Monday, June 06, 2016

Review: "The Polically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)"

A historically interesting and still relevant item from the American Thinker. I can very much recommend Robert Spencer`s excellent book.

Click on the following link to read the whole thing:

Islam Without Camouflage
August 20th, 2005

A review of Robert Spencer's, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades),  Regnery Publishing, Washington, D.C., 2005, 270 pp.

*Dr. Bostom is an Associate Professor of Medicine, and the author of the forthcoming The Legacy of Jihad, on Prometheus Books (2005).

From the article:

Through the first six decades of the 20th century, a cadre of erudite Christian theologians and scholars wrote illuminating, unapologetic analyses of Islamic dogmas, practices, and history. These individuals, primarily Europeans, also included persons from the indigenous pre-Islamic communities, living with the major Muslim populations of Africa, the Levant, Asia Minor, the Indian subcontinent, and the Far East. Prominent among these distinguished scholars were Edward Sell, W. St. Clair Tisdall, W.H.T. Gairdner, D.S. Margoliouth, W.R. Gardner, Henri Lammens, Arthur Jeffery, Samuel Zwemer, Murray Titus, and Antoine Fattal. Their detailed, eloquent observations were refreshingly candid, and they often engaged in lively and illuminating debates with the Islamic apologists of their respective generations, both Muslim and non-Muslim alike.

W.H.T. Gairdner (d. 1928, in Cairo), was a gifted Arabic linguist and scholar of (the Sufi) Al-Ghazali’s works, who lived for three decades in Cairo, where he also served as a Protestant Canon. In 1919, he wrote an essay responding to a mendacious “birthday tribute” panegyric of Muhammad written collaboratively by Muslims and non-Muslims. A particularly trenchant segment of Gairdner’s rebuttal discussed the slaughter of the vanquished Medinan Jewish tribe, the Banu Qurayza—a massacre which became an important motif in jihad war jurisprudence. 
[3] Relying exclusively upon Muslim sources, Gairdner highlighted without equivocation the pivotal role that Muhammad himself played in orchestrating the overall events: 
The umpire who gave the fatal decision (Sa’ad) was extravagantly praised by Muhammad. Yet his action was wholly and admittedly due to his lust for personal vengeance on a tribe which had occasioned him a painful wound. In the agony of its treatment he cried out- “O God, let not my soul go forth ere thou has cooled my eye from the Bani Quraiza” [Banu Qurayza]. This was the arbiter to whose word the fate of that tribe was given over. His sentiments were well-known to Muhammad, who appointed him. It is perfectly clear from that that their slaughter had been decreed. What makes it clearer still is the assertion of another biographer that Muhammad had refused to treat with the Bani Quraiza at all until they had “come down to receive the judgment of the Apostle of God”. Accordingly “they came down”; in other words put themselves in his power. And only then was the arbitration of Sa’ad proposed and accepted- but not accepted until it had been forced on him by Muhammad; for Sa’ad first declined and tried to make Muhammad take the responsibility, but was told “qad amarak Allahu takhuma fihim” “Allah has commanded you to give sentence in their case”. From every point of view therefore the evidence is simply crushing that Muhammad was the ultimate author of this massacre. [4] 
Four decades later (in 1958), Antoine Fattal, a Lebanese Maronite Professor of Law, whose Le Statut Legal de Musulmans en Pays’ d’Islam remains the benchmark analysis of non-Muslims (especially Christians and Jews) living under the Shari’a (i.e., Muslim Law), offered these perspectives on the living legacy of jihad and dhimmitude: 
Dhimma or dhimmi status…is one of the results of the jihad or holy war. Connected with the notion of jihad is the distinction between dar al-harb (territory or “house” of war) and dar al-islam (house of Islam). The latter includes all territories subject to Moslem authority. It is in a state of perpetual war with the dar al-harb. The inhabitants of the dar al-harb are harbis, who are not answerable to the Islamic authority and whose persons and goods are mubah, that is, at the mercy of Believers. However, when Moslems are in a subordinate state, they can negotiate a truce with the Harbis lasting no more than ten years, which they are obliged to revoke unilaterally as soon as they regain the upper hand, following the example of the Prophet after Hudaibiyya…[5] 
…Even today, the study of the jihad is part of the curriculum of all the Islamic institutes. In the universities of Al-Azhar, Nagaf (Najaf), and Zaitoune, students are still taught that the holy war [jihad] is a binding prescriptive decree, pronounced against the Infidels, which will only be revoked with the end of the world… If he [the dhimmi] is tolerated, it is for reasons of a spiritual nature, since there is always the hope that he might be converted; or of a material nature, since he bears almost the whole tax burden. He has his place in society, but he is constantly reminded of his inferiority…In no way is the dhimmi the equal of the Muslim. He is marked out for social inequality and belongs to a despised caste; unequal in regard to individual rights; unequal in the Law Courts as his evidence is not admitted by any Muslim tribunal and for the same crime his punishment is greater than that imposed on Muslims...No social relationship, no fellowship is possible between Muslims and dhimmis… [6]


Robert Spencer, a serious student of Islam for the past quarter century, and a devout Catholic, has revived this highly informative, unapologetic genre of writing in four recent books: Islam Unveiled, Inside Islam: A Guide for Catholics, Onward Muslim Soldiers, and The Myth of Islamic Tolerance . His fifth, and latest effort, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) —true to the courageous spirit of the four earlier books—is a didactic, carefully referenced work, written in very accessible language. 

[1] W.R. Gardner. “Jihad”, Moslem World, Vol. 2, 1912, cited in, A.G. Bostom. The Legacy of Jihad, Prometheus Books, Amherst, N.Y., 2005, p.295.[2] Bostom. The Legacy of Jihad, pp.294, 297-299.[3] Bostom. The Legacy of Jihad, p.18.[4] W.H.T. Gairdner. “Muhammad Without Camouflage”, Moslem World, Vol. 9, 1919, cited in, A.G. Bostom. The Legacy of Jihad, Prometheus Books, Amherst, N.Y., 2005, pp. 18-19.[5] Antoine Fattal, Le Statut Legal de Musulmans en Pays’ d’Islam, Beirut, 1958, cited in, A.G. Bostom. The Legacy of Jihad, Prometheus Books, Amherst, N.Y., 2005, p.96.[6] Bostom, The Legacy of Jihad, p.35.[7] K.S. Lal. Muslim Slave System in India, Aditya Prakashan, New Delhi, 1994, p. 175.