Important contribution to the debate...
I arrived at this book having recently decided to prove to myself that Islam was indeed the religion of peace, as some were using it to justify extreme and indiscriminate violence. Boy did I fail in that quest. I have given this book (kindle version) five stars after reading it twice and making reference to it over the last two months or so. I do not necessarily agree with everything contained in it, but there is not enough disagreement to warrant docking a star or even a fraction of one, because I regard the book as a very important contribution to the increasing amount of literature dealing with this important subject. It is not in my opinion particularly academic or learned and this is one of it’s main strengths, it is written in a straightforward and uncompromising manner, is based on the work of respected Islamic scholars and other similarly respected sources, and amply referenced as such. I really appreciate that. So where have I disagreed or felt uncomfortable with parts of the book? These are minor but I feel it is worthwhile mentioning them. The authors state that all it takes is five minutes to uncover the truth about Islam. True it takes about that time to get very concerned but it takes more than that to get a proper grasp of the problem but I find it is now essential to do so and I for one will not stop here. I just cannot contemplate leaving my children or grandchildren or my country to deal with this because I did nothing. I found the part dealing with the early life of Mohammed a bit unsatisfactory and I had the feeling that there was not enough detail to justify the authors position. I turned to Harry Richardson’s excellent (and cheap) book “The Story of Mohammed Islam Unveiled” for the corroboration I needed. The authors assert that the change in the outlook of the West (for lack of a better word) came after 11/9/2001 with Bush. In fact I believe it was more like in 1989 with the abject failure to deal with demonstrations in Britain in support of the fatwa calling for the death of the author Salman Rushdie. Considering what is regarded as hate speech and crimes now, we really do have a sickness in our society. I personally do not like comparing biblical words, as they appear then with their usage now, particularly given the post-modern way of changing the meaning of words so that they fall under hate legislation and free speech and can therefore be attacked. So I feel the word terror as used then is not exactly synonymous with modern day usage. Certainly the sight of 10,000 sword wielding advancing savages would be enough to instil it in me. However I also think Mohammed would have approved. To compare suicide bombers to Kamikaze pilots to me is just wrong and an insult to the latter. The Japanese military disgraced themselves by their treatment of prisoners but the same cannot be said of their soldiers in battle. These pilots were soldiers in uniform attacking well defended military targets only. I have incidentally very little interest in military matters and I am sure there were other atrocities as in all wars. The question of why our elites, politicians etc., are in apparent denial has not been answered in this book. This is fair enough as it did not set out to do so, but it is a question that it is imperative to address NOW. It cannot be mere ignorance, and it cannot be mere denial for why should they unless they are all rabbits caught in the headlights? And why all at once? Why have the vast majority of our “leaders” decided not only to apparently ignore the perils of Islam but actively endorse it and pursue the critics of it? To me it is part of a general trend to devalue democracy and free speech both from above and within but I really don’t understand the mechanisms. This book should take it’s place alongside others in order to gain a better perspective on the whole issue. I would recommend the following as a start. Mick Hume “Trigger Warning: …………...” “Revolting! ………...” J P Tate “Progressing toward the edge…………...” Peter Townsend “Nothing to do with Islam?………...” The associated website is very useful as it allows the user to access the Koran and the hadiths etc., quickly and offers several alternative translations to the Pickthall one used in the book. The most poignant part of the book for me came when I followed up reference 281 which almost seemed casually dropped into the book. This refers to a Muslim scholar Mahmoud Muhammed Taha who was executed (of course) for apostasy for proposing modernising of the Koran. Google him and use your imagination to see how different the world could have been had his proposals been accepted. Instead it was decided that the violent parts of the Koran had to remain as is. So, why? https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/customer-reviews/RRBE3KC4DEBH6/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0995584907
http://mohammeds-koran.com/book-reviews/importanat-contribution-to-the-debate
http://mohammeds-koran.com/@@site-logo/Jihad_Sword_White_Background.png
Important contribution to the debate...
I arrived at this book having recently decided to prove to myself that Islam was indeed the religion of peace, as some were using it to justify extreme and indiscriminate violence. Boy did I fail in that quest. I have given this book (kindle version) five stars after reading it twice and making reference to it over the last two months or so. I do not necessarily agree with everything contained in it, but there is not enough disagreement to warrant docking a star or even a fraction of one, because I regard the book as a very important contribution to the increasing amount of literature dealing with this important subject. It is not in my opinion particularly academic or learned and this is one of it’s main strengths, it is written in a straightforward and uncompromising manner, is based on the work of respected Islamic scholars and other similarly respected sources, and amply referenced as such. I really appreciate that. So where have I disagreed or felt uncomfortable with parts of the book? These are minor but I feel it is worthwhile mentioning them. The authors state that all it takes is five minutes to uncover the truth about Islam. True it takes about that time to get very concerned but it takes more than that to get a proper grasp of the problem but I find it is now essential to do so and I for one will not stop here. I just cannot contemplate leaving my children or grandchildren or my country to deal with this because I did nothing. I found the part dealing with the early life of Mohammed a bit unsatisfactory and I had the feeling that there was not enough detail to justify the authors position. I turned to Harry Richardson’s excellent (and cheap) book “The Story of Mohammed Islam Unveiled” for the corroboration I needed. The authors assert that the change in the outlook of the West (for lack of a better word) came after 11/9/2001 with Bush. In fact I believe it was more like in 1989 with the abject failure to deal with demonstrations in Britain in support of the fatwa calling for the death of the author Salman Rushdie. Considering what is regarded as hate speech and crimes now, we really do have a sickness in our society. I personally do not like comparing biblical words, as they appear then with their usage now, particularly given the post-modern way of changing the meaning of words so that they fall under hate legislation and free speech and can therefore be attacked. So I feel the word terror as used then is not exactly synonymous with modern day usage. Certainly the sight of 10,000 sword wielding advancing savages would be enough to instil it in me. However I also think Mohammed would have approved. To compare suicide bombers to Kamikaze pilots to me is just wrong and an insult to the latter. The Japanese military disgraced themselves by their treatment of prisoners but the same cannot be said of their soldiers in battle. These pilots were soldiers in uniform attacking well defended military targets only. I have incidentally very little interest in military matters and I am sure there were other atrocities as in all wars. The question of why our elites, politicians etc., are in apparent denial has not been answered in this book. This is fair enough as it did not set out to do so, but it is a question that it is imperative to address NOW. It cannot be mere ignorance, and it cannot be mere denial for why should they unless they are all rabbits caught in the headlights? And why all at once? Why have the vast majority of our “leaders” decided not only to apparently ignore the perils of Islam but actively endorse it and pursue the critics of it? To me it is part of a general trend to devalue democracy and free speech both from above and within but I really don’t understand the mechanisms. This book should take it’s place alongside others in order to gain a better perspective on the whole issue. I would recommend the following as a start. Mick Hume “Trigger Warning: …………...” “Revolting! ………...” J P Tate “Progressing toward the edge…………...” Peter Townsend “Nothing to do with Islam?………...” The associated website is very useful as it allows the user to access the Koran and the hadiths etc., quickly and offers several alternative translations to the Pickthall one used in the book. The most poignant part of the book for me came when I followed up reference 281 which almost seemed casually dropped into the book. This refers to a Muslim scholar Mahmoud Muhammed Taha who was executed (of course) for apostasy for proposing modernising of the Koran. Google him and use your imagination to see how different the world could have been had his proposals been accepted. Instead it was decided that the violent parts of the Koran had to remain as is. So, why? https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/customer-reviews/RRBE3KC4DEBH6/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0995584907
