What is your opinion of author Robert Spencer's books?

[josie_L]

As further proof that those recognized as authorities on Islam are also bankrolled by Saudi money:

The “more strongly you are committed to your faith,” emerging church leader Brian McLaren stated at Georgetown University on November 21, 2013, the “more tolerant and compassionate you are.” McLaren’s equivalency among all faiths fit perfectly into the conference “Muslim-Christian Relations in the 21st Century: Challenges & Opportunities,” a day-long, one-sided presentation of Islam as a pacific faith unjustly maligned by Christians and others.

Presented by Georgetown’s Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding (ACMCU) on the occasion of its 20th anniversary, the conference has already produced considerable controversy. The keynote address by popular British religion writer Karen Armstrong, for example, unconvincingly argued that Al Qaeda’s September 11, 2001, attacks resulted from Muslim grievances inflicted by the West in general and the British Empire in particular. Outside of the conference’s estimated 100 attendees at Georgetown’s Copley Hall, Armstrong’s arguments have met with universal revulsion, if comments upon my previously published analysis are any indication (see here and here, for example).

A panel moderated by Islam scholar Natana J. DeLong-Bas, meanwhile, preceded Armstrong. As a moderator, DeLong-Bas did not have much too say, which was probably just as well, as research has revealed her to the unsuspecting at the conference and elsewhere as an Islamism apologist and 9/11 truther. Among other things, she has doubted the role of Osama bin Laden in 9/11 and has praised the “democracy” efforts of Hamas.

Armstrong and DeLong-Bas were perhaps predictable given the tone set at the conference’s morning introduction by ACMCU’s director, the frequent Islamism apologist and internationally renowned Islam scholar John Esposito. Along with the “Arab Spring” becoming “potentially the Arab Winter” and “Sunni-Shia sectarianism,” Armstrong’s fellow United Nations Alliance of Civilizations (UNAOC) High Level Group member Esposito identified the “rise of Islamophobia” as a global issue facing Islam. McLaren likewise during the conference’s final panel spoke of Islam substituting for Communism after the Cold War’s end had for many Americans “take[n] away their enemy” and identity “crutch.”

counterjihadreport.com/tag/karen-armstrong/

I love how the director of ACMCU, John Esposito (internationally renowned Islam scholar), states that the “rise of Islamophobia” is a global issue, because you know the Muslims are the most persecuted group there is, oh wait, that would be Christians, i.e., 80% of all those persecuted are Christian.

P.S. This is the same university of which I spoke of earlier, i.e., it’s Islamic Studies department is funded with Saudi money.

frontpagemag.com/2014/andrew-harrod/preaching-islamophobia-to-the-choir-at-saudi-funded-georgetown/

 

[josie_L]

Okay, one last thing I want to post, here’s the supposedly renowned scholars of Georgetown University talking about Robert Spencer:

Although Esposito dismissed Spencer as a scholar, he nonetheless sneered that he wrote “best-selling books” while discussing worries about Spencer’s popularity. Noting the influence of popular culture, Esposito complained that “Islamophobic websites score very, very high.” Varisco bemoaned that such websites outperformed his own Tabsir website and without irony cited a need for people like him to create “more books…that people can read.”

The “Vast Rightwing Conspiracy is better at” advocacy “than our lefty friends,” the audience member who had called Spencer a “crank” agreed. “Lots of money” also appeared as an advantage for “Islamophobic” groups to Esposito. Esposito did not say whether this money outweighed the $20 million Saudi namesake grant to ACMCU or George Soros funding and six-figure salaries at the likeminded Center for American Progress and Southern Poverty Law Center, respectively.

Amidst this uniform opposition to Spencer et al. from fewer than 20 people in the briefing room, one audience member sounded an independent note. Observing that he was the only black person in the room, the young man discussed how he did not see Spencer’s work as a “race issue” but rather as opposition to Islamic extremism. Because of this “my country is in ruins now” he said with respect to the Somali homeland of his Muslim father.

Varisco answered by attributing violence in Somalia and other majority-Muslim societies not to Islamic ideology but rather to Somalia’s “colonial experience,” pre-Arab Spring dictators, or Western countries “pumping weapons” into these countries. Another audience member spoke of Somalia’s “tribal roots.” “I don’t think you put blame on one individual,” Varisco meanwhile responded to the black man’s query about responsibility for Afghan violence following Terry Jones Koran burning. Absolving Muslim murderers and other criminals at least partly from their individual responsibility, Varisco analogized to an arsonist setting alight a carelessly tended house.

In all, Varisco’s briefing exposed much of modern academia’s shallowness. True to multicultural shibboleth, Varisco refused to identify any uniquely disturbing aspects of Islam and dismissed all past aversion towards this faith as prejudice. Varisco’s minimalist treatment of Spencer, meanwhile, accorded with an unwillingness to respect this lucidly insightful scholar. Rather, Varisco grouped Spencer with far more lightweight individuals like Chick and Richardson with whom Catholics like Spencer or his colleague Robert Muise of the American Freedom Law Center have little commonality. The expressed worries of Varisco, Esposito, and others, however, give hope that their efforts to silence their opposition will fail.

frontpagemag.com/2014/andrew-harrod/preaching-islamophobia-to-the-choir-at-saudi-funded-georgetown/

 

[GaryTaylor]

-CAF- Mind showing me where in the CAF mission statement they make a claim about being experts on Islam? I looked, but I can’t find it. I’m confused as to why you are assuming CAF has the ability to declare someone an expert or not.

Why do they need to make a expert claim. your the only one who requires it, and to which you yourself don’t fill your own requirements. Which is why you can’t find it.

They reviewed his book as have many other Catholics as linked as they actually read it in order to do so. Then they placed it on here to actually sell it which is an endorsement in itself. Then it made it to the best seller list a further endorsement Then its actually left to readers to review in which case a good deal of his books fair rather well. Then the OP came here to actually ask informed Catholics for their “opinion” Sorry you disagree with this in your non expert opinion on a book which you haven’t read and seem to have some unfound agenda and opinion of. Why is it that you are opposed to this endorsement by CAF and others related as mention.

Especially when you haven’t read a page of a book.,

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Why do they need to make a expert claim. your the only one who requires it, and to which you yourself don’t fill your own requirements. Which is why you can’t find it.

They reviewed his book as have many other Catholics as linked as they actually read it in order to do so. Then they placed it on here to actually sell it which is an endorsement in itself. Then it made it to the best seller list a further endorsement Then its actually left to readers to review in which case a good deal of his books fair rather well. Then the OP came here to actually ask informed Catholics for their “opinion” Sorry you disagree with this in your non expert opinion on a book which you haven’t read and seem to have some unfound agenda and opinion of. Why is it that you are opposed to this endorsement by CAF and others related as mention.

Especially when you haven’t read a page of a book.,

So other Catholic opinions count because they agree with Spencer and my opinion doesn’t count because I’m not an expert? Any other double standards you need to use to defend Spencer?

As for CAF, well I’m not the one trying to cite CAF as a reason for Spencer being an expert. If you wish to use CAF as a justification for Spencer being an expert, you need to show why CAF’s opinion on him matters.

Lastly, best seller = endorsement for it being true? I guess you believe Dan Brown’s rants. After all, his books are not only best sellers, they’ve had movies made out of them.

So much for you wanting an honest dialogue on the topic.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

If I can be of any help I think he is referring to post #23, wherein you wrote:

I don’t deny that I was the one who brought up the subject but only because many supposed scholars/experts who are accepted by the mainstream are bankrolled by Saudi money, moreover, it is not conspiracies of which I speak, here’s an article by Fox News but reprinted by “The Muslim Times”:

Here’s something else I think you’d be interested in reading, unfortunately I can’t copy and paste because it’s a google book, but it pertains to Saudi money affecting U.S. curriculum on Islamic studies:

books.google.ca/books?id=NXLHAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA66&lpg=PA66&dq=Is+karen+armstrong+funded+by+saudi+money&source=bl&ots=_DkoRhBry5&sig=Kyxg3zLjyVxA0T1JnHvpk4sqsJ8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=68MjU5HfIseBqwHs1YHwDg&ved=0CCwQ6AEwATgK#v=onepage&q=Is%20karen%20armstrong%20funded%20by%20saudi%20money&f=false

Please start reading from pg 65, “The Stealth Curriculum”.

P.S. Robert Spencer may not be accepted by the mainstream media or academia, but his credentials are far greater than others they have deemed experts in the field of religious studies, for example, Karen Armstrong (an ex-Catholic nun) who has a degree in Literature is lauded by the mainstream media and academia has an expert on comparative religious studies (she wrote a book on Islam that was so popular that the Saudi government sent copies of it after 911). She has been awarded honorary degrees, worked with the U.N., and received prizes for her works, all because she tows the line, i.e., she has liberal views and is politically correct, yet she has no credentials in the field whatsoever.

I’m not criticizing the idea that where the money comes from is important. It is. I’m commenting on Gary’s comment that I somehow tried to turn this into something all about money and Spencer just being in it for money.

The only criticism or comment I have on your concern about Saudi money linked to scholastic and non-scholastic works (I share the same concern) is that this concern works on both sides of the issue.

 

[GaryTaylor]

So other Catholic opinions count because they agree with Spencer and my opinion doesn’t count because I’m not an expert? Any other double standards you need to use to defend Spencer?:

Other Catholics READ the book, you didn’t, how in the world can you make an informed opinion. That’s the double standard. Its not if your opinion is relevant or if your entitled to it. Its others actually read the book they are endorsing in this case, or not endorsing.

As for CAF, well I’m not the one trying to cite CAF as a reason for Spencer being an expert. If you wish to use CAF as a justification for Spencer being an expert, you need to show why CAF’s opinion on him matters. :

Your the only one speaking on “expert” opinion. In which case its for you to reconcile your different understanding with CAF, not I. They read the book, and endorse it, why don’t you who didn’t read not ONE PAGE.

Lastly, best seller = endorsement for it being true? I guess you believe Dan Brown’s rants. After all, his books are not only best sellers, they’ve had movies made out of them.:

No-one said this but you, I mentioned it as part of the collective whole. Ripped out of context. Again you never read anything by him, nor are an expert. You proposed an opinion based on absolutely nothing but a bias opinion. Propose your credentials which cannot be verified.

So much for you wanting an honest dialogue on the topic.

There could be no honest dialogue with you, you didn’t read any books by him. I’m sorry you don’t see this. Perhaps you can read the book being reviewed at the next book review. Experts usually read what they are going to discuss…no?

 

[GaryTaylor]

I’m not criticizing the idea that where the money comes from is important. It is. I’m commenting on Gary’s comment that I somehow tried to turn this into something all about money and Spencer just being in it for money.

The only criticism or comment I have on your concern about Saudi money linked to scholastic and non-scholastic works (I share the same concern) is that this concern works on both sides of the issue.

Right your conspiracy theories on what you didn’t read. Perhaps a bit more reading then “wiki-pedia” next time?

Perhaps you can step outside your agenda and allow others to actually dialogue about they read and you didn’t?

I’m sorry this is the oddest conversation I’ve heard in a long time, oh wait since last time we talked and the day Boston was bombed, and you still haven’t read anything on Spencer since.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Thanks all, I’m out!

 

[josie_L]

I’m not criticizing the idea that where the money comes from is important. It is. I’m commenting on Gary’s comment that I somehow tried to turn this into something all about money and Spencer just being in it for money.

The only criticism or comment I have on your concern about Saudi money linked to scholastic and non-scholastic works (I share the same concern) is that this concern works on both sides of the issue.

Fair enough, old Catholic, but I’d like to point out something, with regards to Islamic material (which is the focus of my argument), you’d be hard-pressed to find texts that are not whitewashed with Saudi money, i.e., the most renowned scholars, i.e, Karen Armstrong (with no credentials whatsoever) and Joe Esposito are simply apologists. And I can honestly say that if mainstream publishing companies were not afraid of deviating from the politically correct liberal p.o.v., people like Robert Spencer would be able to attain the credibility, they, in my opinion, deserve. But that’s not going to happen because the mainstream media, along with academia, and major publishing companies are mostly left of center. This is not propaganda I’m selling you, i.e., the “right” has far less control of the culture and the left uses this to their advantage. The other thing is that many “experts” would refer to writers such as Robert Spencer as extreme right wingers, when all they are really expounding is LIBERTARIAN (democratic) views.

I do not necessarily always follow the “experts”, but I understand the need to refer to someone with credentials, just be careful who the world at large refers to as an “expert”, because they are not always such.

P.S. Do a search on Amazon.com of Robert Reilly’s book “The Closing Of the Muslim Mind”, you’ll be pleasantly surprised, I think!

 

[Dave_Noonan]

So I’ve been reading Not Peace, But a Sword on my Kindle after seeing it advertised here on Catholic Answers. For anyone who is familiar with his works, what do you think of them? He seems to have done extensive research on Islam, but his words seemingly resonate with such profound bias and his claims are so clear-cut that I find myself naturally suspicious of the accuracy and reasonableness of what he claims. What do you think?

He has zero credentials in Islamic studies as far as I know. If even the ADL has gone out of its way to condemn his work, that pretty damning:

archive.adl.org/nr/exeres/823f2236-e96a-461e-b182-d350f31186a7,0b1623ca-d5a4-465d-a369-df6e8679cd9e,frameless.html

Spencer is also an Objectivist, which should be more than enough to disqualify him from being a spokesperson for a Christian point of view. Of course, he’s entitled to ascribe to any philosophy he wants, but I don’t think Christians should be promoting him or his work.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Its a resort to character assassination, which is to resort to an agenda, which completely ignores the context of the work discussed.

I guess by the above post the experts rule over the Catholics and Evangelicals also, because

wnd.com/2013/04/evangelicals-could-be-put-on-watch-list-denied-guns/

We should also abolish Chesterton and a host of others. Muhammed had “no education” I guess we could cut to the chase right there. Abolished, no “expert” qualified to speak.

One word…“ABSURD”

 

[1Tim215Mommy]

So I’ve been reading Not Peace, But a Sword on my Kindle after seeing it advertised here on Catholic Answers. For anyone who is familiar with his works, what do you think of them? He seems to have done extensive research on Islam, but his words seemingly resonate with such profound bias and his claims are so clear-cut that I find myself naturally suspicious of the accuracy and reasonableness of what he claims. What do you think?

I consider him in the same boat as James Lukodus (please forgive the misspelling, the books I have of his literally just got donated earlier today). These authors write with such extraordinarly strong bias and in such an inflammatory manner as to render the tiny bit of accurate information they many have obtained as totally and utterly useless in the manner they convey it. These authors only hurts relations and understandings between the religions/cultures. The OP asked for opinions & this is mine.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Fair enough, old Catholic, but I’d like to point out something, with regards to Islamic material (which is the focus of my argument), you’d be hard-pressed to find texts that are not whitewashed with Saudi money, i.e., the most renowned scholars, i.e, Karen Armstrong (with no credentials whatsoever) and Joe Esposito are simply apologists. And I can honestly say that if mainstream publishing companies were not afraid of deviating from the politically correct liberal p.o.v., people like Robert Spencer would be able to attain the credibility, they, in my opinion, deserve. But that’s not going to happen because the mainstream media, along with academia, and major publishing companies are mostly left of center. This is not propaganda I’m selling you, i.e., the “right” has far less control of the culture and the left uses this to their advantage. The other thing is that many “experts” would refer to writers such as Robert Spencer as extreme right wingers, when all they are really expounding is LIBERTARIAN (democratic) views.

I do not necessarily always follow the “experts”, but I understand the need to refer to someone with credentials, just be careful who the world at large refers to as an “expert”, because they are not always such.

P.S. Do a search on Amazon.com of Robert Reilly’s book “The Closing Of the Muslim Mind”, you’ll be pleasantly surprised, I think!

First, I know you aren’t trying to sell me propaganda. Propaganda would be that Spencer isn’t taken as an expert on Islam by Islamic scholars because there is a conspiracy after Spencer because he is telling the “truth” about Islam. Citing the need for caution due to Saudi money linkages to scholars specializing on Islam and presenting it as all “sunshine and roses” isn’t propaganda. It’s good advice.

Second, the argument about left of center publishing companies being the majority and hence his use of publishers focused on conservative politics really only works if a)we believe there is a conspiracy between left of center politics and Islam to such a degree that any work critical of Islam is pretty much black listed and b)the only alternative he has is politically focused publishers. Given the results I found when I googled- catholic publishing companies I don’t think not being able to find one is a valid reason for using publishers who focus on politics (unless Spencer is claiming those works published by these companies were on Islamic politics).

Lastly, if these experts are doing anything other than critiquing the scholarly merits of his work and/or his findings, than they are stepping out of bounds. Labeling him as an “extreme right winger” could be true (given what I know about him I would say that Mr. Spencer is politically and socially conservative), but it has no bearing on his works. The only bearing that his politics would have would be if the experts you mentioned cited his politics as influencing his work (and here there is still no need for name calling).

Response to PS- I’ll look into Mr. Reilly.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Its a resort to character assassination, which is to resort to an agenda, which completely ignores the context of the work discussed.

I guess by the above post the experts rule over the Catholics and Evangelicals also, because

wnd.com/2013/04/evangelicals-could-be-put-on-watch-list-denied-guns/

We should also abolish Chesterton and a host of others. Muhammed had “no education” I guess we could cut to the chase right there. Abolished, no “expert” qualified to speak.

One word…“ABSURD”

Absurd would be not being able to defend Spencer’s lack of qualifications to be considered an expert on Islam and therefore adopting the argument you present above.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Other Catholics READ the book, you didn’t, how in the world can you make an informed opinion.

I haven’t read Mr. Dawkins either. Funny how you and pretty much everyone else on this thread seem not to be too upset that I don’t consider him an expert on Christianity. But, I’m sure a double standard isn’t the reason you haven’t so vigorously defended Mr. Dawkins as you have Mr. Spencer.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Absurd would be not being able to defend Spencer’s lack of qualifications to be considered an expert on Islam and therefore adopting the argument you present above.

You are the only one expecting such expertise and to boot “you” want to decide what is in fact an expert regardless what is provided for you . I’m sorry you don’t see the silliness of your argument which your confined to. Its precisely why you have no response for Chesterton or Mohammed. In fact your only response to any question is to revert to your own paradigm of what “you” believe an expert should in fact be.

You’ll have to prove Mohammed is an expert. Sorry, your argument fell sloppy dead.

Mohammed. start there. By your own admission, NO-ONE should pay not one glance of attention to Mohammed. In which case we wouldn’t be entertaining this conversation.

Astonishing as it is you see nothing wrong with weighing in on what you do not know as you admit not reading any book of his. Rather a difficult position as a “opinion” suggested by the OP isn’t even possible.

I’m sorry I see no sense in going on. Have a great day. I’ve come to conclusion you are not qualified to make an evaluation on expert in this situation. You have no verified credentials, nor have you read the work in question.

Your motives in this case are questionable to say the least.

Again God Bless, have a inspired holy season!

Peace

 

[JackyB]

I haven’t read any Robert Spencer books but I most certainly will now. Once I have I hope to be able to contribute to this discussion, until then I don’t feel qualified to argue either way.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

You are the only one expecting such expertise and to boot “you” want to decide what is in fact an expert regardless what is provided for you . I’m sorry you don’t see the silliness of your argument which your confined to. Its precisely why you have no response for Chesterton or Mohammed. In fact your only response to any question is to revert to your own paradigm of what “you” believe an expert should in fact be.

You’ll have to prove Mohammed is an expert. Sorry, your argument fell sloppy dead.

Mohammed. start there. By your own admission, NO-ONE should pay not one glance of attention to Mohammed. In which case we wouldn’t be entertaining this conversation.

Astonishing as it is you see nothing wrong with weighing in on what you do not know as you admit not reading any book of his. Rather a difficult position as a “opinion” suggested by the OP isn’t even possible.

I’m sorry I see no sense in going on. Have a great day. I’ve come to conclusion you are not qualified to make an evaluation on expert in this situation. You have no verified credentials, nor have you read the work in question.

Your motives in this case are questionable to say the least.

Again God Bless, have a inspired holy season!

Peace

In other words, not only can you not defend Spencer’s lack of credentials, you can’t defend the fact you seem to have no issue with my opinion of Mr. Dawkins not being an expert on Christianity. Rather funny that of the two individuals I compared, Mr. Spencer and Mr. Dawkins, the only one you seem to be miffed about not being called an expert on the field he claims to be one is the one you happen to agree with.

 

[johnnyc176]

I haven’t read any Robert Spencer books but I most certainly will now. Once I have I hope to be able to contribute to this discussion, until then I don’t feel qualified to argue either way.

I have not read any either but after hearing him talk on CAL and Al Kresta I plan to read his books also. Here is a list of his shows on CAL that you can download…

catholic.com/radio/shows/browse/all/all/Robert%20Spencer/all

 

[Tiber2001]

The fact that former Muslims say his work is accurate impresses me. I don’t trust Muslim publications such as the Muslim Sunrise because I’m suspicious of them being fine with lying so as to “reconcile”. Here is a link to a Muslim who explains when it is okay to lie: muslim-responses.com/Islam_on_Lying/