Rating: 
Summary: Spencer illuminates and educates coolly and calmly
Review: Our educations, ALL of our educations, suffer from a narrow perspective and the pressures of whatever the prevailing political orthodoxy happens to be. This book explodes the cuddly ecumenical world view that is STILL in fashion that all monotheists are but different shades of the same color.
In assessing the nature of Islam William Gladstone put it best: "They [Muslims] were, upon the whole, from the black day when they first entered Europe, the one great anti-human specimen of humanity. Wherever they went, a broad line of blood marked the track behind them, and, as far as their dominion reached, civilization disappeared from view. They represented everywhere government by forces opposed to government by law." And this was said BEFORE the slaughter of 100's of thousands by the Turks in the TWENTIETH century.
The myth of the "moderate" Muslim is a diabolical politically correct canard forged on the anvil of "tolerance". And to the extent that we've accepted this monstrous invention we've allowed ourselves to become denuded and emasculated. That we still allow ANY Muslim to immigrate to this country is a testimony to our failure to understand the problem and a failure of will to solve this crisis.
Make no mistake, Islam is a gutter religion with the capacity to destroy civilization. William Durant in his "The Story of Civilization" succinctly stated, [Islam is] "probably the bloodiest story in history." He called it a "discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without and multiplying from within." The bitter lesson, Durant concluded, was that "eternal vigilance is the price of civilization. A nation must love peace, but keep its powder dry."
Indeed, man's grasp on civilization is tenuous. It takes but one generation to separate men from their past. And men cut adrift from the certitudes and accumulated wisdom of the generations that have gone before are highly susceptible to the centrifugal forces of chaos. This elaborate edifice that we can the modern world could easily fold in the face of a committed enemy particularly in light of the fact that by nearly all measurements the West has lost its will.
It would be impossible for this or any book to suffer from overstatement insofar as the pernicious designs of Islam are concerned. Islam, as Spencer accurately points out, is committed to our destruction. Books like this are necessary to overcome the intellectual ossification engendered by the current PC environment.
Rating: 
Summary: Wartime propaganda
Review: Our military industrial complex needs another enemy. It also needs to divert America's "public mind" from the weapons of mass destruction we spend $400 billion on, our history of invasions and overthrowing elected leaders, the waste of the Pentagon budget, the dirty deeds of the CIA, the robbing of resources the world over, etc, etc. Spencer is a skilled servant of America's masters of war. No doubt, people who make a living off of our war machine appreciate is endless deceipt.
Rating: 
Summary: Onward worried readers, finding out the truth
Review: Please look at the person to your left. Now look at the person to your right. And finally, please look in a mirror. All three of you have only three choices. You may convert to Islam, right now please. You may agree to live under the rule of Muslims, with proper infidel penalties. Or you can be killed. Conversion, dhimmitude, or death. Under Islamic Sharia law, the law of the Koran and the Hadiths, those are the only three choices allowed. You may not opt out. This is the central topic of Onward Muslim Soldiers, Robert Spencer's latest study of Islamic history and belief. The topic is jihad.Spencer's latest work is strong, albeit imperfect in many ways. This is a focused book on jihad, an often-misunderstood word, sometimes deliberately so. It goes to the central question of how well the Islamic world gets along with its neighbors. The verdict of history is grim. Jihad is, whatever else the apologists might say, generally accepted as a struggle against other human beings. There is a concept of greater (or higher) jihad and lesser jihad, with lesser being the warfare and greater being the internal personal struggle. Lately the greater jihad has been stressed by apologists trying to fend off suspicion and anger towards Islam from the West. But historically, it is the lesser jihad that is usually referred to in Muslim writings. Jihad refers to battle against unbelievers, a struggle by Dar al-Islam against Dar-ul-Harb (house of Islam, house of war). Under proper, Koranic theology, these two terms neatly partition the entire world. Westerners did not invent these terms, we learned them. Spencer goes into considerable detail over how, when, and why Muslims have interpreted these ideas over the centuries. The results are not universally bad. There are many Muslims throughout history and today who do not consider it their duty to wage war against unbelievers. But if you'd like to read many accounts of when they have, pick up Onward Muslim Soldiers. This leads me into some of the problems. Like Spencer's earlier Islam Unveiled, Onward Muslim Soldiers is highly anecdotal, even more so than the earlier work. Particularly in part one we get almost a listing of specific incidents in history (contemporary and older), speeches, and writings covering acts of unneighborliness. But the connecting narrative I found to be weak. It comes off sounding like Spencer is too eager to tell as many horror stories as possible in limited space. However many stories one collects, we're talking about a fourteen hundred year history of now close to one billion believers. A list of events is not sufficient to establish the thesis. Not that I dispute Spencer's main point, far from it. But as a book, this one suffers from a lack (although not total absence) of connecting material. It jumps too fast through topics, and this is really a startling problem considering how narrow the focus of the book is. There's really no new insight to be gained here, only new evidence. As an aside, I'll point out that Spencer includes the seemingly obligatory chapter ranting about Liberalism. Personally I think Liberalism is the natural enemy of Islam, but I'm getting tired of writing about this in every book review on Islam. Suffice to say, Spencer doesn't fail to go off on this subject towards the end. So while I doubt Spencer will change minds here, he can no doubt reinforce the convictions of people who have bothered to notice the problem. Spencer does point out that if we would just listen to what a great many Muslims, particular religious leaders, are saying then we might realize that there is some pretty serious animosity towards the West emanating from that part of the world. And it is based on religious conviction. I repeat, religious conviction. Islam, with its fundamental and built in concept of jihad, makes it at best very easy and at worst mandatory for Muslims to hate our civilization for being non-Islamic. The root problem is not poverty - if it was then we would expect some more global non-Islamic terrorism. It is not that Islam has been hijacked by frauds. Lacking any central authority, it is true that multiple interpretations of Islam are possible. But, as Spencer has pointed out, the writings and speeches of countless Islamists (a term Spencer avoids, but I'll use it here) over many decades of the Twentieth Century (and earlier ones too) show a consistent use of Islamic religious motivations for jihad (again, meaning warfare) against the West. Spencer's best line: "Khomeini, al-Banna, Qutb, Maududi, Azzam, and other Islamic leaders call on Muslims to subdue all people, by violence if necessary, to obey Allah; and they couch this call in terms that are entirely religious. It is condescending, ethnocentric, and ultimately baseless to insist that this religious motivation is really a cover for something else." (p. 262) Although, as I've pointed out, Spencer's lack of cohesion make it impossible to say in this book that this interpretation of jihad is universal, or even predominant, the problem clearly does exist in a sizeable portion of the world's Islamic community. And history has shown that Muslims have a hard time getting along with neighboring non-Islamic lands. It again boils down to the three choices. Conversion, submission, or death. Bury your head in the sand about this if you must, but don't expect everyone else to do the same. Jihad is real, and it's a genuine problem. And if you think it's not, I dare you to read even a few chapters here. You might learn something very important about our world.
Rating:
Summary: Koran - repulsive and abhorrant, Islam -unreformable?
Review: Probably the most truthful and "politically incorrect" argument on the evilness of Koran itself. Groundbreaking in boldly showing that the evil of Islamic terrorism we see today is neither new nor unusual in 1400 years of Islamic history but is firmly rooted in the brutal and repulsive life of its founder- Mohammad, and the nauseatingly abhorrant verses in the Koran. Because of Islam we have lost the beautiful old cultures of Egypt(coptic), Babylon, Syria, Byzantium(Christan and Jewish), Persia (Zoroastrian), Afghanistan (Buddhist), India, Malaysia, Indonesia( Hindu, Buddhist.)India has been struggling against this cancer for last 800 years and still continues to fight Islamic terror today despite serious obstacles put up by the west. Books like this are urgently needed to wake us all up and begin the fight to seriously reform Islam...if not eradicate it. I have a lot of Muslim friends and even the most moderate amongst them openly and secretly consider non-muslims as infidels, therefore inferior.
Rating:
Summary: Shattering Taboos on Jihad and Dhimmitude
Review: Robert Spencer's meticulous research and documentation, complemented by a lucid writing style, has yielded a remarkably informative work that transitions seamlessly between classical Islamic theology, jurisprudence, and sociopolitical history, and contemporary events, especially modern manifestations of jihad war ideology. Moreover, Spencer's analyses are devoid of politically correct, ahistorical dithering. This is apparent from the opening chapter (in the first of the books three main sections), and the illustrative example of the infamous grenade and small arms attack by American sergeant Hasan Akbar, an African-American convert to Islam, which killed two of his senior officers and wounded 15 others, in northern Kuwait on March 22, 2003. After reviewing statements by designated spokespersons (an Army chaplain and a Pentagon official) dismissing (reflexively) Islamic ideology as a potential motivating factor, and the predictable defense counsel and family attempts to portray religious and/or racial discrimination against Akbar as precipitating the arrest, Spencer cites sacred texts from the Qur'an and hadith (putative deeds and utterances of Muhammad as recorded by his pious followers) prohibiting Muslims from fighting their co-religionists.
The author's provocative analysis is supported by a succinct introduction to the unique Islamic institution of jihad (including jihad war), its central obligation to pious Muslims, and how jihad is linked inextricably to the corollary institution of "dhimmitude." He then makes further disquieting observations germane to contemporary jihad "campaigns" and the basic human rights of all non-Muslims living in societies whose legal codes are inspired either in full or part by the Shari'a (Islamic Holy Law). Subsequently, Spencer returns to the Akbar case, specifically, to review evidence of the funding and related ideological orientation of the mosque attended by Sergeant Akbar. Jihad was pursued century after century, because jihad, which means "to strive in the path of Allah," embodied an ideology and a jurisdiction. Both were formally conceived by Muslim jurisconsults and theologians from the 8th and 9th centuries onward, based on their interpretation of Qur'an verses and long chapters in the hadith. As Spenser notes, appropriately, the consensus on the nature of jihad from all four schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence (i.e., Maliki, Hanbali, Hanafi, and Shafi'i) is clear.
Spencer then reviews the historical implications of the Qur'an's injunction in verse 9:29:
"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of The Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, feel themselves subdued."
For example, al-Mawardi (d. 1058), a seminal Shafi'ite jurist during the Abbasid-Baghdadian Caliphate, elucidated the regulations pertaining to the lands and infidel (i.e., non-Muslim) populations subjugated by jihad. The vanquished non-Muslims were compelled to adhere to this pact ("dhimma"), which acknowledged their submission, or face the threat of having the jihad against them resumed. If the payment ceases, then the jihad resumes. This is the origin of the system of dhimmitude- a vast, uniquely Islamic institution of religious apartheid, implemented for over a millennium across three continents- Asia, Africa, and Europe- from the Indian subcontinent to Portugal, north through the Balkans, and south to The Sudan. The native infidel populations had to recognize Islamic ownership of their land, submit to Islamic law, and accept payment of the poll tax (jizya). Spencer provides this reasoned, sobering assessment of the modern predicament created by the living institutions of jihad and dhimmitude, which is consistently obfuscated by his timid or uninformed peers in modern Western intellectual circles:
"...the simple fact that jihad remains a vital part of Islamic theology is insufficiently appreciated in the West. In stark contrast to apologies for the Crusades issued by the Pope and various Protestant groups, no major Muslim group has ever repudiated the doctrines of jihad. The ideology of jihad, with all its assumptions about unbelievers' lack of human rights and dignity, is available today as a justification for anyone with the will and the means to bring it to life... The author segues from the Akbar case to a host of other chilling examples which illustrate the pervasive influence of jihad and dhimmitude in both the U.S. and European Muslim communities- primarily mosques expounding these institutions, but also intermediate school textbooks, and college student organizations (for e.g., chapters of the Muslim Student Association).
Spencer's carefully referenced, but concise, thoughtful discussions address a truly impressive array of issues critical to an informed understanding of international jihad conflicts and terrorism. Most importantly, he describes how seminal 20th century Muslim ideologues- the Shi'ite Ayatollah Khomeini, and four Sunnis - Hasan al Banna, Sayyid Qutb, Sayyid Abul A'la Maududi, and Abdullah Azzam - revitalized and implemented the classical Islamic institutions of jihad and dhimmitude. Since the 1930s, their teachings and actions have had a profound impact on every major jihad campaign across the globe (including, but not limited to Israel, India, Bangladesh, Iran, Sudan, Indonesia, former Yugoslavia, and Algeria). Osama bin Laden, who orchestrated the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center, was influenced deeply and directly by Abdullah Azzam, with whom he studied and fought alongside, in Afghanistan.
Sadly, as Robert Spencer demonstrates, dhimmitude is still ignored or obfuscated, and most Muslim (and many Western) intellectuals continue to justify the jihad concept as an inoffensive spiritual engagement with one's own evil instincts, or purely "defensive" combat for "justice." Let us hope the author's elegant, uncompromising analyses prompt intellectual and media elites in general, and the Muslim intelligentsia and media, in particular, to begin the long overdue process of a (self-) critical reflection on the uniquely Islamic institutions of jihad and dhimmitude. Only then can meaningful interfaith dialogue begin to facilitate sincere efforts at reconciliation between Muslim and non-Muslim societies and peoples.
Rating:
Summary: Explains the jihad imperative
Review: Robert Spencer's seminal study of Islamic fundamentalism is as valuable to scholars of Islam as it is accessible to the average untutored reader. He carefully reviews events of the last few years. But most critical, he ties the actions and comments of radical and moderate Muslims alike to sacred Islamic texts and jurists considered central by many if not all. That Spencer, a Melkite Christian and the grandson of dhimmis, has studied Islam for decades could hardly be in doubt. For his grasp and understanding Islamic texts and liturgy is truly breathtaking. His examination is not spiritual in nature, of course. Yet Spencer turns ably from al-Mawardi's Laws of Islamic Governance to verses of the Qu'ran to Ibn Khaldun's Muqaddimah: An Introduction to History without blinking. Always, he relates critical passages of these historical and sacred documents and texts to current events. I have read many histories and analyses of Islamic history in recent years, and say without reservation that Spencer's book is one of the most useful of the lot. For he explains, unlike virtually any other scholar, the religious lynchpins, or triggers, for much that is happening in our world. Policymakers especially should take heed, as Spencer zeros in on the persistent reality Western civilization cannot afford to ignore: the Islamic religious imperatives to jihad, or sacred war. Whether readers are just beginning to ask makes Islam tick, or advanced in their studies, Onward Muslim Soldiers offers salient and critical material not to be missed. --Alyssa A. Lappen
Rating:
Summary: Needed dose of truth ask the Eastern Christians
Review: Spencer provides a needed dose of truth to those still in denial after so many ugly acts of violence by the jihadis. Just recently I took a college course in science taught by a professor who was born in Jordan and was the faculty advisor for the Muslim Student Association. I was dismayed to find out that the MSA website contained articles arguing in favor of legalizing polygamy. My professor was very well-spoken and well-mannered and polite but he is serious about polygamy. Western liberals simply refuse to take Muslims at their word. Muslims believe in gender apartheid, the inferiority of women, stoning and amputations and a whole host of medieval ideas. They are serious about them and they are willing to spread Islam by any means necessary. They publish this in public places on a daily basis. Ask any person of the Eastern Orthodox faith about dealing with Muslims as neighbors, ask them about the Armenian slaughter that Turkey has never admitted, ask them about the destruction of Christian churches on Cyprus occurring after the 1974 invasion of the Turks In some ways, Spencer, merely collects what is publicly available and puts it all in one place.
Rating:
Summary: How Jihad Threatens America and the West
Review: Thank G-d Spencer avoided Middle East Studies Departments. Spencer whose degree is in Religious Studies approaches the problem of Islam from a religious angle, and tries to examine the theology of jihad on the Muslims' own terms. His book is blessedly free of academese and it is not only well-written but a well-organized look at how jihad threatens the West. (Contrary to what reviewer Seth Franzman thinks, Nigeria is neither part of America nor the West).
Daniel Pipes who is a professor of Mid East Studies (but a good guy nonetheless) writes on the book's cover, "To understand the ideological sources of the terrorist enemy, read Robert Spencer's succinct, knowledgeable, and important book, Onward Muslim Soldiers. His systematic survey of such vital topics as radical Islam's aspirations, its unlikely alliance with the far left, and the need to encourage a moderate Islamic alternative are all valuable. But Spencer's signal contribution is his focus on the 'global threat to the West' that so many Western analysts and policymakers persistently refuse to see: jihad, or sacred war for Islam. There is no more important topic for citizens to comprehend."
Anyone who reads both Daniel Pipes and Robert Spencer will understand both the politics (Pipes) and the theology (Spencer) of the jihad terrorists who threaten us all.
Rating:
Summary: Brings up an issue we all need to face
Review: The author says that some areas in the world are undergoing demographic changes. For example, the Netherlands may have a Muslim majority by the year 2040 (then again, it may not). Should that worry those of us who are Christians, Muslims, Jews, or Pagans? As well as those of us who are not?
Well, if we're going to live together in peace, I think it all sounds really good. The newcomers probably will contribute greatly to Holland. And those Dutch who convert will make their society more diverse. But what if the Muslims are led mostly by extremists? What if we get a society led by something more like the Mafia, or the Ku Klux Klan, or the Stalinists, or the National Socialists, or the Maoists, or simply the Taliban? Then I think we have less reason to be optimistic. And the author of this book agrees.
In the first part of this book, Spencer discusses Jihad now. He explains that dhimmitude is a direct challenge to the proposition that all people are created equal with unalienable rights. He points out that the Wahhabis, the majority in Saudi Arabia, are one of the most extreme of the Islamic sects, and that they routinely identify their enemies as "Jews and Christians." He gives examples of hatred taught to schoolchildren from Wahhabi texts, not just in Saudi Arabia, but right here in Muslim schools in the United States. Typical of the preaching is the claim that Wahhabi dead go to Paradise while Jewish dead go to Hell. Given the company each would have there, I suspect that if this is true, the Jews are getting the better deal.
I think a very revealing comment is a quote from two eleven-year old Arab girls. They were asked which they would prefer, to have peace and full rights for all Arab people or for the two of them to die as martyrs. Interestingly, they immediately chose martyrdom: peace and justice was not important to them, even on their terms.
The second part of the book deals with the history of Muslim Jihad. Here, Spencer exposes the myth that non-Muslims were treated well in Islamic lands. Some non-Muslims did indeed do well, but none had the rights of Muslims. And he also points out a very interesting statistic. Fifty years ago, Christians were 15% of the total population of the Middle East. They are now 2% of that population. And it is pressure from radical Islam that has caused this.
As Spencer says, "the problem of radical Islam is not a liberal or conservative issue. It is a human rights issue." But many people on the political Left seem to apologize for radical Islam. Why? The author gives the answer: it is because radical Islam is anti-American.
I think it is a big mistake for anyone who has any sympathy for liberalism to support reactionary terrorism, but it seems that many people strongly disagree with me about this. As for the author, he regards those who ally themselves with America's enemies as having chosen sides in a war we're in. I agree with him about this.
Well, what is to be done about the threat of radical Islam? Spencer comes up with three main suggestions: monitor mosques, control immigration, and encourage moderate Islam at home and abroad.
As a liberal, I'm nervous about monitoring mosques. But I do think that we need to have some way to give law-abiding and loyal Muslims a way to demonstrate that they are not the problem. Otherwise, I fear that all Muslims will be treated with suspicion here.
The author thinks that Muslim organizations in this country need to renounce a theology of jihad and dhimmitude. Once again, I think we need to find out which organizations are openly and explicitly willing to do this. And finally, Spencer warns us that we do not encourage moderate Islam by being "politically correct" and pretending that extremists are in fact moderate. The author concludes that those of us who love freedom need to oppose jihad.
I highly recommend this book to everyone.
Rating:
Summary: Required reading for Americans
Review: The book is so true. Most people do not understand the threat of militant Islam. It is not only the Israeli's they despise and want to kill; it is the US. Any American who does not read this book is effective signing their own death warrant.
|
