difference and the dangers of mixing white culture with the natives, Orphan's work takes on political and moral issues. He mixes the issue of suicide, religion, and morals with a political act. This political act seems like a fashion choice in some parts of the world, but a major rebellious act in this region. It's an all too real a premise: whether or not to be allowed to wear a head scarf and whether or not to kill oneself if one is not allowed to do so.
   
   If it was imaged as a work of fiction or even science fiction, it would have been brilliant. Although it happens in the real world, it is even more frightening. This is a case where life is stranger then fiction and reporting straight from it with honesty and being able to see the concept of the novel in its simplicity is an amazing work of recognition.



5. I was looking forward to reading a book by Orhan Pamuk after I saw his interview on Charlie Rose. Now I am convinced that his acclaim and yes, even his Nobel prize, have more to do with his subject matter than with the quality of his writing. But surely there must be other avenues to gain an insight on the political and cultural tensions in Turkey! This book was simply too painful to read. The writing was extremely awkward (this is an actual quote, "Let us take advantage of this lull to whisper a few biographical details....We'll have a lot to say about melancholy later on." You don't say!) and repetitive (how many times can you mention the snow? Yes, we get it!). Only one character was even half-way developed (Ka, the main character), and he is so shallow, pretentious, and frankly, boring, that you can't wait to finish the book just to get the torture over with (yes, I finished it, hoping it would redeem itself in the end; it didn't). The character of Ipek (Ka's love interest) was a laughable love-object stereotype (yes, she's beautiful, we get it; there's no need to repeat that fifty times). Other characters are simply mouthpieces for the religious/political views they are supposed to represent. Please save your time and read something else!

5 comments about Essential Rumi.

1. Coleman Barks crafts scintillating translations of Rumi's ecstatic, poetic prayers. Speaking directly to the modern heart across centuries, Rumi captures the most poignant and mystical ways we seek to commune with a vast and unknowable creator who is at the same time an intimate companion, a friend. Wonderful prayers, poetry and parables bring Rumi's world to life, and enliven this life, injecting joyful surprise into the eternal mysteries.



2. "Come to the orchard in Spring.
   There is light and wine, and sweethearts
   
   in the pomegranate flowers.
   
   
   If you do not come, these do not matter.
   If you do come, these do not matter."
   
   With amazing economy of words and with a deep understanding of his art, the luminary Persian poet, jurist, and theologian Jalal Rumi takes us on a profound and deeply moving journey into the mind of the spirit.



3. Almost all the great religions have a mystical side, including Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, and Zoroastrianism. Gnosticism, Khabalah, the Nagas within Hinduism, Vajrayana Buddhism, Sufism, the Eleusine Mysteries within ancient Greek religion, Hermetism (a fusion of western and eastern mysticism by the third century, A.D., philosopher, Iamblichus), Avesta, Taoism, Confucianism, and even Rosicrucianism and Freemasonry all had mystical sides.
   
   Sufism is one of the mystical traditions within Islam, of which there are a number not well known in the west. Rumi is one of the greats in that tradition, and one of the few eastern poets I've read (such as Omar Khayam) and there is no doubt he is one of the greatest poets of all time, whether western or eastern. I enjoy Rumi's poems but have to agree with a reviewer that the translations may not be the best since the author admits he knew no Persian, and Sufis are quite definite on the point that their poems are very precise and even technical in their wording and phraseology. As I'm not an expert I'll leave the final opinion on this book to the experts and those more knowledgable than I. Fortunately, as there are other translations you should also try one of those and compare those renderings with this book. But whichever way you decide to go, Rumi should be essential reading for anyone wishing to expand their literary and intellectual horizons beyond the "usual suspects."



4. My first book of Rumi, made me love him and now I have lots of his poetry so I highly recommend this book.



5. There are certain books everybody should own and keep in their personal library and this is one of them. This book speaks to you in different times of your life. Sometimes you get one poem and not another and then later the other poem will come alive for you. I love Rumi's work and have loved it before it became fashionable.

5 comments about A History of God: The 4,000-Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

1. What I love and respect about the author, is how she is open minded and honest enough to challenge the reader to think outside their comfort zone and all they have been taught to believe based on faith and not a serious study of history and how religion whatever the belief system, is something that has evolved and changed over the centuries.
   
   She challenges the reader to study and dissect myth from fact. To stop and ponder why we as humans have been given a brain, as well as how over the centuries, a select few have known human weaknesses and the whole herd mentality, and thus, have sought to demean certain groups while building up or making special, other groups.
   
   And how many if not most of the conflicts the world have seen, have been based on made up myths concerning people of other races and regions. Or as Darwin would note, the survival of the fittest or in the case of religions, the religions with the most charismatic leaders. Right or wrong.



2. The utter, seemingly perpetual redundancy of this book is enough to make me nauseous. The fact that she can't explicate a single religious or philosophical subject without concluding that its proponents originally saw it merely as some "expression of his or her inner notions of God and self" makes this waste of perfectly good paper virtually unreadable. But that she completely destroys Plato (!!!) for the sake of her own little "inner self" fancy is enough to convince me that she has no business even talking about philosophical, historical, or theological subjects. I read this book with an open mind, thinking it would be a postmodern revisionistic history, but history nonetheless. No. It's not. It's her own pathetic, unrefined reflection posing as a well researched deconstructive analysis. If you're a religious skeptic or atheist, you should be let down by this book. If you're a philosopher you should feel extremely irritated. If you're a historian, you should raise an eyebrow and scratch your head. If you're a theologian, you should say "WHAT?!". If you're a mystic, you should be really confused. If you're a Christian thinking that this book will undo your faith...you probably don't even know what you believe or why you believe it.



3. please contact me if you really want a page by page breakdown, Karen just is not educated enough to write this book. She comes off as a disgruntled Nun which she actually is. every other page represents a outdated theory, popular when she wrote the book as the mainstream concensus. Also the entire thing is a work of Teleological tunnel vision and is ridden with anachronism. If you wish to learn more about religion consult authors like Pagels and Pelikan, doctors and eminant scholars in their fields. please do not hesitate to contact for additional information, aim = hendrixangus. I do not give this book a one lightly!



4. "A History of God" by Karen Armstrong
   
   Armstrong is the author of "popular" histories. Her work evidences a consistent Cartesian Affliction, typical of New Age authorship such as Gary Zukav's "Seat of the Soul" or popular atheistic publications. This work reflects the author's selective handling of the universal proposition of God.
   
   True to form, Armstrong purports to author a "history" omitting however, any critical comprehension of the subject. Most of the writing is rhetorical FLUFF.
   
   In paragraph one, this review levelled a specific charge against the author. It is charged that Armstrong offers a SELECTIVE HANDLING of the subject, "God". How can a reader belief this is not merely a rhetorical charge? Here's why. Any careful reader will find the evidence in the INTRODUCTION.
   
   "This book will not be a history of the ineffable reality of God itself, which is beyond time and change."---page xx,INTRODUCTION, "A History of God" by author Karen Armstrong.
   
   This is the merest example of the coy language and misleading wordsmithing employed by Armstrong in all of her books. She is a master of DOUBLE-SPEAK.
   
   Armstrong can be wordy, complicated, and do not fail to underestimate her tendency to intentionally mislead readers.
   
   Consider this bit of unsound science:
   
   "We shall see that it is far more important for a particular idea of God to work than for it to be logically or scientifically sound."---page xxi, INTRODUCTION, "A History of God by author Karen Armstrong
   
   Armstrong never indicates where we are to find a "SCIENTIFICALLY SOUND" idea for God, nor does the author explain what this term means; but given the previous quote, identifying a God "which is beyond time and change" the author it is obvious that any subject "beyond time and change" is not a subject that falls within the SCOPE & BOUNDARY of Science. No matter, Armstrong is a rhetorician and who needs facts or sensible metaphysics when you're engaged in meaningless polemics?
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   In fact, one of the identifiable problems with those who rate this author highly, lavishing endless praise, is that it becomes clear that at no point do such reviewers challenge a single one of the author's assumptives.
   
   In other words, virtually no critical analysis is applied to the author's work, which shows a complete absence of objectivity.
   
   ----------------------------------------------------
   
   It becomes clear, that Armstrong does not actually know "God". She writes as though quite familiar with book-learning, in the academic sense, but there is absolutely nothing to indicate that the author has a direct experience of the Divine. Armstrong is careful to write in the cold, calculating, and abstract tone of the person who assumes all knowledge to be book knowledge.
   
   /



5. You can learn a lot about man's search for GOD from the beginning. 14,000 years ago.

5 comments about The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.

1. Francis Yockey's "Imperium," written in 1948, pointed out the fact of Europe's decline long before Huntington did. Yockey himself based some of his insights on Otto Spengler's "The Decline of the West," conceived before but written after the ghastly genocide of WWI. Huntington's book is a pallid, scholarly exercise compared to the bold speculations of these two predecessors. It is important to read Yockey and Spengler to shake up all cliche'd thinking before turning to Huntington. For example, Yockey explains what it means to be a Westerner, a concept which has all but disappeared in the thin watery gruel of European and US multiculturalism. In "The Enemy of Europe" he notes that a true Westerner "is for Charles XII against the Russians, for England against the Indian mutiny, against the Zulus, and against China in the Opium War; for the Teutonic Knights against the Slav at Tannenberg; for Maximilian against Juarez; for the American colonists in the Alamo against Santa Ana; for Napoleon against Russia . . . . In these events, it was left only to chance which of the Western nationalities fought the Barbarian. The victory of any Western nation over an outer military force, whether Chinese, Hindu, Zulu, Islamic was a victory for all Europe and its colonies. Any European who gloats over the defeat of a Western nation brands himself politically and Culturally feeble-minded. For what distinction does the Barbarian make between Western nations? During the Second World War, the Japanese called the Germans 'friendly enemies' and the English 'hostile enemies.'"
   
   The West is declining because it suicidally turned its guns upon itself in two civil wars (WWI,WWII) while simultaneously refusing to turn its guns on those alien cultures who began invading its territory as soon as it lay bleeding and prostrate. It's time for historically informed, strategic re-thinking about how best to defend the West, such as ending immigration from enemy cultures, particularly the primitive, Sharia-dominated Islamic culture. Alien apologists, such as Edward Said, wanted only to prevent this Western re-evaluation and re-birth, until parasitic cultures had thoroughly undermined and destroyed the West. If the West won't stand up for itself as a culture, it will be overwhelmed by cultures which have no similar, self-hating neuroses.



2. The author delivers a great future cast rarely found in the historian world. This made the book great. While there is plenty to find out about the past, I always wondered what would the greatest historians of the world think of the future. Due their meticulous attitude few of them venture to speculate on facts that are not checked and double checked. Well, Samuel Huntington, is not that kind of historian. He develops on the future of the two main civilizations and the possible results. While I found him a bit too skeptical on the US future, I admire how well he's documenting his suppositions.
   The most important think I got from the book is the fact that we all belong culturally somewhere and that is not necessarily the place where we were born. The early impressions in life mark us with tremendous prejudices, bound to clash with the world outside.
   While looking for this book, I stumbled on "The World Without US" - a documentary similar in topic. After checking out the trailer at the film website, I got the DVD and it was quite good. It takes the premise of "America Alone" a step farther by asking, what would happen should the US withdraw its military completely from the world? Answering a hypothetical question is hard, for any author and filmmaker, however this movie did provide an answer. Weather you agree with or not I applaud the filmmakers for going on 5 continents in their quest. Check it out also.
   
   
   The World Without US - With Niall Ferguson



3. This book gives a decent picture of the current political situation of the world.
   
   Especially w.r.t 9/11 and the ongoing clash between the west and Islam the books seems like prophecy. The author is also right on the money when he claims and explains the bloody borders of Islam and I wonder why there is any dispute about this. More analysis of how Christianity and Islam spread after conception would have been insightful. Yugoslav wars are analyzed quite well and I would like to find a refutation of this analysis by any of his political/academic rivals.
   
   The author however does not provide an alternative to the western dependence on mid-east oil. Limited interference is fine but how to run the limping US economy?
   
   The author seems to have a subtle sense of western cultural superiority but hides it well behind cultural relativism.
   
   
   The author however laments that the west is losing its edge and that religion is fading away. Towards the end he says that to find truth is part of morality. Does he want people to find the truth but not live by it? He also gloats about the west's rule of law, secularism and individualism, some of which are frowned upon by the religious right. It seems like he is contradicting himself unless he appeals for religiousity purely for uniting the society. He claims that Christianity is one of the defining aspects of the current west while ceding that Sweden/Europe is quite non-religious. Being aware of totalitarianism of Islam he should have been careful while treading this line.
   
   I would like to end the review with a few quotes from the book that are (sometimes painfully) true:
   
   "The underlying problem for the west is not Islamic fundamentalism. It is Islam, a different civilization whose people are convinced of the superiority of their culture and are obsessed with the inferiority of their power."
   
   "In civilizational conflicts, unlike idealogical ones, kin stand by their kin "(Comparing responses of EU governments to US actions against USSR and Muslims)
   
   "Powerful societies are universalistic; weak societies are particularistic."
   
   "In Islam god is Caesar, in China and Japan Caesar is god, in Orthodoxy god is Caesar's junior partner"



4. 
   
   This excellent book provides the reader with a view of the world based on civilizations - past, present and future. If you cannot find time to read the entire book, read the last chapter. It describes creditable circumstances under with a third world war could ignite.



5. First published in 1996, this scholarly discussion of future international relations has been a classic from the beginning and will remain so for decades to come. From among the seven most important civilizations the author selected three, which may collide in conflict. Thus, in Moslem eyes Western culture is decadent in various ways and therefore utterly unacceptable. The current resurgence of the Islamic civilization is seen as an evolution no less significant than the Reformation or Marxism, demanding society's complete overhaul, renewal and purification, a movement whose impact on history will grow as the Moslem population will soon represent thirty percent of humanity. At the same time, Islam is seen as the least tolerant of religions, as it promotes peace inside their ranks but hostility toward the infidels outside.
   Similarly, in East Asia, the Confucian civilization adheres to commandments like order, discipline, hard work and abstemiousness, where the individual subordinates to the needs of the community. Alien to them is what they call the West's sanctifying of human rights. Whereas we in the West expect our value system soon to become universal, the Confucian world is convinced that "the Anglo-Saxon module is not working" and that their own standards must of necessity apply to the rest of humanity. Here, again, the impact of such convictions will be immense as the center of gravity of economic power is rapidly shifting from the West to the East.
   Out of such discordance, there arise economic and political contentions and military ones cannot be ruled out. Huntington believes possible conflicts could arise from a contest between Western arrogance, Islamic intolerance and Sinic assertiveness. The spark igniting material strife, however, will most likely be generated by more prosaic crises such as the youth bulge among the unemployed, terrorism, rivalry in the search of resources such as oil, and the pervasiveness of weapons of mass destruction among those who suffer and rebel.
   The main message carried forth from this study is that any military clash in the future will most likely oppose not nations but rather civilizations in what he aptly calls fault-line wars. He points to the danger that such inter-civilizational feuds will be uncompromising and almost impossible to halt.
   Huntington advises the reader that cultural universalism, so engrained in the mind of the West, is ill advised and that especially includes the American tendency to be "a nanny if not even a bully" in other civilizations. We must, he says, renounce universalism of values, and instead accept diversity and seek commonalities.
   Since these thoughts were first published, much has been confirmed. The power shift toward East Asia is rapidly progressing. Fault-line conflicts in Afghanistan, the Middle East, Chechnya and the Balkans have resisted or defied peacemaking efforts. Our promotion of democracy, civil rights, and individualism has been rejected elsewhere in favor of soft authoritarianism. Most importantly, perhaps, is the West's failure to observe the "abstention rule", that is, for one civilization to abstain from invading the lands of another.
   Every prospective world leader should read this book at least once.

5 comments about The Politically Incorrect Guide(tm) to Islam (and the Crusades) (Politically Incorrect Guides).

1. An eye opening book that led me to other books on the subject. Highly recommended.



2. Fantastic and eye opening book!! When i was young, i was taught in Catholic school that we were brothers and sisters with Jews and Islam. But as i have gotten older, i started to discover the Islam part was totally incorrect. This book bring it all together to show the truth about Islam and how it compares with Crhistianity. the other gives a fair account, even telling where Islam is good, but that sure isnt often.
   The biggest "truth" i found in the book was the subject of lying. Jesus taught that if you lie, you speak from the devil. God Cant tell a lie. But Muhammad stated in the Koran that lying is ok if it promotes Islam. The other eye opening thing was how Muhammad hated the Cross and banned it. Only the devil hates the cross. Both those convinced me that Islam comes from the devil.
   This book should be required reading in high school to take a serious look at Islam. We all need to wake up before its tooooo late....After reading this book i would die before ever being "FORCED" to convert!



3. Readable and recomendable. drop the miths and bring us facts. Very interesting to understand many of the world's current problems.



4. I read through a couple of pages of this book. Then I went online to see what the actual translation of the verse : Quran(2:214) says;
   
   "Or do ye think that ye shall enter the Garden (of bliss) without such (trials) as came to those who passed away before you? they encountered suffering and adversity, and were so shaken in spirit that even the Messenger and those of faith who were with him cried: "When (will come) the help of Allah." Ah! Verily, the help of Allah is (always) near!"
   
   Ignorance and propoganda has no boundaries these days. Wake up people and do some research before you start buying lies and ills of an upset jerk.



5. After spending four tours in Iraq and just getting home from the last one, I can say that what is said in this book is correct.
   
   There is no more the rising threat, but the threat that has already risen and is here in the US.
   
   I suggest you, the reader, understand that Islam is more a tribal/political system than it is a religion. It's about control and who can gain it. I know there will be critics saying we have done the same. But the US has evolved and surrounds itself with life - or rebirth. Islam is engulfed in death and chaos.
   
   Buy this book and read it to your children - educate them - Islam is worst than communism could ever dream of being. I also suggest the book, Because They Hate, Islamic Invasion, and Hostage to the Devil to see - or at least read - what US military personnel are experiencing in defending your rights here in the US.

5 comments about The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion.

1. Robert Spencer's book is not totally vacuous. He does make many points worth considering by those who are overly apologetic. However, in many ways he misses the boat. Is Christianity a religion of peace? I don't think history would bear out such an absurd statement. Religion tends to get pretty nasty- you know, us vs. them stuff. Is Judaism a religion of peace? Well, if it is, what is Israel doing right now? Has anyone read the Old Testament lately?
   
   I truly wish that all and sundry would drop religion and become rationalists, but I highly doubt such a miracle will happen. Regardless of such a contingency, humans will continue to murder each other and go to war. Religion may justify such actions, but it is hardly necessary to get them started.
   
   Indeed, this is the weakest part of Spencer's book. He does not rigorously link current events to the core of Islam. Yes, he tries. Clearly his examples are anecdotal and unconvincing. I could fire off fifty examples of U.S. barbarism since WW2 and tie them to Christianity, does that mean that their is a causal link? Doubtfull.
   
   In fairness, it is to Spencer's credit that while being controversial he rarely engages in ad hominem's or unfair rhetoric. He needs to be answered in a serious manner by defenders of Islam. I think this can be done, but invective is not the way to do so.
   
   All in all, worth a read if you have the time. If not, you are not missing too much.



2. I highly recommend this book for anyone interested in learning the history of Muhammed and Islam. I know it certainly opened my eyes. This book informs the reader on how Muhammad's views changed as he matured from a young man being more tolerant of other religions to his total intolerance of other religious views as he aged.
   
   I also found it highly suspicious that whenever he desired someone or something that was considered "improper" he would go into a trance and he would be told by his "guiding angel" that he was allowed to have his way.
   
   The idea that Muhammad was and is considered the "perfect man" and the goal of all Islamic men is to be like Muhammed scares the HE** out of me. In closing, I consider this book to be a "MUST READ" for a better understanding of Islam.



3. If you believe you have a grasp of the fundamentals of the people and their philosophy arrayed against us but have not read this book, you are in for a rude awakening.
   Spencer shows that if we deal with the Islamic terrorist threat in ignorance, we cannot prevail. This book, fully sourced in detail, reveals what we must know about the founder of Islam AND the religion he founded. It is tightly written and profound in its ability to awaken one to built-in threats of the radical aspects of Islam. It's an excellent read. A must read.



4. After reading this book the primary thought I had is that, similar to what Christians did by creating the "New Testament," thus toning down a lot of violent ideas that are not remotely consonant with our era, Muslims NEED to do the same thing ASAP! That is create a "New Koran," toning way down the violence and hate - thus depriving radicals of their toxic justifications for mass murder. Also, at the same time, possibly making the best parts of this book more accessible to non-Muslims. However, I see no hint of this happening, perhaps it will take a mushroom cloud.



5. The author did not miss an opportunity to twist the meaning and in some instances the actual words being detailed and referred to as in the Qur'an as well as from other sources. Not surprised, because the author is not a scholar of Islam nor of Arabic that would be required to conduct the research he claims. This book couldn't be farther from the truth!
   For an excellent, well sourced and researched text about Muhammad Ibn Abdullah, The Final Messenger of Allah (God), peace be upon him, please read Muhammad His Life Based on the Earliest Sources by Martin Lings.
   
   Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources

5 comments about The God Delusion.

1. Now in my late 40's, I grew up quite literally in the shadow of Oral Roberts University in Tulsa, OK--the epicenter of American Evangelicals. My Mother was Roman Catholic and my father Southern Baptist. It's taken many years and Herculean effort to escape such an auspicious orbit. And I thought I had long escaped. I eventually settled into a live-and-let-live, middle-of-the-road agnosticism.
   
   Then I read this book. And I realized that that passive acceptance, that "live and let live" approach to American Fundamentalist Christianity I'd held, was itself dangerous. By not openly refuting something so blatantly ignorant and destructive, I was passively contributing to it. I now realize this to be clearly true and I thank the author for this powerful distinction. Especially as I reflected back on my own religious indoctrination, as a very young child, I desperately needed even a wink from a wise soul, as if to say, "Don't worry son, the smart ones don't actually drink the kool-aid." Only after reading this book, I realized, I had to start standing up for what I believe in. And especially, for what I don't believe in.
   
   Those schooled reviewers who criticize Dawkins as being too hard on religion or especially personal spirituality are still missing the point. If you believe in anything other than a Fundamentalist, Literalistic interpretation of religious texts, you are abjectly hypocritical. If forced to accept your own believes literally, you would abandon them. Moreover, by accepting them as being divine but also vague, you accept that any interpretation is acceptable--it's a personal choice (and yet, a divine overarching truth). You might then say, those choices, however, have limitations--say laws to prevent inspired apostles applying their personal interpretation as to fly planes into tall buildings. But then you're saying religious texts are superseded by laws, composed by sober societies. So your religious ideal is now relegated to a very vague, still divine, but not proscriptive idea, which you're entitled to because it makes you feel good. Like smoking pot. And yet, indulging even privately in that inebriant is illegal.
   
   I highly recommend reading this book in corroboration with Letters to a Christian Nation by Sam Harris and Misquoting Jesus by Epstein.
   
   This book is important. If you love religion, read it. You've nothing to fear. Right?



2. If you are an atheist this is a good book for you, but Richard does not really try to convince us that there is no God, his arguments are of a different kind.
   
   I was an atheist and I can understand Richard, but there is a higher place from atheism which pictures "God" in a different light than the classical one (bible). The progression is like this: God (bible) -> no God (atheism) -> new God (revelation)
   
   The book was a page turner at some points, in average about 100 pages were the good part. Sometimes I found it rather boring.
   
   A good book in average, but not what I expected, his aim was more to point out the flaws in religion (good arguments) than to prove that there is no God, purpose, etc.



3. Though he has received highly virulent criticism for his books and opinions, (I think) Dawkins does a remarkably fair job of presenting his views on religion and god(s). It is simply a result of the fact that the issue itself causes a great deal of argument and disagreement that it can be difficult to discuss. Dawkins, however, does a wonderful job in being non-offensive in his remarks - if the evidence requires it, sometimes one cannot avoid being rather blunt in showing it.
   
   If anyone actually takes the time to understand/read his work, one can clearly find a well-reasoned and thoroughly researched argument. Indeed, in this book, Dawkins continues to present the case in such a way that I am constantly amazed that anyone can presist in disbelieving in evolution.
   
   I find, more often than not, that Dawkins has the ability to present evidence, logic, and (quite simply) common sense in ways that make me say, "yes! that is exactly how I feel!"



4. The God Delusion is a book that really ought to be read by open-minded people of faith. My favorite point in the book is the idea that having two views, God(s) and no God(s), doesn't mean we have a 50/50 toss-up.
   
   As far as any kind of a "call-to-arms" goes for secularism I'm still on the fence. I'm convinced that pure fundamentalism is terrible, and that we really need to keep "Intelligent" Design out of public schools, but I attend a more moderate church with my family and I see no real dangerous delusion, just some intellectual inconsistencies.
   
   I don't believe that there isn't a god, I'm CONVINCED there isn't one, (a subtle difference.) I put it like that for personal reasons which I think anyone who reads this book will understand.
   
   In the end religion is going to be around for a long time. Maybe forever as someone like Chomsky or Hitchens would argue. Atheism/secularism may be loosing the masses of the layman but I don't think this is true with the masses of higher education and people who really enjoying asking the tough questions.
   
   Read this book. Sit down with your friends, and yes your family too, and have a civilized conversation about Dawkins brilliant collection of ideas. It's awkward and tense at first, but you'll find that as you argue your viewpoint you'll learn more about yourself and what you believe. I don't think we have enough of that these days...let's shake up the boat.
   
   Wouldn't it be nice if all disagreements were expressed over coffee and book swapping?



5. As a former Catholic Christian fundamentalist, Richard Dawkins book has aided me immensely in removing the "immoveable, unchangeable" blocks to reason and truth. Especially helpful are the sections treating "natural selection". I could see the light as I gradually floated upward toward the oxygen I needed to recover from the abuse I suffered about eternal damnation, fear, and "suffering is good". Regardless of the outcome, I can encourage others who have suffered the same, to let his book speak to you. "the truth shall make you free". Also recommend Christopher Hitchens - "god is not great".

5 comments about Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books.

1. After reading reviews I decided to give this book a try. Unfortunately I couldn't make it very far. This book was beyond boring and every time I picked it up it would put me to sleep. Maybe if I was able to push through the beginning of the book it would have gotten better but I just couldn't. Which is unusual for me because I try to finish all books that I start reading.
   I would definitely not recommend this book to anyone.



2. Reading Lolita in Tehran is a journey through a warn torn nation, through the eyes of several woman who struggle with who they are in relation to what's going on around them. Their sanity is preserved through their deep exploration of great works of fiction from Nabokov to Fitzgerald to Henry James to Jane Austen. This is a thoughtful book from an author who seems far more in love with reading than writing.



3. This is an extremely important book because it gives the women of Iran a voice, and one that has been heard around the world. This book is many things: a discussion of English literature, a memoir, a history of the last 30 years in Iran, and more. It is especially worthwhile for those interested in women's issues, Iran, and literature. Just a word of warning--for those not familiar with the writings of Jane Austen, Nabokov, Henry James, or Fitzgerald--parts of this book may not make much sense. May there be freedom and democracy one day in Iran.



4. I avoided this book for fear of voyeurism. Abuse of children, or the artful justification of it in even an attenuated form, is not something I want to encourage, and I assumed the point of the title was, ¨How paradoxical to be reading something so naughty with veils over our faces!¨
   
   Fortunately that was wrong. Nafisi seems rather to be using a story about the exploitation of one girl, as a literary doorway into a society in which all girls are treated badly. That was what I was hoping for, in finally picking up the CD of this book (which I listened to while driving through Amish country in Ohio!) -- to learn more about life in Iran from a sensitive critic of the regime.
   
   Overall, the book is good enough. Nafisi's descriptions of her students, and the other characters, are acute. You do come to understand what life is like for women in the most radical Islamic countries -- at least for women educated to think like Westerners.
   
   But at the same time, I didn't always get the feeling of getting inside the thought processes of another culture, here. Nafisi does not always seem to mediate a general view of life for women in Iran, but more of ¨what an American forced to live among Islamic Leninists¨ (see Naipaul) would feel. Her description of Islam is so uniformly negative, one does not much get inside the head of its proponents -- unlike with Naipaul.
   
   My other complaint was that the book dragged at times. The author has descriptive talent, but sometimes lets it get away from her. Sometimes Nafisi gives the readers too much interior dialogue -- read with a rather gloomy seriousness, in the CD version.
   
   All in all, while good, I'd probably prefer a shorter version of this book. Maybe a printed version, which one can skip forward at times, would in this case be preferable.



5. The author was a specialist for Western literature in the Iran of the Islamic Republic. That was of course a no-no and she lost her university job in 1995. Before finally emigrating to the US (where she is now probably a suspect as a sleeper of some kind), she did a remarkably courageous thing: she continued teaching girls in English language literature at home for two more years. The main message of the book is the story of the lessons and of the fate of the girls in a country that has gone back dramatically in civic freedoms.
   I was reminded of this book, which I read a few years ago, by the discussions after I posted reviews of the novel and the first film Lolita. I realized that there are more interpretations of Lolita, the novel, than was mentioned in the discussion. For the group of women who read the book in Tehran, what was in the forefront was that somebody who has been forced to be with somebody that she didn't want to be with, can rise up and escape.
   In a way though, Lolita is not really the main subject of the study group. The book ought to have been called Reading the Great Gatsby in Tehran or reading Jane Austen. Both take a lot more space. Obviously the title was chosen by marketing criteria. The title with Lolita sounds more interesting and it has a much better rhythm.
   I am as often puzzled by the reactions here in Amazon. Where do all the negative reviews come from? Does the Iran have a fifth column of literate people who can write reviews?