The recent arrival in my mail of a book entitled Islam: Critical Essays about a Political Religion has prompted a number of thoughts. Edited by Sam and Wim van Rooy and published late last year, it is a massive compendium, just under 800 pages long. It is in Dutch. (The title is actually De Islam: Kritische Essays over een Politieke Religie.) And it is richly comprehensive, with thirty-four essays on such subjects as the Islamization of Europe, Islam in India, the term “Islamophobia,” jihad in Africa, dhimmitude, apostasy, the myth of Andalusia, taqiyya, Islam and the West, sharia law, Islam’s “fellow travelers,” Jews under Islam, Christians under Islam, Islam and women, Islam and slavery, Islam and fascism, and Islam vs. democracy.
The authors are mostly Dutch and Flemish writers with considerable expertise in their subjects, plus a sprinkling of well-known international figures as Ibn Warraq and Bat Ye’or. I have not yet read every word of the book – and given my spotty Dutch I may never do so – but one thing is absolutely clear: this is most definitely not a product of the Islamic Studies propaganda factory. It is not the sort of book, in other words, in which you would be likely to find the work of John Esposito, the king of Islamic Studies in the U.S., who is a reliable apologist for Islam and whose Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University is, in fact, funded by (and named for) his good friend and benefactor, Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal of Saudi Arabia. Nor is this book the sort of soft-focus feel-good material churned out by popular writers like Karen Armstrong, who (it must be admitted) does a truly brilliant job of soft-pedaling the darker sides of Islam and emphasizing its warmly spiritual aspects, so that when you think of the religion you don’t picture a jihadist lopping off somebody’s head but a beautiful woman in a sensuously loose veil meditating at sundown under an olive tree while sipping coffee and nibbling on delicious figs.
No, the writers of this book are not propagandists for Islam. Instead, they are mostly generalists, journalists, independent scholars, or professors in non-Islamic disciplines who have developed an expertise in certain aspects of Islam. And they tell the truth about it. No, women are not equal under Islam. Yes, apostasy from Islam is a capital crime. No, Jews and Christians in medieval Andalusia did not live in perfect harmony with their Muslim overlords, but were systematically treated as inferiors, afforded limited rights, and subjected to a special tax. As Sam van Rooy writes in his introduction, the overarching purpose of this book is to dispel myths, dissolve naïveté, and challenge the absurd and historyless notion of Islam as a religion of peace. In short, this book is the real thing – a substantial education in the hard facts of Islam written by people who are free of the kind of institutional and ideological restraints that keep many a certified “expert” in the subject from telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about Islam.
The first of the two important points to be made here is that this book is far from alone. In the years since 9/11, while Islamic Studies professors have continued to whitewash the religion of peace, responsible-minded men and women outside of the Islamic Studies racket have taken up the job of truth-telling, publishing a number of substantial, and in some cases encyclopedic, volumes about Islam. Some of these authors have educational and professional backgrounds in areas entirely unrelated to Islam, but after the outrage of 9/11 felt driven to engage in a fast-track process of self-education about the belief system that had motivated bin Laden and his operatives. One thinks, for example, of Andrew Bostom, a physician and professor of medicine at Brown University who in the last few years has somehow found the time to produce massive, definitive books about the history of jihad and the legacy of Islamic anti-Semitism.
The second of the two important points to be made here is that while books like the van Rooys’ and Bostom’s do indeed exist – not only in English but in a number of major Western languages – ignorance and outright duplicity about the basic facts of Islam still reign supreme throughout the West. That insipid cliche about Islam as the religion of peace persists. An assortment of inane claims about the Koran – for example, that it forbids killing and that it prohibits compulsion in religion – persists.
In the article: "Some of those who recycle these lies are ignorant enough to think they are true. Others know better. But they have decided that when it comes to the subject of Islam, ideology matters more than truth. “Respect for difference” matters more than truth"
Thus, making them culprits in rape and bloodshed. They may not care – but if the law of treason where applied – they would.
BAWER: "Imagine if politicians, academics, and mainstream journalists actually began discussing Islam in a spirit of objectivity and intellectual responsibility."
RESPONSE: I can imagine…
1) Infidels would look upon Islam with a much greater degree of critical scrutiny and skepticism…leading to….
2)…a climate in which Muslims – particularly in infidel West – would feel the need to answer for the theological and historical specifics of their faith, compelling some – upon a greater awareness – to apostate…and others to abandon the West…leading to…
3)…de-Islamization and the establishment of the West as a viable alternative to Islam…and a refuge for Muslim apostates
In a sane world, we would be encouraging apostasy from Islam, establishing de-programming centers and safe houses…trying to win this epochal struggle one 'heart and mind' at a time. But as we all know, it's not a sane world.
2)…a climate in which Muslims – particularly in infidel West – would feel the need to answer for the theological and historical specifics of their faith, compelling some – upon a greater awareness – to apostate…and others to abandon the West…leading to…
Not really, they would continue to prevaricate and lie and they most certainly wouldn't feel any remorse or compulsion to answer for historical specifics of Islam.
Moreover, Islam is not a faith. Hell, it's not even a religion, at least in the same context that we think of religion, as all Muslims must submit totally, completely, and unconditionally to the will of Allah. Hence, in stark contrast to faith-based religions where adherents are perfectly free to question and even challenge the texts and tenets of their respective religions and free to leave their respective religions or convert to another religion altogether, because the freedom of conscience in Islam is forbidden, those same actions, blasphemy in the first instance and apostasy in the second, are capital offenses. Indeed, what faith-based religions punish blasphemy and apostasy under the pain of death? The answer is none of them, proving irrefutably that Islam is not a faith-based religion as it purports.
As for as compelling more to apostatize goes, do you actually believe Muslims are not aware of the tenets of Islam?
In a sane world, we would be encouraging apostasy from Islam, establishing de-programming centers and safe houses.
In a sane world, the West would outlaw Islam and ban and reverse mass Muslim immigration ASAP. It would also eradicate the ruling Mullahs of Iran and destroy their nuclear weapons program and take out Pakistan's nuclear weapons arsenal and nuclear weapons program ASAP to prevent nuclear weapons from proliferating throughout the Islamic world. Finally, it would also occupy the Mideast oilfields and confiscate the immense unearned oil wealth of the Saudis and the Gulf States Emirs, followed by isolating the Islamic world.
In other words, the West needs to pursue a strategy of containing the spread of Islam, like the West pursued a strategy of containing the spread of Communism during the Cold War.
YOMAMA: "Not really, they would continue to prevaricate and lie and they most certainly wouldn't feel any remorse or compulsion to answer for historical specifics of Islam."
Certainly, most would continue to prevaricate. But I believe at least SOME (particularly those infected with Western epistemological and cultural influences) would in the process of actually having to engage in the dialectics of defending the specifics of their religion, be forced to examine them more closely and find themselves conflicted or even repelled.
How many? Hard to say. But taking the ideological offensive is preferable than to just ceding the entirety of the Muslim world to their miserable belief system.
Muslims are human beings after all…granted, corrupted by their suffocating beliefs,…but we know of many high-profile Muslims who have defected from their faith – embodied by titanic figures such as Ibn Warraq, Wafa Sultan, Taslima Nasrin, Hirsi Ali, Noonie Darwash, and the late, great Anwar Sheik (among others). There have to be many, many others who have defected but have deliberately kept themselves under the radar for obvious reasons. How many more would there be if there existed a robust debate in the West on the theological and historical particulars of Islam?
It is an honor/shame culture after all. We can utilize this for our ends.
YOMAMA: "As for as compelling more to apostatize goes, do you actually believe Muslims are not aware of the tenets of Islam?"
I DO believe that there are MANY Muslims are unaware of the tenets of their faith (excepting the five pillars). They are what Robert Spencer would refer to as "nominal Muslims".
As for outlawing Islam, it is not an unreasonable position, but has zero chance of becoming reality anytime soon. Still, if you believe strongly, continue to advocate. Who knows?…it's an idea whose time may eventually come.
Finally, "containment" is quite a different thing than overtly attacking two countries and occupying the natural resources of several others. And don't over look 1) the position of third parties, like Russia and China…and 2) the ability to keep Iran and Pakistan from quickly re-constituting their nuclear programs after our attacks (particularly Pakistan, where the know-how in embedded).
In my estimation, the military option is not a panacea. But of course, I could be wrong.
Certainly, most would continue to prevaricate. But I believe at least SOME (particularly those infected with Western epistemological and cultural influences) would in the process of actually having to engage in the dialectics of defending the specifics of their religion, be forced to examine them more closely and find themselves conflicted or even repelled.
Nah…not really as that would constitute blasphemy, which is a capital offense under Islam. You need to take off your Western multicultural lenses and stop assuming Muslims think and act like us, because they don't. They are a product of a completely alien civilization that isn't in any way similar to ours.
I DO believe that there are MANY Muslims are unaware of the tenets of their faith (excepting the five pillars). They are what Robert Spencer would refer to as "nominal Muslims".
Actually, there are six pillars of Islam, but, of course, the most important one is deliberately hidden from view but nonetheless still can be found if you know where to look, and you need to keep up with Spencer more because his views are constantly evolving, although he is guilty of formulating some slippery locutions from time to time.
Anyway, in Islam there are no nominal Muslims, as all Muslims are jihadists. A few are violent jihadists, while most are non-violent stealth and deceptive jihadists, and the few that aren't jihadists aren't Muslims at all but instead blasphemous apostates (which would include that so-called nominal Muslim category) that per the dictates of Islam should be executed. Of course, this is not to say that all blasphemous apostates are necessarily executed, as fortunately most of them are smart enough to keep their mouths shut and views to themselves.
As for outlawing Islam, it is not an unreasonable position, but has zero chance of becoming reality anytime soon. Still, if you believe strongly, continue to advocate. Who knows?…it's an idea whose time may eventually come
Never claimed it was going to happen overnight, but it has to happen eventually. Otherwise, Islam will subsume the West and the world.
Finally, "containment" is quite a different thing than overtly attacking two countries and occupying the natural resources of several others. And don't over look 1) the position of third parties, like Russia and China…and 2) the ability to keep Iran and Pakistan from quickly re-constituting their nuclear programs after our attacks (particularly Pakistan, where the know-how in embedded).
You have a lot to learn about Islam and about containment.
In my estimation, the military option is not a panacea. But of course, I could be wrong.
Rest assured, you usually are. Especially about Islam.
You know Skippy, I try to treat you like an adult…and you fall right back into your self-righteous, egotistical bullcrap.
I hate to break it to you, but you're not the smartest kid on the block. Your screeds are endlessly repetitive, unimaginative, and poorly written. Your ideas are sophomoric and grandiose. And your methods of disputation are excessively contentious.
I'm not the enemy, Skippy.
That being said, I wanted to apologize to you for bringing your woman (or lack of) into the equation a couple of weeks back. That was completely out of line and I'm sincerely sorry.
Yeah right, because like the liberal deep down you are you can't control your emotions and thus resorted to attacking my wife. What's next, my mother?
You're very gracious and magnanimous in accepting my apology.
Once a liberal always a liberal. Back to emoting again like always and like the liberal you inherently are. Hey, it's not my fault you can't accept reality and the truth.
Sorry friend, YOU were the one who emoted here. I expressed my contention with your points without explicitly repudiating anything you wrote…and your response was a childish insult.
As for "reality and truth"…now, apparently, even Robert Spencer is too politically-correct for you.
You want to attack two country's…and invade and occupy portions of several others. Your views are border-line maniacal. Me thinks your grip on reality is tenuous at best.
While I've never had to know enough about Islam to care, it is an immutable truth that partisans supporting one religion are prone to slander its competitors.
I suggest that before you make another inane statement that you take the time to study the Politics os Islam and read the Koran, Sira and Hadith or at least have some idea what you are talking about.
Naked relativism…the by-product of a slothful, vapid intellect.
Folks, Herman's statement is revealing in one respect that transcends his lame relativism….
HERMAN: "While I've never had to know enough about Islam to care…."
You get that, folks? Devout Muslims murder 3000 innocent Americans in 2001, over a hundred innocent Spaniards in 2003, over a hundred innocent Brits 2007, dozens of CHILDREN in Beslan, over a hundred tourists in Bali, dozens of innocents in Mubai, etc, etc…
…and yet, our Herman feels he has "never had to know enough about Islam to care".
This folks, is a perfect example of what we call WILLFUL ignorance…and it DEFINES the Left.
"… an immutable truth…" okay, and this is roughly akin to the science on global warming being settled. I find it really interesting that leftists have accused me of thinking only in black and white and not being able to see shades of gray even though they blather on like this.
It is also an immutable truth that Islam is not a faith-based religion and when you morally equate it with faith-based religions, it immutably demonstrates that you are an unhinged moonbat.
I just don't see a "reasonable" solution. Until there is such programs as advocated with a real clear and honest look at Islam I will continue to speak out against it whenever and wherever I am able. It appears that we will be forced to meet Islam headfirst as it marches through our society and tries to take us straight into the 7th century.
'And who can forget President Obama’s famous June 2009 speech in Cairo celebrating Islamic history and civilization, in which nearly every sentence was either an outrageous exaggeration or an outright falsehood?"
"Some of those who recycle these lies are ignorant enough to think they are true."
I believe that almost all, and very possibly all Western leaders and politicians who make nice speeches about Islam know the truth about Islam and are DELIBERATELY lying. We are sold out by our leaders and politicians. And sold out by media who constantly cover for Islam.
Global jihad is winning not because of cruel, aggressive Muslims; it is winning because Western leaders imported massive numbers of Muslims into our countries. Global jihad is winning because of our leaders, our courts and our media.
We won the Second World War because of our brave heroes and because our leaders wanted us to win. We are losing the ruthless global jihad against us because our leaders want us to lose.
Look at PC multiculturalism which pervades the lexicon of society and shapes our views and the quest for one world governance.
Historian Will Durant:
"The Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex of order and freedom, culture and peace, can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within."
In the the last 1400 years, Islam killed 270 million people: 120 million Africans, 60 million Christians, 80 million Hindus and 10 million Buddhists.
And G-D said, "What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood cries out to me from the ground." Genesis 4:10
Great quote Linda. And let's keep in mind that Durant wrote that in the 1930s, when Islam had been entirely eclipsed and magnanimity towards the vanquished "other" was a necessary display of idealism and broad mindedness in a scholar.
Durant was otherwise far too kind to Islam, but even he would occasionally engage in an honest exposition. The Muslim rape of India was one example; the atrocities perpetrated in the fall of Constantinople was another.
In the end, using India as a precautionary tale, Durant encouraged us to "keep our powder dry." As we prepare to gut our military in order to gain control of our finances, one wonders what tragedies await the good ole USofA.
So, Islam has outdone Hitler, Stalin, and Mao… And yet the left still throws around the BS line, "more people have been killed in the name of Christianity than any other religion."
Peace Linda,
Indeed your lies affect not those of sincere hearts who seek nothing but truth. You quote "Will Durant", who's been critisised for his Anti-Islam bias.
Christianity is well known to top the list for "bloodiest history", especially when we look at the Romans, Bazyntines, Crusaders, Hitler/Germany etc.
The Muslims however, as Orientilists (these people aren't even Muslims) say –
"History has never known a more merciful conqueror than the Arabs."- French orientalist Gustav Lebon in his Arab Civilization, A. Zu'aiter, trans., Beirut: Dar 'I'hia' Al-Kitab Al-Arabi, 1956.)
And this is backed up by MANY historians, all in agreement –
The orientalist Thomas Arnold was right, he added, when he said in The Call to Islam: "Muslims treated Arab Christians with great tolerance from the very first century of Hijrah; and this tolerant treatment has continued throughout successive centuries. As for those Christian tribes who adopted Islam, they did so freely. Arab Christians living among Muslims today are another proof of Islam's tolerance."
Thomas Arnold says: "When the Muslim Army reached the Jordan Valley and (the Muslim commander) Abu 'Ubaydah camped at Fihl, the Christian inhabitants of the country wrote to the Arabs saying: "Muslims, you are closer to our hearts than the Byzantine Romans, though they are of our own religion. You keep better faith with us, are more merciful and compassionate, less oppressive and unfair and better rulers. The Byzantine Romans have forced us to accept their rule, subjugated and robbed us of our property and our homes." Arnold goes on to say: "The people of Emessa (Homs) closed their gates against the army of Heraclius and told the Muslims that they preferred their government and justice to the injustice and oppression of the Greeks and the Romans." The Call to Islam, cit., p. 73.
Even Will Durant, the hater admitted –
The Story of Civilization, Will Durant said: "The Jewish minorities lived in peace and security with Muslims in Constantinople, Salonika, Asia Minor, Syria, Palestine, the Arabian Peninsula, Egypt, North Africa and Spain under Arab rule"
What about Christianity? We all know the answer there, as the one of the most famous 20th century Jewish writer admits –
Every honest Jew who knows the history of his people cannot but feel a deep sense of gratitude to Islam, which has protected the Jews for fifty generations, while the Christian world persecuted the Jews and tried many times ‘by the sword’ to get them to abandon their faith. [Uri Avnery]
Hate Islam all you like, but remeber that truth will always prevail, as Quran says –
"Their intention is to extinguish Allah's Light (by blowing) with their mouths: But Allah will complete (the revelation of) His Light, even though the Unbelievers may detest (it)." – (Quran 61:8)
"No matter how much lies they like to spread against Islam, they can never succeed in extinguishing the knowledge and guidance of Islam." (Quran 61:8)
May God guide you out of ignorance.
To Perseveranze,
Why tell me? Go to your brothers in Sweden and tell them they must be merciful and compassionate!
Sweden is being destroyed. A low intensity civil war has already started. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QILt8mnZnMs
When will there be an English Edition of this book?
It is a good thing that at least some writers are exposing islam for the vicious, violent, inhumane, and genocidal ideology it has been since its inception 14 centuries ago by the charlatan, sexual glutton, and sociopath, mohamad. islam doesn't evolve and isn't capable of revision. It is, rather, a plague on the human race perpetrated by the monsters in iran and saudi arabia. islam does not produce benefits for anyone; it seeks to only slaugher and enslave.
Sad to say but President Bush was heard sayting that Islam is a "religion of peace", too.
As to President BUSH wisdom on such matters, as an old proverb says,
it can be distributed among 20 cows, as anyone with te slightest knowledge
of their KORAN's preachings, knows it is a creed of peace as much as the
NAZI creed is…and BUSH's statement on TV that evening just made me
puke, as even politics has also a limit….
It had became such a big farce when even socalled educated islamic women are
trying to mislead us nonbelievers about their socalled equal status in their islamic community,
@ crypticguise: at this moment, we are searching for an English publisher.
Kind regards,
Sam van Rooy
I am dutch speaking, I read the book for the half, and I can recommend it to everyone with hearts and brains. It would be a good thing if some English publisher would be found. Here in Belgium the book is repressed, that means: the press generally doesn't talk about it (there are a few exceptions, but in the Netherlands ot's widely known) .The later in history, the more this book will be recognized as an important, historical study (by clandestine readers, like clandestine readers read the writings of Giordano Bruno few centuries ago). Islam is coming near, sharia will be introduced in Tunesia, Libya, Egypt, Libanon and possibly Syria if the fascist rebels get what they want. So we have to be prepared. And one of the things you can do to get prepared is to read this book. It will make you stronger.
Western culture has gotten lazy, substituting truly caring with being NICE (pleasant) all the time. When confronted with Muslim aggression (Mohammad ordered them to fight unbelievers until they submit to Islam), such laziness means not being willing to deal with the true situation and just trying to get back to NICE in the quickest and easiest way possible. That most often means acquiescing and hoping for niceness in return. It is only when Westerners realize what Islam is and that Muslims are serious about the mandates of their religion that they either rouse themselves to truly deal with the situation or lose their dignity to dhimmitude.
It is interesting that a psychological study (via inductive reasoning) of Muslim crime results in the almost recitation of Islamic doctrine and the profile of Mohammad.