A Review of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (And the Crusades)

The Bottom Line
Most followers of Islam maintain their faith is a religion of peace and Allah (God) is merciful. Yet, the jihadists are even more vocal about their aggressive, destructive ways being directly from the Qur’an, therefore Allah (God).

Who’s right? They both are. Remember Muslim hordes set out in the seventh and eighth century to conquer the world and convert all infidels (non believers) to Islam. The fact is, the Qur’an and other Islamic holy books are full of contradictions, so if you are looking for answers to questions you may have about Islam, you won’t find them here. But, if you want to know what kind of people we are fighting against and why, this book will tell you.


In this timely, hot button book, Robert Spencer examines the motivation and goals of, not necessarily, just the terrorists alone but fellow extremists and, by association, all Muslims in general.

He claims there is a substantial quantity of misinformation being disseminated about Islam, some officially and some by apologists. Islam, which, translates into surrender, appears to be aptly named since there was plenty of surrendering going on among Islam’s perceived enemies in the first hundred and fifty years of the religion. That’s when aggressive, ruthless armies of the Prophet Muhammad, poured out of Arabia, spreading the nascent religion across a swath of Africa and Asia from the Atlantic Ocean to India. Later Indonesia and parts of India, Thailand, China, Malaysia and the Philippines were added. The victims of this onslaught were given three options: surrender and convert to Islam, surrender and become a dhimmi (a second-class citizen subject to onerous taxation) or DEATH.

This area is home to some one point two billion Muslims, which Spencer claims are all potential enemies of the rest of the inhabitants of the globe. The reasoning is that the seeds of confrontation are intertwined within the fabric of Islam, through the Muslim holy book and he cites various passages from the Qur’an to substantiate his theory. At the head of these passages is Jihad, which means struggle. The struggle, according to Spencer is to struggle against the infidels (non-believers) to achieve a position of preeminence where Islam reigns supreme.

We all know that this is what bin Laden wants but it’s been widely reported that this view is a perversion of Islam. According to Spencer, this is straight out of the Qur’an and the perversion is that this information is being withheld from the public, ostensibly to not engender additional angst with John Q. Public. Even mainstream Muslim’s seem to have trouble coming to grips that their holy book is the basis of so much terrorism and could be so inconsistent.

Other passages that should be of concern to Westerners are the traditions of deceit and duplicity. Muslims should not befriend infidels and it’s expected that they should lie to them (but not Muslims). If they do befriend an infidel, it should only be to gain an advantage and any agreements with infidels are again, to gain an advantage and if no longer needed, should be discarded. No wonder Israel cannot get a peace agreement with the Palestinians.

Spencer also takes a cursory look at the Crusades. He states that, although they appear to have been a waste of time and manpower, they kept the Muslims at bay for almost two hundred years. Spencer believes this gave the Europeans just enough time to build their strength and technology to hold their own when the Islamic hordes, once again set their sights there.

Even so, there are large pockets of Muslims left over from Jihadists incursions in Bosnia, Kosovo, Albania and Spain. It is Spencer’s contention that without the Crusades we might all be on our knees five times a day facing Mecca. However, that still might happen since an estimated fifteen million Muslim immigrants, with more daily, have inundated Europe. As we’ve all seen on the news recently with bombings in London and Madrid and riots in France, these immigrants can be problematic, but they also could become a fifth column.


The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) is the kind of book that can get under your skin if you let it. I’m sure it’s accurate and factual and in comparison to other similar books I’ve read, specifically, about the plight of Muslim women, it backed what I had previously read. However, it seems to me, to be written with a conservative slant. It seems to highlight the worst of Islam, giving only perfunctory concessions to other views. The fact that Regnery Publishing, a well-known right wing publisher, published the book reinforces that feeling.

As for the author, Robert Spencer, he did a good job of presenting his case in a fluid, easily understandable and readable style. I personally believe what he wrote but many would feel it wasn’t balanced. He is obviously well versed on the subject of the book, providing the chapter/verse in the Qur’an, wherever he paraphrases a passage. He has a thorough knowledge of the subject and puts his views forward in a believable method. In addition, he provides many interesting sidebars where there are comparisons of the teachings of Muhammad and Jesus, quotes from historic figures, Books You’re Not Supposed to Read and Just Like Today segments.

Spencer makes several good points, such as saying our war on terror is incorrectly named, terror being a tactic. He says the enemy is the Jihadists and the war should be so named. I also got a kick out of Spencer’s term for outrageous, seventy-two virgins in heaven Muslim belief. He called it bordello paradise.

Frankly, if you are looking for some good news about the Muslims, this book is not for you, unless you consider learning more about their downside, good news. The bottom line, according to Spencer, is their can be no long-term peaceful co-existence with the Muslim society unless they modify the aggressive tenants of the Qur’an. Don’t hold your breath.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) is 231 pages and contains eighteen chapters. They are titled:

1] Muhammad: Prophet of War
2] The Qur’an: The Book of War
3] Islam: Religion of War
4] Islam: Religion of Intolerance
5] Islam Oppresses Women
6] Islamic Law: Lie, Steal, Kill
7] How Allah Killed Science
8] The Lure of Islamic Paradise
9] Islam – Spread by the Sword? You Bet.
10] Why the Crusades were called
11] The Crusades: Myth and Reality
12] What the Crusades Accomplished – And What They Didn’t
13] What if the Crusades Had Never Happened?
14] Islam and Christianity: Equivalent Traditions?
15] The Jihad Continues
16] “Islamophobia” and Today’s Ideological Jihad
17] Criticizing Islam May Be Hazardous to Your Health
18] The Crusade We Must Fight Today

November 3, 2007. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Atrocity, attack, Baghdad, Cheney, George W. Bush, Iran, Iraq, Islam, President Bush, Saudi Arabia, Sharia, Shiite, Sunni, Syria, Terrorism, women.


  1. Assissotom replied:

    This is one of the best sites I have ever found. Thanks!!! Very nice and informal. I enjoy being here.

  2. Shaheen Khan replied:

    Dee, you know that I’ve left Islam and I’m not Islam’s biggest fan, infact I’ve often severely criticised it, but could you be a little objective here?

    If you want to look at intolerance, I think you’ll find plenty of examples in Christianity, infact more examples, if not equal.Start by googling Vlassis Rassias, this guy’s written a series of books on the suppression of the Greek polytheistic faith, and the mass murders by Christians of followers of that faith. Even today, Greek neo pagans don’t have the right to practice their faith in Greece.Next check up on Edgardo Mortara, a little Jewish boy converted to Christianity and abducted from his family, as late as 1858. In pre Christian Phillipines, there was a sort of matriarchy, and female high priestesses called babaylan. The Spaniard Conquistadores wiped the faith off, often by force. Today, contraceptives are still banned in most of Phillipines(there are way too many contraceptives in Iran).

    A certain Deborah on your blog told me only Jesus can save me from Hell, if you remember. Well, Christian priests baptized newborn Native American babies, only to kill them later, believing they were sending them straight to Paradise.During the Spanish Inquisition, Catholic Spanish forcibly converted thousands of Hindus and even Jews in the Indian city of Goa to Christianity. Jews had lived in peace in India till them.

    I could go on and on and I understand how Buddhists, Jews, Hindus or Zoroastrians can call Islam intolerant, but for Catholics like Spencer to do so is the pot calling the kettle black. JMO.

  3. Shaheen Khan replied:

    Oh and about Spencer’s view that Muslims can’t get along with anyone else AT All, in Senegal which is 95% Muslim, the first President Leopold Sanghor was a Catholic. His mother was a Muslim, married to his Christian father.Her family didn’t honor kill her or disown her. Sanghor was President for 20 years, with no riots or assasination attempts. Italy too is 95% Catholic.
    Can you imagine a Muslim Prime Minister there? If I remember correctly, Catholics and Protestants also had a miserable co existence in Ireland till recently.

  4. Dee Dawning replied:

    You yourself have mentioned many of the things that are mentioned in this book. Let me post the first pargraph of my conclusion:

    The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) is the kind of book that can get under your skin if you let it. I’m sure it’s accurate and factual and in comparison to other similar books I’ve read, specifically, about the plight of Muslim women, it backed what I had previously read. However, it seems to me, to be written with a conservative slant. It seems to highlight the worst of Islam, giving only perfunctory concessions to other views. The fact that Regnery Publishing, a well-known right wing publisher, published the book, reinforces that feeling.

    We don’t compare the transgressions of one religion to another. I dislike Christianity as I dislike all organized religions, I hate televangelists who scam the poor and gullible. I dislike the smug evangelical condescension, but to compare this blog, which I didn’t hear you say was incorrect, with Christianity is like a man telling his wife that he only cheated twice but so & so cheated three times.

  5. Shaheen Khan replied:

    Actually, I was angry with Spencer’s book rather than with anything in your blog. Yes it is by a right wing author and I don’t think it will get under his target audience’s skin. They’ll be delighted that it only confirms what they glibly believe, that Christianity is about peace, peace and more peace, while Islam is only about violence.

    I’ve visited this guy’s site Jihad Watch and some of the comments are unbelievable.For eg, a guy who identified himself as Matt wrote, ” …The bottom line is that Christianity is about peaceful co existence and love with everybody around while Islam destroyed nation after nation.”

    Robert Spencer has built his career around such selective quotations from the Koran and Bible, by conveniently ignoring or downplaying the violent bits of the Bible, and presenting the most violent parts of the Koran.

    He attributes stuff to Islam which is region specific and happens among both Christians and Muslims. For instance female circumcision, something I’d never heard about until I read Spencer’s interview in Jihad Watch.No such thing happens in Iran, Turkey, Bangladesh or anywhere outside Africa.And its extremely common in the world’s oldest Christian nation Ethiopia, among both its Muslim and Christian populations. The Coptic Christians in Egypt refuse to baptize girls who have not been circumcised, while in Egypt’s Muslim neighbours Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco, it is non existent. 90% of Nigeria’s women have been circumcised, Nigeria is 45% Muslim, 45% Christian. Do the math.

    I agree that we don’t excuse the violence in one religion by comparing it with another, but that’s just what Spencer’s built his career on.Moreover, I would have had no problem had he just said that in the 20th and 21st centuries, Christianity has become so much more tolerant than Islam. This is an undeniable fact.Its also true that Mohammed was certainly more violent than Jesus.

    However, when he quotes scriptures, it becomes a bit more problematic. For instance, in Deuteronomy God tells you to kill your son, daughter or wife if they start worshipping another God.By contrast in Koran, there are these lines, “There is no compulsion in religion,” “To you your religion, to me mine” and, “He who wills let him believe and he who wills let him disbelieve”

    I could easily compare these lines and pick and choose selectively from these scriptures to “prove” like Spencer that Christianity is intrinsically more violent than Islam.

  6. Shaheen Khan replied:

    As a former Muslim, I can lose affection for Islam, but I’m not a former daughter of Muslim parents, former granddaughter of Islamic grandparents or former student of Islamic teachers. I dislike it when everybody is painted with the same brush.I know quite a lot of people who follow a very liberal and tolerant interpretation. Its natural to feel defensive about one’s culture in the face of such relentless and often hypocritical scrutiny, by guys like Spencer.

    I’ve read about CNN correspondent Christiane Amanpour who was born to an Iranian Muslim gather and a British Muslim mother. She and her sister were raised Christian in Iran, and report no problem with Iran’s Muslim majority. However, rather than such stories, all I hear are horror stories.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Trackback URI

%d bloggers like this: