5 comments about Religion of Peace?: Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn't.

1. I studied Islam on my own for 6 months last year. I read ONLY Muslim texts and avoided anything like this until I could form my own opinion. I have 5 English translations of the Qur'an, Bukhrai and Muslim (collections of hadith) and Tafsir Ibn Kathir. I have read as much of it as I could stand.
   
   You can do it the hard way like I did, or you can read this book. Spencer has Islam spot on accurate. Islam is not a religion of peace. In fact it's more of a tribal code of law than a religion. The Islamic world view divides the world into two camps, the House of Islam, and the House of War. If you aren't Muslim, you are in the House of War.
   
   There may be moderate Muslims, but there is no moderate Islam. Learn it the easy way by reading Spencer, or learn it the hard way and pick up a Qur'an and hadith, but learn it! You need to learn the truth for yourself.



2. It's astonishing that other reviewers think this book presents "facts". It is a starkly ignorant book (and this is an understatement) of vast swathes of Islamic history which, if examined, would disprove its main theses almost point by point (for e.g. that Islam is the "religion of the sword", rejects rationality, etc). Islam is not perfect, and no religion is, but it is downright dishonest to take a look at a book (the Quran) and base your judgment of an entire culture on it. Look at the history of a culture and how it USED the book as a civilizational project. In this respect, Islam has been astonishingly open and tolerant. Again, I am not saying Islam is perfect, but the above picture is so ignorant and biased that it doesn't take much research to show that it is grossly distorting.
   
   An even cursory acquaintance with Islamic civilization and history ought to dispel such long-standing ideologies as the above (not to mention that Christianity waged battles of the sword in the Mideast and the Americas of horrifying proportions, in which millions of people died (the Spanish Conquistadors or Columbus were peaceful Christians?!! read the historical record and see for yourself what a wonderful and loving Christians they were). Despite that, and despite being a non-religious person, I condemn neither Islam nor Christianity wholesale as faiths). Religions are not coherent bodies of belief; hell, not even philosophy is, and it is one of the most systematic attempts in human history to systematize our beliefs about the world, so how could religion be?
   
   For the historically challenged like our author:
   even in medieval times, there were debates over the question of reason and its relation to faith in Islam. The great Muslim philosopher Averroes went so far as to say that philosopher and prophets are on an equal footing, i.e. that prophets have no more claim on the truth than do philosophers. There were even atheists in the history of Islam, one of them for instance was the great physicist Ibn al-Haitham, and the great poet al-Ma'ari.
   finally, Islamic philosophy and science had an enormous impact on Western thought and have been one of the prime sources (often unacknowledged) behind the development of Western modernity. They went far beyond the Greek philosophers and scientists they learned from and developed the scientific method before even the great Bacon. read a good history of science and you'll see that immediately (for instance the renowned BBC science historian James Burke in his series which you can find on youtube, called The Day the Universe Changed, shows this very clearly. And that's just he tip of the iceberg as far as Muslim contributions to science and rational inquiry go).
   so one can only conclude that far from Islam being irrational, it is the book that is.
   
   so please spare us the hate-mongering in the guise of "facts", since the book is clearly deeply under-infomred! and please dear reviewers who bought this cheap trick of a book, don't be so gullible as to base wholesale condemnations of entire civilizations and cultures on one or even several biased accounts. surely one has to be more responsible and inquire and search for oneself what the truth of such matters is. after all, isn't this an Emersonian (and American) virtue, of "self-reliance"? or do you simply abandon critical judgment and rationality when Islam is under discussion?
   so before accusing others of being irrational barbarians, let's look at ourselves in the mirror when we so heinously misrepresent and condemn an ENTIRE civilization. we ought to be more responsible as citizens of a democracy.



3. Robert Spencer is among only a handful of people in the United States that is not only a walking wealth of information on the religion of Islam, but has the courage to speak his convictions. This is a truly courageous act for which he receives numerous death threats from those "Religion of Peace" adherents. If you want to experience a very small taste of what his courage brings Mr. Spencer for exercising his freedom of speech rights, just peruse the 1-star ratings on this book. Mr. Spencer has always maintained a standing invitation to anyone wanting to debate his facts in an open and public discussion. Few have attempted to do so and those who have, always came out the losers. The reason is that Mr. Spencer does not speak from his emotions or personal bias, but from the scriptures of the Koran, the Sira and Hadith, as determined by the major religious teachings of all the major Sunni and Shia theological leaders in the world today.
   His many detractors don't offer any evidence that what Mr. Spencer writes and says is in error, they simply do what ignorant bullies do the world over. They threaten and resort to character assassination, which is all they are left with when confronted by the truth. Almost every single book authored by Mr. Spencer has made the New York Times Bestseller list, and for good reason. Hasn't anyone noticed how the "Religion of Peace" followers rioted over the Danish cartoons, the short video "Fitna," the murder of Danish citizen Theo Van Gogh, the endless fatwa's calling for the murder of those who speak out against the "Religion of Peace," such as Salman Rushdie, author of The Satanic Verses? Has anyone noticed the worldwide celebratory crowds of thousands of Muslims around the world, who are so quick to publicly celebrate the Iranian takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in 1979? Or the bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983? And of course the worldwide euphoric eruption of sheer joy from Muslims around the world on 9/11?
   More to the point, has any one else noticed the deafening silence from the Muslim community against these same acts? Mr. Spencer's book "Religion of Peace" is factual and well written. I would highly recommend any of his books and eagerly await his future ones as well. If you don't want to know what is going on in the world of Dar al-Islam then go back to sleep, but if you are interested in your future and the future of our children, then I would read every article or book written by the superbly knowledgeable and talented Robert Spencer.



4. Spencer is well studied in islam... This is more of an eye openening / informative book rather than an "islam bashing" book as the bad rerviews here accuse. If you want to understand the jihadists of today you must understand the historical / religious roots of their belief. Spencer points out text in the koran / hadiths to the modern jihad and helps remove the whitewash of the "religion of peace". I thought it was a good read.



5. Robert Spencer produces a hateful, revisionist, and triumphalistic argument about why he thinks Christianity and the Western world (he conflates the two) are superior to Islam. Christianity is a religion of peace and dialogue and Islam a religion of terror and suppression. He accuses Christianity's detractors of "cherry-picking" evidence of the support of violence in the Old and New Testaments, but then goes on to do the same in his treatment of the Qu'ran and Christian history itself.
   But the most basic error he makes is to dismiss the long and bloody history of Christian cruelty, forced conversion, slavery, destruction of native cultures, and environmental disaster with a flick of his temporal wand. Yes, there were Christians who did such things in the past, he notes, but this was not essential to Christian's message of peace and love for others. Besides, most of these more troublesome episodes of Christian history were not as bad as they seemed and have now passed. Christian anti-Semitism was not all that bad (especially compared with Muslim anti-Semitism). Slavery was a mistake and Christians finally figured that out.
   Even if one accepts the latter point that such Christian atrocity-mongering has diminished (which is eminently debatable with good Christians in America still enthused for racial and gender inequality and positively foaming at the mouth for guns, capital punishment, and a vast nuclear arsenal) it is patently false to suggest that it was anything other than the Enlightenment, the throwing off of theocracies, and the embrace of secular, constitutional democracies, that spurred our best, though always fragile, efforts to live with our differences without killing each other.
   No one is arguing, as Spencer seems to believe, that there are not Islamic terrorists and theocrats who wish to suppress people with Sharia law. They use religion to justify their violence. Yet Spencer ignores the consensus that most of the anger that drives such things is political rather than religious. It is anger at Western cultural hegemony, globalization, and the inequality of wealth that feeds the discontent of radical Islam.
   Why should Christians who do evil get the benefit of the doubt that they simply missed the point of their faith's deeper teachings on peace in the pursuit of more worldly and self-serving ends, while Muslims do so because they are just following their religion? Because Spencer wants to goad on the great "Clash of Civilizations" view of the world and take up good, loving, Christian arms, if necessary, to defend the great Western civilization of peace and reason. With books like these, he and his ilk may just succeed.

5 comments about I Dared to Call Him Father: The Miraculous Story of a Muslim Woman's Encounter with God.

1. In light of the ongoing involvement in the middle east, this book was informative to those who have an interest in the customs and beliefs in this part of the world. The writing style is easy to read and holds the readers attention.



2. Bilquis' story of her search for God and the way He found her shows the depths of his love for lost sinners and the powerful way he draws men to him. As the story unfolds, you can see how God is working out everything in the background, through dreams, events, chance encounters and situations to orchestrate the salvation of her soul. This is especially revealed in the Afterword written by Synove Mitchell, the missionary that Bilquis' first consulted, the despair that was going on in her spiritual life at the time, and her fervent prayers to God to show her meaning in her ministry.
   
   After her conversion, Bilquis learns to walk with God, to feel for his Presence and to follow his leading. This part is very humbling for me because I have not yet learned to walk as Bilquis has, perhaps because I have too much material, Bible study notes, commentaries, preaching, programs, that I have not learned to lean solely on God, and what he wants me to do. I pray that I can develop the sensitivity that Bilquis has, about moving in his will, staying in his presence and his fellowship and then obey. Even though she was shunned by her family, threatened by the villagers, and almost had her house burned down, Bilquis learned to trust only in God and his timing. She was bold in her witness, she did what God told her to do, and was used by him to bring other villagers to Christ. Bilquis also recounts times when she grieved the Spirit, when she let her old self get in the way, and her immediate sense of being further away from God.
   
   Servants and neighbors observed the changes that God made in Bilquis' life after her salvation. Whereas before, she was imperious, prideful, and hard to please. She became gentle, gracious, and giving. After years of observing her, her Muslim servant received Jesus as Saviour because she too wanted to know God, and asked Jesus to come into her heart. They both "have tasted that the Lord is gracious" (1 Peter 2:3)
   
   So it can be for you too, if you want to taste of the heavenly gift, then just ask God to show Himself to you. While visiting a hospital, she met a doctor who told her "there is only one way to find out why you feel this way. And that is to find out for yourself, strange as that may seem. Why don't you pray to the God you're searching for? Ask Him to show you His way. Talk to Him as if He is your friend.... Talk to Him as if He were your father."



3. I am currently taking a course on Islam and the anstructor thought that this book would be an interesting read as to how women in that society were treated from their perspective. My wife and I read the book together in ONE DAY, she read it out loud as we drove around running arrands and then as we arrived home we finished that evening. Neither of us wanted to put the book down as it had us captured from page one.
   This book was obviously written by a well educated woman raised in the Muslim faith who started on the journey to Christianity through a carefully thought out spiritual process.
   I would call this book a Must Read for Christians of today as we have lost this simplistic view of our faith that this woman had and our willingness to defend it to the loss of everything.
   The book is yet in a very simplistic writing style that it reads much like one of Kipling's stories that the author quotes and obviously was raised on in Pakistan.



4. This is one of the most amazing books of a biography that I have ever read, on the power of GOD to show his LOVE for His children.



5. I love this book. It has become a friend over the years. It is written in such a way as you are sitting down and talking with a dear friend and she is telling you about her adventure.
   
   What a life changing book it is. Read it.....and pass one along to a friend.

5 comments about Who Speaks For Islam?: What a Billion Muslims Really Think.

1. In a time of growing animosity between the West(Christianity) and Muslims world wide(Islam),this book provide us with a balanced approach to understand 'what a billion Muslims Really Think'. Most people belonging to the Christian way of life either have no interest in the Muslim way of life or have an extremely biased view of their perspectives. Ignorance and propaganda feed indignation, and indignant people will become more lenient towards subversive forces.This book should form part of prescribed literature in schools and colleges if we are serious to prevent extremism, creating a fair society and honest communication bridging the void.



2. This book nose-dived to a three and even a two as I was confronted with what appeared to be a Saudi-USA sponsored propaganda piece that did not properly consider India (largest Muslim population after Indonesia) and that addressed what Muslims thought without being explicit about US misbehavior, what I think of as Dick "Not the Virgin" Cheney's "immaculate conception" of the most amoral, costly, and destructive global war in our history. Bless him--had he not taken the Republic over a cliff and into insolvency, the two thirds of the voters who have tuned out the two party spoils system ("you pay, we'll make it legal to steal") would not be coming back into 2008 steaming mad and with both feet.
   
   However, I persisted, and ultimately this book settled at a four. What I found was a series of offerings that allow this book to be a very fine "Muslim 101 Lite" for the general public. I totally admire the reviewer that has listed more in-depth works for consideration and have urged him to edit the review to use the Amazon feature that allows links to the pages for each of those books.
   
   I also detect a real disconnect in that the book lists all Muslim countries up front, but the fine print says the survey only covered the 10 predominantly Muslim countries, and that list specifically excludes India, which has the second largest Muslim population after Indonesia, and in my mind that discredits the study by perhaps 20%.
   
   Highlight provided early on by the authors:
   
   + Muslims do not see West as monolithic (and also see distinctions between Americans, America, US Government, US military, and the bellicose presence of US forces in their countries). I found this also in a Strategic Communication survey across the 27 countries in the US Central Command Area
   
   + Muslim majority, and especially women, want jobs, development, opportunity, not jihad and certainly not US occupation or corruption
   
   + Muslim silent majority rejects attacks on civilians (but I would say the book does not do as well as it could on showing that they also feel USA "deserved" 9-11--regardless of let it happen or made it happen allegations). Today the USS Cole belligerents got a free pass and we are reminded that it was Bill Clinton that took Madeline Albright's advice to ignore the attacks on Khobar Towers (Iran), two Embassies (al-Qaeda?) and the USS Cole (al-Qaeda?).
   
   + Religious moderates are in the majority, consider democracy a FOREIGN concept, and look to find ways to accommodate faith, family, and state without their being exclusive or compartmented. One could even say moderate Muslims are pre-disposed to be holistic!
   
   + The one thing the West could do to improve relations with Muslims is to show more respect and press for more understanding (in both directions).
   
   + Majority favor religious law as a source of legislation, but do not want clerics to have a direct role in drafting the constitution (I am reminded of how Israel went too far toward extremism when it yielded to its religious extremists--and of course Israel used the tactic of terrorism against the British to good effect, and ignored Gandhi's observation that "Palestine is to the Palestinians as France is to the French.")
   
   + My valuation of this book takes a definite leap upwards as I appreciate three facts that come together:
   
   - Within the limits of prostitution toward those who pay their bills, the Gallup book does a good job--but I have BLAND in one section--of raising hard truths that those in power have no interest in, but could be helpful to voters.
   
   - Each section has little gray boxes worth a look.
   
   - Each section ends with key points summarized.
   
   + The book ultimately loses one star because it does not cite many books for context and when it does, tends to go with the discredited Fukiyama and the discredited Blair. This is an undergraduate reading that needs several more layers of study, and hence I recommend the other books suggested by an earlier reviewer.
   
   + I am totally absorbed by the book's account of how the Pope, with the best of intentions and relying on his top "experts," made many mistakes in his speech attempting to reconcile with Islam, and was so told by over 100 Muslim scholars. This drives home both the limits of experts embedded with any leadership figure, and the importance of multicultural appreciative inquiry. The three candidates for President of the USA today are out of touch with citizens and out of touch with reality because they are giving stump speeches instead of leading nation-wide conversations on the ten high level threats to humanity outlined in A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility--Report of the Secretary-General's High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change and the twelve policies that must be recovered from the special interests that hijacked them to steal from the many for the benefit of the few. See also The Global Class War: How America's Bipartisan Elite Lost Our Future - and What It Will Take to Win It Back
   
   + The book does cite Professor Pape's Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism and adds primary research to the effect that the radicalized are not poor or illiterate, but rather educated and moderately well-off. This was my own finding in 1976 when I did my first Master's thesis on the prediction of revolution. The book astounds me in noting that while only 7% of the Muslim population is radicalized, this number is NINETY ONE MILLION. The book also documents the plain fact that the primary motivation for suicidal terrorism is almost invariably FOREIGN OCCUPATION.
   
   + Page 84 lists the Muslim perceptions surveyed has of the USA, we learn that they are:
   
   - Ruthless (68%)
   
   - Scientifically & technologically advanced (68%)
   
   - Aggressive (66%)
   
   - Conceited (65%)
   
   - Morally decadent (64%)
   
   The book does a very good job of addressing how the civil rights conflict is closer to the Muslim-Christian-Jewish conflict, calling this a clash of cultures (to which I would add, a clash of economic corruption and predatory looting versus commonwealth exploitation by, of, and for indigenous peoples) and specifically discounting the clash of civilizations as the model. Readers interested in the whole question of belief systems can find the Technical Preface by Robert Garigue free online or at Information Operations: All Information, All Languages, All the Time.
   
   The book does well at portraying Muslims world-wide as feeling under siege from the USA, and concludes from its primary research that Muslim anger is based on US foreign policy and its effect on their own peace and development. This is not rocket science, but I assure you, Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Madeline Albright, Condi Rice, even Strobe Talbott--they are NEVER going to come to grips with the fact that US foreign policy today is lunatic, out of control, costly, and totally out of touch with how to wage peace at one third of the cost of war. See for example Breaking the Real Axis of Evil: How to Oust the World's Last Dictators by 2025
   
   The book ends on a note that suggests that both Muslims and Christians deeply want and need more erespect and understanding at a public diplomacy level, but the book is also quite specific in noting how US public diplomacy (and I would add, Strategic Communication) is completely out of touch with reality. You can no longer manufacture consent or use propaganda to mislead the majority of the world. As Joe Trippi points out, The Revolution Will Not Be Televised: Democracy, the Internet, and the Overthrow of Everything--Trippi is a genius, but I would note that we have moved one step beyond--cell phones, not the Internet, are the primary intellectual, emotional, cultural, and asymmetric warfare tool of choice today, one reason why the National Security Agency is freaking out--they cannot build a computer that weights next to nothing, runs on almost no energy, and can do petaflop calculations per second--the human brain (these are the last three words in Jim Bamford's book, Body of Secrets: Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency. US intelligence is "inside out and upside down" as I explained in Forbes ASAP, and desperately needs a draconian redirection of funding from the %60B we spend on the 4% we can steal, to rebalancing the use of all national powers and especially education, rule of law, and infrastructure here at home, and public diplomacy as well as open source or public intelligence that can exploit all information in all languages all the time.
   
   I liked the details on the survey that are included in the appendix.
   
   On balance, the book does a good job within the constraints of funding, US management, and the need to pander moderately to an Administration that has no regard for reality at the White House level (our flag officers and top civil servants and some political appointees such as the Secretary of Defense have rediscovered their integrity and are fighting a holding action for all of us here at home).
   
   I would like to see two new surveys: one of all the countries they missed, and one of India alone, ideally done in partnership with the government of India. I regard India, Malaysia, and Turkey as well as Indonesia as major success stories, and the US Government does not seem to be ready to recognize that these four countries can and should be major partners in offering peace and development instead of corruption, occupation, and exploitation, to all Muslims everywhere.
   
   Three other books within my limit of ten:
   Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: America, the Cold War, and the Roots of Terror
   The Looming Tower: Al Qaeda and the Road to 9/11 (Vintage)
   Web of Deceit: The History of Western complicity in Iraq, from Churchill to Kennedy to George W. Bush



3. I'm familiar with Georgetown University professor John Esposito's funding (Saudi Arabia) and pro-Islam bias, but 5 minutes into the book even I was surprised at his audacity in translating "Islam" as "a strong commitment to God" when most other scholars, including loud-and-proud Islam apologists (both Muslim and non-Muslim), translate it as "submission to God". Replacing the harsher, but almost universally accepted, "submission" says all you need to know about Esposito's lack of objectivity.
   
   But don't rely on my opinion. On 5/12/08 Robert Satloff published in "The Weekly Standard" (Volume 13, Issue 33, available on-line) a devastating expose of how this book is devoid of scholarship.
   
   Specifically, Mr. Satloff details how Ms. Mogahed (the coauthor) admitted to changing the definition of "radical" AFTER the data had been collected and analyzed, effectively reducing the number of radicals from the 169 million Muslims in categories 4 and 5 of a 1: "9/11 totally unjustified" to 5: "9/11 completely justified" scale, to the 91 million members of category 5 only. (Page 97 of the book also reveals that Esposito now either considers category 4 Muslims, 75% sure the 9/11 attacks were justified, as "moderates", or just ignores category 4 altogether despite it being a swing group between "moderate" and "radical" with almost the population of Germany!)
   
   In Mr. Satloff's words, "[the authors] must have shrieked in horror to find their original estimate [of radicals] on the high side of assessments made by scholars, such as Daniel Pipes, whom Esposito routinely denounces as Islamophobes... The cover-up is even worse. The full data from the 9/11 question show that, in addition to the 13.5 percent [ie categories 4 and 5], there is another 23.1 percent ---300 million Muslims--- who told pollsters the attacks were in some way justified. Esposito and Mogahed don't utter a word about the vast sea of intolerance in which the radicals operate."
   
   It would be a big mistake to read this book if you are just beginning your study of Islam, since you might miss the subtle but fairly standard techniques Esposito uses to introduce his pro-Islam bias. One well-known technique he uses throughout the book is being neutral on Jewish and Christian theology by referring to Moses and Jesus as historical figures while validating Islamic theology by referring to "the Prophet Muhammad", capital P and no qualifier (such as "the Islamic prophet").
   
   Another technique (and the first time I've seen it used) is his references to "Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition", an obvious (to me) attempt to imply that the three religions share a common value system, a fiction (at least when it comes to the Wahhabi version of Islam dominant in Esposito's sponsor Saudi Arabia) commonly promoted by political Islamists (ie non-violent but with similar goals as violent Islamists). Political Islamists' use of the term "Judeo-Christian-Islamic values" to try to ride the coattails of the well-established Judeo-Christian value system has so far failed to gain traction since even a cursory study of Wahhabi Islam shows it shares few if any major values with Christianity (I can't comment on Judaism). Specifically, Wahhabi Islam has no version of the Golden Rule, it tells its believers the exact opposite of "turn the other cheek", it considers non-Muslims inferiors who should (as revealed by God) have fewer rights than Muslims. (See Freedom House's detailed report on Saudi Arabia's government-sanctioned K-12th grade religious studies curriculum, available on-line.) Even the mandatory 2.5% to charity Wahhabi Muslims are required to contribute each year can only go to charities that benefit Muslims. (Can you imagine Mother Theresa turning away an orphan whose parents had been Hindu?!) But Esposito's term is technically correct, since the Koran incorporates a Muslim version of some Old and New Testament characters and stories, and since Jews, Christians, and Muslims coexisted for hundreds of years in the Middle East, so the three religions must share some aspect of a common "tradition". But Wahhabi Islam most certainly doesn't share common values with Christianity, which Esposito surely knows even as he hopes the reader comes away with the impression it does.
   
   To sum up, if you are going to read 5 or fewer books on Islam, this should NOT be one of them. If you are well-grounded in Islam, this book has some interesting points (such as the fact that the vast majority of Muslims want "free speech", defined as "allowing all citizens to express their opinion on the political, social, and economic issues of the day", but with no mention of any right to criticize religion (p. 47)), and is a fast read. Don't buy it though, it's not worth the $16 I spent on it. (To illustrate how little regard I hold for the sham "scholarship" this book masquerades as, this is the first book I'm throwing out instead of donating to my library. And I donate every book, even those I strongly disagree with, to my library.)



4. Review of Who Speaks for Islam? What a Billion Muslims Really Think by John L. Esposito and Dalia Mogahed released March, 2008
   
   Both John Esposito and Dalia Mogahed work for the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies, which claims as its mission providing data-driven analysis on the views of Muslims around the world. Esposito is known in his own right as a Sunni convert to Islam and a professor of International Affairs and Islamic Studies at Georgetown University, famous for Muslim-Christian interfaith work, some of it funded by the royal family in Saudi Arabia.
   
   This book is a very fast read based on Gallup's World Poll that seeks to address common, if biased, views of Muslims with the results of the survey claiming to represent the actual views of Muslims. Thus, it cannot be construed as representing an official Islamic viewpoint, but rather the views from a sample intended to represent 90% of the world's 1.3 billion Muslims.
   
   Some of the supposedly surprising revelations of this study are practically humorous in a sad, insulting way: one "counterintuitive discovery" is "When asked to describe their dreams for the future, Muslims don't mention fighting in a jihad, but rather getting a better job." Other similarly hardly amazing tidbits are presented in the course of five chapters: Who are Muslims?, Democracy or Theocracy?, What Makes a Radical?, What do Women Want?, and Clash or Coexistence?
   
   In the first chapter, we learn the basics of Islam, such as that "Muslims pray not only as a religious obligation, but also because it makes them feel closer to God". A gray box highlighting brief, important facts occurs on many pages throughout the book and one in this chapter tells us Islam means, "a strong commitment to God", implying that is how the Arabic translates.
   
   In the second chapter we learn results of the survey indicating views that Muslims do not want wholesale adoption of Western democracy in their countries, but at the same time, a majority of Americans don't either, saying that they want the Bible as a major source of legislation. There is an unmistakable, but overdone, effort to show that American views and Muslim views are much closer than many think.
   
   In the third chapter, we find questionable altruisms like, "The real difference between those who condone terrorist acts and all others is about politics, not piety," leaving open the possible interpretation that a truly pious person could condone terrorism. This brings to question the definition of piety employed by the authors and the survey.
   
   In the fourth chapter, we learn things such as that while Western women view the hijab as showing inferior status of women, Muslims view lack of modesty in Western women as showing their degraded status.
   
   And in the last chapter, we find out results like Muslims don't "hate us because of our freedom." The book concludes with an appendix explaining the scientific design of the poll, how it was conducted, and notes.
   
   The book also draws on numerous other poll results, news articles, and interviews. For example, it refers to a Christian Science Monitor interview of Jenan al-Ubaedy, a female member of Iraq's National Assembly, in 2005. She told the newspaper that "she supported the implementation of Sharia. However, she said that as an assembly member, she would fight for women's right for equal pay, paid maternity leave, and reduced hours for pregnant women." I doubt Ms. Al-Ubaedy would have found the use of "however" as appropriate, as if what she was fighting for in equal pay and maternity leave were in opposition to Islamic law as she understood it.
   
   While the poll itself is statistically valid and possibly even worthwhile for addressing certain misconceptions about Muslims, I struggled to think of an audience that this book would actually reach. Anyone who found the majority of the study results as enlightening is unlikely to be open-minded enough to read the book or believe the poll results, anyway. Further, the authors seem to have several questionable interpretations and views, such as a few mentioned earlier, as if they are going too far to adapt to their perceived audience. It seems to have been written too quickly and with too many questionably worded sentences, such as the one about terrorism and piety or the one about Ms. Al-Ubaedy's interview, that can allow for incorrect negative impressions about Islam that the book is supposedly aiming to dispel. Thus, the sincerity of the intent of the work is called to question.
   
   If you like reading interesting takes on statistics, such as Freakonomics by Stephen D. Levitt, there is still some enjoyment to be had in reading this book. I could now cite in a dinner conversation that 88% of Muslims polled in the survey support women's right to vote, or that 80% of Iranians say that bombing and other attacks intentionally aimed at civilians are never justified, while only 46% of Americans surveyed agreed, but that you might get a different result if you use substitute "terrorist attacks" in place of "attacks intentionally aimed at civilians."
   
   I can't help thinking that a much better book could have been written with the results from the survey than this one. Despite the academic nature of the survey, when I finished the book I felt like I had just read something only pseudo-academic, flawed, off-target for an intended audience, and with questionable intent.



5. Well, this isn't a book for hate-mongers or fear-mongers. It is, however, a book that gives a voice to the Muslim majority, which is usually not consulted by the likes of Bill O'Reilly or Michael Savage or even moderate American media. Mostly, it's a summary of the huge, lengthy Gallup survey of Muslims in various countries. There are always flaws in surveys -- for example, if someone asked you if you wanted Christianity to be a source of law in the United States, your notion of Christianity might be enormously different from the next person's notion of it -- but at least this is the first time that Americans get to see roughly what Muslims really think...rather than mindlessly take the media's (sensationalist) word for it.

5 comments about Tactics of the Crescent Moon: Militant Muslim Combat Methods.

1. During seven months in Falluja in 2005 I spent approximately 150 days in the city. The history alone in this book showed us just how much we may have been underestimating our enemies, and that if they followed their classical influences they could have done much more damage.
   
   The history is priceless dating back to influences of the Samarai and how it came to bring the original Middle Eastern assassins, and how today's suicide bombers are like those in the past, only they have explosives instead of knives, and do not need as much skill.
   
   John Poole had spent close to 30 years in the Marine Corps leading men as both a gunnery sergeant (when enlisted) and a Lt Colonel (when commissioned). He saw Vietnam first hand, and left feeling that he could have done more for the men he'd led. Although the officers that are in charge of teaching battle field skills are not fast to accept his methods the men on the ground who deal with the enemies in the streets of Iraqi cities know he is right.



2. I would highly encourage any person who is Battalion staff or lower to read this book. All Army and Marine personnel should read this book on the jet flying them to Iraq or Afghanistan. This book will give a typical soldier or marine a good snap shot of how the Eastern combat mind thinks. Also, unlike much propaganda to the contrary, the Islamic soldiers fight using Eastern techniques. There is more hand-to-hand fighting than in the past. American's just can't call in their massive fire support because the targets may not be easy to hit.
   
   This book is great for privates, sergeants, lieutenants, and captains. I don't know if the advice will be taken if it's read at the level of battalion or above. That is where the "rubber no longer meets the road". The staff disconnect from the soldiers begins.
   
   For all war fighters this book is a must read. All ROTC departments, Marine, and Army infantry should have this book as required reading.



3. If you want to truly understand how difficult it is to fight and win in the Middle East, then this book is required reading. Far too often we get watered-down information out of the press and on the Internet but the tactics of our Eastern adversaries go unmentioned. We know of suicide bombs, but where did this tactic originate? Which group in the Middle East is the most proficient at close-range combat? Where does Al Qaeda excel and what is the role of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard? Are Sunni and Shia groups always adversaries, or will they work together when faced with a common enemy?
   
   This book gives countless examples of diffent tactics in different areas of the world from Afghanistan to Chechnya to the Levant. It illustrates the strengths of our adversaries and addresses our own weaknesses as a "Western" army. Finally, Poole makes recommendations on how we can win this fight through better light infantry tactics and restrained use of preparatory fire and air power.
   
   It is in my opinion the best book yet on this "4th Generation" warfare. It is an outstanding read and will make you an expert amongst your friends when discussing the current state of military affairs in the Middle East.



4. This book is excellent. It should be required reading for both military Officers and Non Commissioned Officers. This book gives an ever day insight into the tatics used by Mid-Eastern terrorist.



5. This work is a very extensive examination of the tactics used by Arab small units. It goes into vivid detail about their ambush techniques as well as other aspects of how they fight. The only serious issue I have with it is it is difficult to read at times. Mr. Poole uses many quotes especially block quotes which are very useful and come from legitimate sources. However, these quotes hurt the flow of the book and make it very choppy to read. If you can work past this flaw though it is a great resource.

5 comments about The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism: From Sacred Texts to Solemn History.

1. Andrew Bostom has performed an invaluable service in editing this volume. All one hears are opinions and projections of personal beliefs onto the religion of Islam. (Our President's view is one such example.) Using the words and expositions of Islamic leaders and scholars, rather than our own revisionism, Dr. Bostom shows clearly that there is a very long history of anti-Jewish bias and prejudice in Islamic thought. The concept that all this "anti-Zionism" is a phenomenon of the 20th century is put to rest in a clear, cool and scholarly fashion. His opening esssay - with ca. 1,000 footnotes - should be required reading in every house of worship and university in the Western world. Sadly, this will not happen but readers can purchase the book and see the facts for themselves.



2. Andrew Bostom has produced a magisterial exposé of the foundations, development and impact of Islamic anti-semitism. Shrouded in perverse denial and historical revisionism, Islamic Jew-hatred is in fact grounded in the Qur'an and the life of Muhammad (the Sunna). Bostom has done the world a courageous service by exposing the roots together with the fruits of this persistent characteristic of Islamic theology and practice. In doing so, he has exposed and disarmed many deceits.
   This will be a standard reference on Islam's treatment of the Jews for decades to come. A brilliant and confronting work, The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism is a must-read for all who would understand Islam and its sacred history.



3. In today's world where the threats of Radical Islamists may set fire to the whole world there are many apologists for Islam that say Jew Hatred is not part of "true" Islam. This work documents and exposes the truth from Muhammad to today using the most accepted references and Islamic scriptures to document his findings. If you want to understand the truth of the relationship between Islam, the Jewish people and thus the motivations behind Muslim actions today you need to read this book. This book exposes the very soul of Islam, the one all Muslims call the perfect example of a Muslim life lived and one all Muslims seek to copy, Muhammad as well as those that have followed after him not only in words but also in the actions they lived in their lives. This book is a MUST READ during this time in World History!!!
   
   Rocky Latham



4. Just from my own research I found at least 23 false argumnet through out the book.
   Unfourtunately, some people just want to hate others. For those people, this book might be good.



5. As a non-Muslim who has done some minimal study of Islam, I found this book to be very one-sided and polemical. Even a non-expert like myself can easily identify the biases and one-sided arguments in this book. Given the somewhat understandable bias against Islam in the Western world, no doubt many people will find this book confirms their views of Islam. However, I would encourage those inclined to agree with the author to consider that many Muslims do not hate Jews and to do their own research on this subject by reading or talking to Muslims. Furthermore, consider that it would be quite easy for a Muslim to write a similarly-biased book arguing that Judaism or Christianity is at its core anti-Muslim.

5 comments about Nine Parts of Desire: The Hidden World of Islamic Women.

1. I read this book for the first time well before 9/11, and I think it could be a useful read for a lot of people exactly for that reason- it was not written with the hindsight of 9/11. A lot of other reviewers have described Brooks' standpoint, so I won't go there, but I will say that her writing itself is beautiful. She does not use clunky language to get her point across, and this gives her writing a great deal of eloquent power. I found myself re-reading it several times over the course of a couple years.



2. Geraldine Brooks's book, while written before the "War on Terror" era, allows for a much better insight on Islamic life (specifically the treatment of women under Islamic law) than watching the evening news. Her panorama of experiences in the Middle East allows for the reader to see the tremendous variation that exists in Muslim countries. The background that she provides on Islam is also very useful for a Western understanding of the social climate in that part of the world. This book is an excellent starting point for anyone seeking to learn about the Muslim world.



3. Geraldine Brooks takes us inside her personal trip trough the Islamic world and gives as close to an UNBIASED view of the treatment of Islamic women that i could imagine. she is careful to point out the reasons that are given for wierd practices. She doesn't shy away from her disgust for certain treatments.
   
   For example the propagation of so-called "honor killings" that still take place all over the world, as well as many other ways women are opressed in the mainstream Islamic world.
   
   O by the way the writting style is smooth and easy to read. You can really enjoy this book even though the topic is sad the way it is told is great!



4. This is just one of the facts that I learned from this book. It became not just a fact but an insight as I continued reading it.
   
   The book's excellence is demonstrated in that 13 years after its publication it is still being read. Its continued relevance is evidenced by so many current reviews here on Amazon. Since its publication there have been many books on this topic, including social studies and personal narratives, but this one still stands out.
   
   Brooks spent 6 years in traveling to Middle Eastern Islamic countries covering the plight of women. While there is a chapter on Queen Nour, the book is primarily on the many anonymous middle class women who must submit to decisions about their lives, their health, their time, their children, where they can travel and even their dealth, all made by men. These men are not required, and most are not conditioned to, value her or consider her opinions or needs. They seem to be driven by their "honor" which is reflected by how well she masters the art of submission.
   
   Brooks gives the clearest presentation I've read on the origins of the anti-woman practices that are permitted. She describes Mohammed's relations with his wives and the aftermath of his death which set the stage for others to interpret and misinterpret his words and actions.
   
   The last chapter, where the author summarizes the issue and the lack of attention it receives world wide is pithy and strong.



5. While this book is not meant to be an anthropological analysis of Muslim women, it does give insight into the Muslim world at large. It is broad in scope and should cite information more, but it can be an excellent choice to begin the journey to understanding. It should not be considered the final destination. I suggest this book to all.

5 comments about Because They Hate: A Survivor of Islamic Terror Warns America.

1. Brigette Gabriel does an awesome job of showing what Islam really intends to do on a world scale. I have been researching Islam for over a year, and this book only adds the personal testimony of a person who has lived through the result of ignorance regarding Islamic intentions. I anxiously await the next book to be written. If Brigette comes to my area I will definitely go to see and hear her myself.
   Pastor Dave Aune



2. Brigitte Gabriel paints a grim picture of the islamic threat to U.S. and western civilization. Along with Noni Darwish's book Now, They Call Me Infidel Because They hate sounds an alarm that Americans should heed. Gabriel, a Lebanese Christian journalist details her experience under the Islamic Jihad that created the civil war in Lebanon. She also reveals that even the Christian maronite parochial school which she attended demonized the Jews and the Israeli's. So what else is new. The Christian faith continues to demonize the Jews. During WWII The Catholic Pope was the first foreign state to recognize Hitler. The Pope made a deal with him. If the nazi's left the jews converted to Catholicism alone, the Pope Vatican would turn a blind eye to the suffering of Europe's Jewish citizens. Now that Chritians too are under attack, they are sympathizing somewhat with their Jewish brethren. Too often in the past they were sacrificed as expendable to placate the hateful policies of other countries and nationalities including the Nazi torture and persecution of an entire people and civilization. Roosevelt knew what was happening and did nothing about it. Now as a nation we cannot afford to ignore the evil intentions of Israel's Muslim neighbors. As she says in her book "First comes saturday and then comes Sunday." This Arab phrase means "First we kill all the Jews. Then we kill all the Christians." Make no mistake. This is the fundamentalist intention. They are using our bill of rights against us. Spewing hateful speech to incite violence, they cite their first amendment rights to prevent any government action to stop it. While I applaud Brigette Gabriel's bravery in coming forward to speak publically about this threat, I do think she has gone a bit far. After reading these two books I not only support ethnic profiling, but I encourage it. Controlling discourse on campus and religious institutions is another ball of wax. Once we start down that slipery slope who knows where limitations on our 1st amendment rights of free speech, free press, and free religion will stop. Since the essence of a democracy is freedom of speech, press, and assembly, we could end up selling our American soul to preserve it. Then what would we have saved. Perhaps, more important would be to give equal funding and access to speakers like Noni Darwish and Brigitte Gabriel on college campuses and other forums. Gabriel's characterization of the entire democratic leadership as indictable for treason goes a bit too far. These comments indicate that she doesn't really understand the democratic process set up in this country. I gave this book 4 stars instead of 5 for three reasons. First, that she draws the line too far. Second, her prose is often repetitive, and thirdly, it is not elegant. I still think that this book is a must read for every American. This woman is in constant danger because of what she states publically. I think that she and Noni Darwish are alive only becasue they are women who are viewed as inconsequential in the Muslim culture. Assasinating her would give her credence. She lays to rest the western belief that female suicide bommbers are participating out of feelings of desperation. They are participating after being harrassed and cajoled and accused of honor violations for which they will be killed. Particularly telling is the incident of the Arab girl raped by her two brothers and then killed by her mother because she had sexual intercourse outside of marriage. Her mother suffocated and beat her for 20 minutes before she died. How can we ever hope to understand this culture and win it over by conciliatory means? They understand and respect only force and strenght. Gabriel puts and end to the notion of Islam as a peaceful religion. The issue presented is where do we draw the line to protect ourselves without giving up completely what makes us Americans. First, I think we should use the Israeli Mossad for security profiles and follow their recommendations on profiling. The petrochemical complex already uses ex mossad agents for their security. One is unaware of this heightened security when entering the plants, but it is there. Like England we need more video surveillance. We must pay senior intelligence and FBI agents competitive salaries so that we don't have agencies run almost entirely by 'junior pilots", because the senoir people have left for more lucrative jobs in private industry. We must see the fundamentalist muslim threat as immediate and real. We must be politically incorrect at times to deal with the danger. College campuses must remain vigilent that professors treat students of any faith or nationality with equal respect. If Arab professors present a pro Muslim viewpoint equal class time should be given to talented speakers presenting the opposing view. Thus, students will not be unduly influenced by a polarizing Jihadist, anti-western, anti-Israeli view. Most troubling to me was the chapter on the fifth column at college campuses. The students who will be our future leaders and captians of industry are at a very impressionable age. It is too easy to imbue a professor with mentor like qualities held up as an ideal to be followed. We must also be vigilent on the true recipients of charitible donations. However, when it comes to Mosques preaching hatred and death, we must tred carefully. Any law abridging such speech could also be used to curtail legitimate government critisizm, a hallmark of democracy. Certainly, Barak Obama's pastor's speech would fall under this umbrella. I deplore what the Rev. Wright and his progeny have said, but I defend his right to say it. Where should we draw the line and how? Gabriel gives some suggestions, but I think they go to far. I do agree with her section on profiling. We could present more options for patriotism in classrooms such as reciting the pledge of allegiance. We could keep books such as this one and the Darwish book on school and public library shelves. We could also place the books on recommended reading lists on high school and college campuses so that students are assured of getting both sides of the argument. Right now they are primarily hearing the pro-muslim side only. Keep up the good work, Brigitte. However, I think



3. This is a very personal, emotional book to read - you have to prepare yourself. It is so moving, visual and shocking. Brigitte is an excellent writer and really knows how to express herself - you feel as though you're right there in the bomb shelters with her and her parents as they suffer unimaginable horrors. I'm so glad I was able to read this book because it is a real warning for America not to fall into complacency - that we all need to stay vigilant and know and understand our enemies. This story is so inspiring; it'll make you feel like you can accomplish anything after reading what she went through to beat the odds and become an American success story.



4. My husband loved the book. He said it was the best book he has read in a long time. The author gave a lot of personal experiences that gave in-depth insight into Islam. Because of his enthusiasm I can't wait to read it.



5. A MUST read for anyone concerned about our future. An eyeopening firsthand account of a group that exists in our country today.

5 comments about Princess: A True Story of Life Behind the Veil in Saudi Arabia.

1. 'Princess' is a true story about "Sultana" a member of the royal bloodline, growing up in Saudi Arabia. One would think that as descendant of the great leader, King Abdul Aziz life would be luxurious with one opportunity after another..and for the males that's true..but as a female born and raised in the Royal family life was severe and restrictive.
   
   This book is very well written and you wont want to put it down. Most people have no idea what life in the Middle East is like. It will shock and sadden you to read about how cruel and harsh life is for females (children and adults) and the sickening double standards allowed for males. This book will open your eyes to the true nature of Islam and just how intolerant and incompatable it is regarding human rights.



2. This was a very well chronicled and written book of a princess' contemporary lifestyle and despairing oppression in Saudi Arabia. I highly reccommend this book.
   
   Princess Sultana,
   You seem to be looking for the Western World to assist in your plight of simple, daily freedoms for your nation's women. Which, by your story, is understandable. When you have a sole, domineering, and restrictive religion entwined in a political state...the chance of change is greatly reduced; after reading Saudi Arabian laws documented in your story, there's hardly any separation of religion and state in your day-to-day activities; especially for women. Actually, the legal system in your country is downright offensive to even me, and I am not a citizen of Saudi Arabia. Truly, I'd rather be homeless, U.S. citizen with complete social, educational, political, religious, and civic freedoms than a Princess with lavishly decorated palaces, an infinite amount of money, and diamonds and gems that string a couple miles...because after reading your life...freedom is priceless. I pity your life and the only people who can change your demise is your own people with the same mindset. 1776.



3. I read Princess the first time many years ago and was very intriged by it. It also made me look into Islam and I can say today I am a Muslim. I read the book again recently and did not find it as good. What must be said is that a lot of horrible things that happened in that book were culture and *not* Islam. (I will also say that Saudi is not a good example of a Islamic country.)
   
   Other than that issue I think it's a good read. Just don't read too much into it. If you really want to get a look into life in Saudi there are Saudi feminist bloggers on the net. That would give you a better view than this book.



4. I read this when I was high school and was shocked and appalled at how those poor Middle Eastern women live. Now grown, I have Middle Eastern female friends who laugh their head off at this book. Perhaps some of the incidents that are related happened, but I highly doubt they happened to the same person. It's like if someone from Saudi Arabia came here and wrote a book, "Senator's Daughter" or something. The girl was sexually abused starting at age 3, starved by her mother so she wouldn't get fat, pressured into sexually servicing the football team. The father has affairs with both women and men, is a pedophile, and likes to torture cats. The mother is a beaten-down woman who undergoes dozens of plastic surgery procedures and ends up locked in an insane asylum. Have these incidents, separately, happened to American females? Yes. Are they representative of American women, or senator's daughters? Nope. I suspect Jean Sasson did something similar, and it completely destroys any argument she was trying to make! A fun read, but don't take it as gospel.



5. I read this book without regard to ethnicity or political belief. I read it as a woman -- as a human being who suffered at the thought of what other women are enduring in the name of "religion" or "culture."
   
   There is no explanation possible to make this palatable to anyone with a conscience. To let it pass without mention is an abomination, akin to denying the Holocaust. There is no justification possible in the eyes of God.
   
   To the perpetrators of this inhumanity to women, I can only promise you that God is watching. Any other comment on these perpetrators is superfluous.

5 comments about America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It.

1. Mark Steyn is Rush Limbaugh II.
   Everything in this book - fact or assertion - is riddled and biased with unadulterated, not-willing-to-see-sense conversativism. For example, Steyn will give you a believable 2 + 2 and then throw in an absurd, unsupported conclusion like 753. That's why it deserved even one star...it was entertaining, if terribly politically incorrect, and made interesting points when it was not busy being racist.
   
   This piece of arrogance is reminiscent of Kipling's "White Man's Burden".
   (Which is probably why some of the reviewers are so fond of it. That was a bestseller in its time, as well.) It plays on Americans own arrogance, fear, and sense of self-importance.
   
   It basically groups Whites and Everyone Else together. I was completely offended, even though I'm not Muslim. It is people like Steyn who have destroyed the public perception of Islam, even more than the jihadists, by putting all Muslims (and any non-Whites) in one group.
   
   *insert long-bottled up scream here*



2. This book is a call to arms for all Americans who wish to retain the real values that this country was founded upon. This country is too special, too unique to be allowed to waste away and melt into a European model that is clearly broken. All immigrants who come to this country MUST wish to become true Americans and ONLY American. We can no longer welcome all and allow them to shun the American way of life and begin to impose foreign laws on this government. This has been and always will be the greatest way of life that was ever created and it must not die. We can and will embrace many cultures as part of the fabric of America, but never to the exclusion of the ideals that make it great.



3. This is an exceptionally written and argued book. The central theme, that demographics favor radical Islam, and that the challenge posed is existential and immediate, is a Steyn classic.
   
   You won't be disappointed.



4. Mark Steyn tells it like it is. Western Europe is in decline; Canada is in decline; America is on the brink. There is nothing politically correct about Mark's discourse. It's a frank discussion about how the Islamist/Muslim world is in its ascendancy while we (the West) are in decline based largely on current demographics. It scared the heck out of me, and if I can do nothing else I can at least spread the word. We need to react before our way of life, our culture is no more.America Alone: The End of the World As We Know It



5. Instead of the Red Scare (those damn pinko commies) we now have the Islamic threat. Read "The Concept of the Political" by Carl Schmidtt in order to understand the necessity of creating an existentially threatening 'other' for the sake of reinforcing national cohesion and identity. As some may know, Schmidtt was influential (especially in his critique of liberalism) in both National Socialist circles and in neo-conservative circles.
   This is a re-hashing of Huntington, only Steyn is even more alarmist and pessimistic (who could have thought it was possible) in his 'prophetic' (read sarcasm) judgments. If you want a real book on the decline of empire that has a historical perspective beyond the past 15 years, then read Kennedy's "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers".

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

1. 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".



2. 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.



3. 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.



4. 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. One of the common themes that appears in many writings of Spencer, Emerson, Steyn and others is that there are many Americans who, for one reason or another, are not proud to be Americans. Bawer alludes very strongly to that as well, and I believe he may even have been one of those people until his long term experience of living in Europe and seeing first hand the Islamization taking place there.
   
   Americans (all Westerners, really) need to understand the total erosion of rights we take for granted being summarily squashed under Sharia. Bill of Rights? Fuhgeddaboudit! All men created equal? Not anymore!
   
   As Bawer points out on almost every page, he is unabashedly and unashamedly gay, and the gay community must someday come to terms with the fact that right-wing America is going to do more to protect their civil rights than the liberals, who turn a blind eye to Muslim atrocities against gays in Europe and elsewhere. Civil unions don't provide much benefit when one's head is no longer in union with the rest of the body.