"Execution of a Moroccan Jewess" is a recreation of the actual public execution, in Tangier in the 1830s, of 17-year-old Sol Hachuel, who was falsely accused of converting to, and then renouncing, Islam. In an introductory note on the painting and on the heartbreaking tale, Bostom asserts that Sol's cruel fate was shared by countless Jews over more than a dozen centuries, wherever Muslims ruled.

The Legacy of Islamic Anti-Semitism calls to mind the work of Bat Yeor, who over the past 20 years has practically single-handedly forced recognition of the oppression inherent in what she calls dhimmitude - the institution of inferiority, humiliation and obedience that Muslims demand of non-Muslims under their control.

The book basically is formation of what west want to see and be happy about it. There is no difference than the author of the book and the Denmark cartoonist who is making jokes about Islam.

Unfortunately west perspective is to see , read , write and act on the things they feel comfortable with. Nothing more or nothing less. A crapy book.

Some people hate this book, some love it. I like it alot and here is why: it explains the Jiahd as explained by the traditions of Islam, using it's own stated rules and texts. It presents the writtings to the reader of the Qur'an and Haddith and explains why and how the Jihadists of old and new do what they do and how they justify it. Unlike the apologetics on TV this isnt a smokescreen, it uses the actual sources as refferences and it is current up to the present. Not only does the author use the source materials ranging as far back as the birth of Islam, but it sues speeches from today's exponents in the lands of Dar Al Islam. if you are interested in knowing where the Jiahd comes from then this is necessary reading. This should be on the news given todays climate as it sheds alot of lioght on a for some reason taboo subject.

AN EXCELLENT WORK THAT MUST BE READ BY HISTORIANS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CHRISTIANS AND MUSLIMS.

I have no intention of reading this cover to cover, as this is quite a tome. The idea that "jihad" is simply a spiritual "striving" seemed like whitewash, and this confirms it. Plenty of energy has gone into diving in the medieval records, and other periods, through centuries of Islamic jurisprudence and commentary in fact. I cannot, however, countenance the reliance upon fanatical personalities like Khomeini and Qutb. There's a large burden of proof that these are representative of mainstream Islamic opinion, I think. Then again I have not done the work Bostom has. The final judgment needs to wait.

I have no intention of reading this cover to cover, as this is quite a tome. The idea that "jihad" is simply a spiritual "striving" seemed like whitewash, and this confirms it. Plenty of energy has gone into diving in the medieval records, and other periods, through centuries of Islamic jurisprudence and commentary in fact. I cannot, however, countenance the reliance upon fanatical personalities like Khomeini and Qutb. There's a large burden of proof that these are representative of mainstream Islamic opinion, I think. Then again I have not done the work Bostom has. The final judgment needs to wait.

This is a stupendous, monumental effort that chronicles the horrors perpetrated on nearly the whole world because of the the intolerance preached by Islam.

The reader gets a convincing picture that Islamic fundamentalism is a problem because the fundamentals of Islam are a problem. There is no solution to this problem except by educating the muslim mind, which could take several centuries.

It is very unfortunate that Muslims believe that-or at least have to pretend to believe-the numerous contradictions and the exortions to violence that are contained in the Koran are the actual words of God. The God of the Koran is a very jealous God like the God of the old testament. Both ignorance and fear of punishment keeps muslims in obedience to their mullahs and rulers even to this day. We cannot therefore be hopeful that Islam will ever let muslims live in peace with non muslims.

I would also recommend Arun Shourie's book " The World of Fatwas" to those who liked Bostom's compilation. Shourie's book shows how Muslims to this day ask their scholars (ignorant mullahs in reality) for answers and guidance on mundane matters and how banal the guidance they get is. Shourie's book also extensively deals with the cruelty that muslims inflict on their divorced women.For instance, a man can divocrce a woman merely by repeating thrice the words " I divorce thee". If he regrets his decision and wishes to remarry his former wife he cannot do so until his ex-wife first marries some one else, consummates that marriage, and is then divorced by her new husband.

Please read this book. It will accurately fill you in on Islamic attitude towards non muslims from its origin till the present day

Dr. Bostom's book "The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims" is clearly not for the simple minded and faint hearted readers of this world. Of the countless books I have read on Islam and the art of Jihad perpetrated by Muslim's since the birth of Muhammad, Dr. Bostom's books ranks number one in actual scholarly research, facts documented, and the utilization of both Muslim and non-Muslim historical text.
All aspects of Jihad are discussed from every prospective that includes sources from the Muslims that conquered non-Muslim lands through the sword, and from the people that survived the bloody conquests to write about it. Readers will also be surprised to read many authentic writings from scholarly Hindu, Christians, Greeks, Zoroastrian and numerous other civilizations that were enslaved by the Muslim invaders.

Nothing escapes Dr. Bostom in this book and clearly anyone looking for a wealth of information regarding life under Islamic Sharia Law needs to have this book on their book shelve as an endless source or reference that even the most scholarly Muslim can't refute.
My only criticism concerning this book is that the print is small and at times, Dr. Bostom has so many sources in the book, at times, you lose the sense of `flow' in the book.
This isn't a book you read from cover to cover considering its length and depth, but, this is most certainly a book all serious minded people intent on understanding Islam have to read if they really want to understand the history and factual evidence of Jihad.

I have been following the writing of Andrew Bostom long before I have the honor of meeting him. His articles and writings are unique as they not only give facts, they are footnoted, and backed up with reasons and statements to prove the points. Regardless of your views on Islamic Holy War, you cannot read this book and not understand the situation we are facing and the fate of Dhimmitude and Sharia law if this goes under the radar of being PC. We must understand, we can lose not only Israel but the USA if we do not fight the enemy within. Great Book, Great Reading, and a must have.

This is an excellent resource to study about the violence that is inherent to Islam.

Islamic terrorism has been around right from the time of the `prophet' Mohammed. In fact if you study the life and deeds of Mohammed, you will realize that he is the first Islamic terrorist. All the actions and deeds of all the tyrants listed in this book, and those of today's terrorists like Al Zarqawi, Bin Laden or the Taliban, mirrors the life and deeds of Mohammed.

Here are a few of the atrocities committed by Mohammed. They give a feeling of Déjà vu

1) Massacre of unarmed merchants during sacred month
Date: Late January(Rejeb), 623 A.D.
Place: Nakhla
Victims: 4 Merchants from Quraysh tribe of Mecca, the Tribe to which Mohammed himself belonged

Four UNARMED merchants were traveling to Mecca to sell their goods consisting of raisins, honey and animal skins. It was the holy month of Rejeb which was considered sacred for trade in Arabia. It was a point of honor that any form of warfare or violence was strictly forbidden in this month. Mohammed's gang attacked the helpless men from behind and stabbed two of them to death. They plundered all the goods as booty and Mohammed got one fifths of the share.

This shows the utter lack of morals or scruples on Mohammed's part. The Prophet of Islam did not possess a shred of pity or kindness, or the slightest sense of justice. He cold-bloodedly murdered two innocent people who had never done him any harm and did not even know him! All this was done in a month that the Prophet himself declared was a sacred month in which no warfare should take place. Mohammed was obviously motivated by nothing but hatred and greed.

2) Slaughter of Meccans who came to defend their caravans
Date: March (Ramadan) 17, 623 A.D
Place: The well of Badr
Victims: 70 merchants from Quraysh Tribe of Mecca, The Quraysh army which came to defend them

The merchandise being carried by this caravan was worth more than 50,000 Gold Dinars. Mohammed ganged up all the criminals of Medina and set out to raid the caravan with 300 men. The Meccans got word of the raid and sent out an army to protect the caravan. Throughout the entire battle Mohammad cowered in a hut which his men made for him. There he cried and prayed with feverish anxiety. At one point he came out of the hut and threw pebbles in the enemy's direction, screaming "Let evil look on your faces!" and "By him who holds my soul in his hands, anyone who fights for me today will go to paradise!" The Muslims killed over two hundred and took seventy prisoners. All seventy of the prisoners were ransomed, and any prisoner who did not fetch a ransom had his head chopped off.

Mohammed was gratified at the sight of his murdered victims. After the battle, he sent his followers to look for the corpse of Abu Jahal, one of the Meccans who had criticized him openly. When his corpse was found,they cut off the head and threw it down at Mohammed's feet. The "Apostle of peace" cried out in delirious joy, "Rejoice! Here lies the head of the enemy of Allah! Praise Allah, for there is no other but he!" The Prophet then ordered a great pit to be dug for the bodies of the innocents to be dumped. The Muslims then proceeded to hack the corpses limbs into pieces. As the bloodied mass of bodies was being thrown into the pit, a feverishly excited Mohammed shrieked, " O People of the Pit, have you found that what Allah threatened is true now? For I have found that what my Lord promised was true! Rejoice All Muslims!" One of the prisoners taken was the defiant Al Nadr Ibn al Harith, who had earlier taken Muhammad's challenge of telling better stories than him. Muhammad ordered Ali to strike off Nadr's head in his presence, so he could watch and exult in the pleasure of beheading the man who had insulted him. Another prisoner Uqba ibn Abi Muait was decapitated in front of the Prophet. Before being killed the prisoner cried out pitifully "O Prophet, who will look after my children if I should die?" The "Great Prophet of the Religion of Peace" coldly spat out "Hellfire", as the blade came down and spattered his clothes with Uqba's blood.

3) Assassination of poets who criticized Mohammed's murderous ways
Date: Late March-April, 623 A.D
Place: Medinah
Victims: Two of the most famous poets of Medinah, who had the courage to criticize the murderous actions of Mohammed and his gang

After the battle of Badr, the people of Medinah were horrified that they had given refuge to such a blatant criminal and his followers in their city. Many began protesting the presence of such violent and murderous people in their city. In a free society like Pre-Islamic Arabia, the poets acted as society's conscience and were free to criticize, satirize and examine the actions of people. The two most famous poets of this kind were Abu 'Afak; an extremely old and respected poet and Asma bint Marwan; a young mother with the gift of superb verse.

Muhammad was enraged at their criticism. When he heard the verses composed by Asma Bint Marwan he was infuriated and screamed aloud, "Will no one rid me of this daughter of Marwan!" That very night a gang of Muslims set out to do the dirty deed. They broke into the poets' house. She was lying in in her bedroom suckling her newborn child, while her other small children slept nearby. The Muslims tore the newborn infant off her breast and hacked it to pieces before her very eyes. They then made her watch the murder of all four of her children, before raping and then stabbing her repeatedly to death. After the murder when the Muslims went to inform the Prophet, he said "You have done a service to Allah and his Messenger, her life was not worth even two goats!"

A month later the distinguished and highly respected Abu Afak, who was over a hundred years old and renowned for his sense of fairness, was killed brutally in the same manner as he slept. Once again the Prophet had commented that morning "Who will avenge me on this scoundrel!"

This shows us exactly how much the tolerant and peace loving Prophet respected life. Muslims claim that Mohammed was extremely gentle and loved children. Indeed the horrifying way he had Asma Bint Marwan's five infants slaughtered certainly attests to this "loving" side of the Prophet.

4) The Siege of the Banu Qaynuqa
Date: April, 623 A.D
Place: Medinah
Victims: The Jewish Tribe of Banu Qaynuqa

In order to get full control of Medinah, Mohammed needed to get rid of all his opponents. The strongest of these opponents was Abdallah Ibn Ubayy, a powerful chief who was allied with the Jewish Tribe of Banu Qaynuqa. This tribe was also the weakest, because they were made up of craftsmen, in particular goldsmiths. By attacking them, Mohammed knew he could plunder a huge amount of wealth and weaken Ibn Ubayy. Mohammed needed an excuse to attack them so he made a girl married to one of his followers, pretend that she had been teased by the Jews. The Muslims blockaded the fort of the Banu Qaynuqa for fifteen days until the starving Jews surrendered. Immediately, the Prophet was ready to kill them all, but Ibn Ubayy seized hold of Mohammed and protested. Mohammed's face became black with rage as he shouted "Let go of me", but Ibn Ubayy was adamant and shouted back "No, by God, I will not let you go until you deal kindly with my allies. 400 men without armour and 300 with, who have always supported me against enemies. And you want to slay them all in one morning! By God, If I were in your place I would fear a reversal of fortune"

At this threat, the cowardly Mohammed turned pale, as he realized that all the people of Medinah were against him. He hit Ibn Ubayy on the face and ordered that the Jews be kicked out of their own homes. All their property was seized and looted, many of the prettiest women were taken as prisoners to become sex-slaves. Mohammed kept one-fifths of the enormous booty for himself. This is the way he repaid the kindness of the Jews of Medina, who had given him shelter and a refuge, when Mohammed had run away from Mecca in fear.

The revelations in the Eighth Sura of the Koran were clearly in reference to the Banu Qaynuqa and anyone who opposed the Muslims.

Note to expected Muslim commenters; please explain Muhammad's actions after the battle of Badr before adding your opinions.

This is an excellent resource to study about the violence that is inherent to Islam.

Islamic terrorism has been around right from the time of the `prophet' Mohammed. In fact if you study the life and deeds of Mohammed, you will realize that he is the first Islamic terrorist. All the actions and deeds of all the tyrants listed in this book, and those of today's terrorists like Al Zarqawi, Bin Laden or the Taliban, mirrors the life and deeds of Mohammed.

Here are a few of the atrocities committed by Mohammed. They give a feeling of Déjà vu

1) Massacre of unarmed merchants during sacred month
Date: Late January(Rejeb), 623 A.D.
Place: Nakhla
Victims: 4 Merchants from Quraysh tribe of Mecca, the Tribe to which Mohammed himself belonged

Four UNARMED merchants were traveling to Mecca to sell their goods consisting of raisins, honey and animal skins. It was the holy month of Rejeb which was considered sacred for trade in Arabia. It was a point of honor that any form of warfare or violence was strictly forbidden in this month. Mohammed's gang attacked the helpless men from behind and stabbed two of them to death. They plundered all the goods as booty and Mohammed got one fifths of the share.

This shows the utter lack of morals or scruples on Mohammed's part. The Prophet of Islam did not possess a shred of pity or kindness, or the slightest sense of justice. He cold-bloodedly murdered two innocent people who had never done him any harm and did not even know him! All this was done in a month that the Prophet himself declared was a sacred month in which no warfare should take place. Mohammed was obviously motivated by nothing but hatred and greed.

2) Slaughter of Meccans who came to defend their caravans
Date: March (Ramadan) 17, 623 A.D
Place: The well of Badr
Victims: 70 merchants from Quraysh Tribe of Mecca, The Quraysh army which came to defend them

The merchandise being carried by this caravan was worth more than 50,000 Gold Dinars. Mohammed ganged up all the criminals of Medina and set out to raid the caravan with 300 men. The Meccans got word of the raid and sent out an army to protect the caravan. Throughout the entire battle Mohammad cowered in a hut which his men made for him. There he cried and prayed with feverish anxiety. At one point he came out of the hut and threw pebbles in the enemy's direction, screaming "Let evil look on your faces!" and "By him who holds my soul in his hands, anyone who fights for me today will go to paradise!" The Muslims killed over two hundred and took seventy prisoners. All seventy of the prisoners were ransomed, and any prisoner who did not fetch a ransom had his head chopped off.

Mohammed was gratified at the sight of his murdered victims. After the battle, he sent his followers to look for the corpse of Abu Jahal, one of the Meccans who had criticized him openly. When his corpse was found,they cut off the head and threw it down at Mohammed's feet. The "Apostle of peace" cried out in delirious joy, "Rejoice! Here lies the head of the enemy of Allah! Praise Allah, for there is no other but he!" The Prophet then ordered a great pit to be dug for the bodies of the innocents to be dumped. The Muslims then proceeded to hack the corpses limbs into pieces. As the bloodied mass of bodies was being thrown into the pit, a feverishly excited Mohammed shrieked, " O People of the Pit, have you found that what Allah threatened is true now? For I have found that what my Lord promised was true! Rejoice All Muslims!" One of the prisoners taken was the defiant Al Nadr Ibn al Harith, who had earlier taken Muhammad's challenge of telling better stories than him. Muhammad ordered Ali to strike off Nadr's head in his presence, so he could watch and exult in the pleasure of beheading the man who had insulted him. Another prisoner Uqba ibn Abi Muait was decapitated in front of the Prophet. Before being killed the prisoner cried out pitifully "O Prophet, who will look after my children if I should die?" The "Great Prophet of the Religion of Peace" coldly spat out "Hellfire", as the blade came down and spattered his clothes with Uqba's blood.

3) Assassination of poets who criticized Mohammed's murderous ways
Date: Late March-April, 623 A.D
Place: Medinah
Victims: Two of the most famous poets of Medinah, who had the courage to criticize the murderous actions of Mohammed and his gang

After the battle of Badr, the people of Medinah were horrified that they had given refuge to such a blatant criminal and his followers in their city. Many began protesting the presence of such violent and murderous people in their city. In a free society like Pre-Islamic Arabia, the poets acted as society's conscience and were free to criticize, satirize and examine the actions of people. The two most famous poets of this kind were Abu 'Afak; an extremely old and respected poet and Asma bint Marwan; a young mother with the gift of superb verse.

Muhammad was enraged at their criticism. When he heard the verses composed by Asma Bint Marwan he was infuriated and screamed aloud, "Will no one rid me of this daughter of Marwan!" That very night a gang of Muslims set out to do the dirty deed. They broke into the poets' house. She was lying in in her bedroom suckling her newborn child, while her other small children slept nearby. The Muslims tore the newborn infant off her breast and hacked it to pieces before her very eyes. They then made her watch the murder of all four of her children, before raping and then stabbing her repeatedly to death. After the murder when the Muslims went to inform the Prophet, he said "You have done a service to Allah and his Messenger, her life was not worth even two goats!"

A month later the distinguished and highly respected Abu Afak, who was over a hundred years old and renowned for his sense of fairness, was killed brutally in the same manner as he slept. Once again the Prophet had commented that morning "Who will avenge me on this scoundrel!"

This shows us exactly how much the tolerant and peace loving Prophet respected life. Muslims claim that Mohammed was extremely gentle and loved children. Indeed the horrifying way he had Asma Bint Marwan's five infants slaughtered certainly attests to this "loving" side of the Prophet.

4) The Siege of the Banu Qaynuqa
Date: April, 623 A.D
Place: Medinah
Victims: The Jewish Tribe of Banu Qaynuqa

In order to get full control of Medinah, Mohammed needed to get rid of all his opponents. The strongest of these opponents was Abdallah Ibn Ubayy, a powerful chief who was allied with the Jewish Tribe of Banu Qaynuqa. This tribe was also the weakest, because they were made up of craftsmen, in particular goldsmiths. By attacking them, Mohammed knew he could plunder a huge amount of wealth and weaken Ibn Ubayy. Mohammed needed an excuse to attack them so he made a girl married to one of his followers, pretend that she had been teased by the Jews. The Muslims blockaded the fort of the Banu Qaynuqa for fifteen days until the starving Jews surrendered. Immediately, the Prophet was ready to kill them all, but Ibn Ubayy seized hold of Mohammed and protested. Mohammed's face became black with rage as he shouted "Let go of me", but Ibn Ubayy was adamant and shouted back "No, by God, I will not let you go until you deal kindly with my allies. 400 men without armour and 300 with, who have always supported me against enemies. And you want to slay them all in one morning! By God, If I were in your place I would fear a reversal of fortune"

At this threat, the cowardly Mohammed turned pale, as he realized that all the people of Medinah were against him. He hit Ibn Ubayy on the face and ordered that the Jews be kicked out of their own homes. All their property was seized and looted, many of the prettiest women were taken as prisoners to become sex-slaves. Mohammed kept one-fifths of the enormous booty for himself. This is the way he repaid the kindness of the Jews of Medina, who had given him shelter and a refuge, when Mohammed had run away from Mecca in fear.

The revelations in the Eighth Sura of the Koran were clearly in reference to the Banu Qaynuqa and anyone who opposed the Muslims.

Note to expected Muslim commenters; please explain Muhammad's actions after the battle of Badr before adding your opinions.

I read this book last year, here in Brazil.This book shows you, the true about Islam-Jihad.The terrible fate of all no-islamic, under islam's yoke is showed in his book.The religion of Islam spread poverty, war, slavery, tirany, unliteracy and backward to all regions, that this totalitarism/religion put his hands on.
This book is a little long, but it is definitive and complete, about this subject.If you have illusions about Islam, this is agood option to read.If you know how really is Islam, this is also a good source of usefull informations.

This is not a good book for someone who wants an overall easy review of Islam. It is a tough grinding
historical read and I skipped over much but did gain a greater understanding of Islamic law as it was
interpreted over the centuries by many different Islamic scholars.

The book came in on time and in excellent condition. Thanks.

The book came in on time and in excellent condition. Thanks.

Absolutely stunning. A flawless reference work of important hitherto untranslated source documents by important islamic thinkers and jurists. This compendium will be used by scholars for years to come.

Dr. Bostom did an excellent job of pulling together, both Islamic and secular, historical documents showing the various aspects of Jihad and how Jihad was used to accomplish Islamic conquest. He shows how contempory Islamic clerics and academics are using Jihad in the current worldwide conflict between Islam and the West.

Filled with detail from original sources spanning 1300 years, this volume dispels the comfortable myths about the threat Islam poses to Western civilization. A frightening, depressing, but essential read.

Dr. Bostom did an excellent job of pulling together, both Islamic and secular, historical documents showing the various aspects of Jihad and how Jihad was used to accomplish Islamic conquest. He shows how contempory Islamic clerics and academics are using Jihad in the current worldwide conflict between Islam and the West.

This book is a very comprehensive treatment of the unique Islamic phenomena of Jihad (often called the 6th pillar of Islam). The book is very heavily footnoted and will be a guide for scholars for many years.

It is clear that although there is a personal dimension to Jihad, the portion emphasizing violent raiding, war, and subjection of other people has been a major activity of Muslims since the 620's and continues today. Any description of Islam as the religion of peace only refers to relations between Muslims. (Even there it has seldom been peaceful). As for a Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Zoroastrians, and any other "non-believers" it has been an unending source of forced conversion, murder, rape, genocide, and slavery.

Even before an areas occupation and rule by Muslims, raids for booty and slaves might be an annual occurrence. In the area of Afghanistan-Pakistan-India these raids depopulated areas, destroyed the culture, and impoverished the survivors for a period of 500 years. The Muslins then took over and governed much of the area for another 500 years. The intense hate between Hindus and Muslims has very long roots and ample justification.

The area now dominated by Islam was once over 90% Christian and Zoroastrian, now these two faiths comprise about 1% of the population in that area. How did that happen? Bostom and the other authors provide the answer and it sure wasn't preaching, convincing and converting.

In addition to major sections by Bostom there are sections by 20 other major contributors and historical writings by a number of Muslim writers making up 40 separate sections. A number of items are translated into English for the first time in this book.

I heartily recommend this book to anyone who has any doubts about the motivations of the Islamic Jihadists we now face.

It is apparent that the usual descriptions of the Western Crusades into the Holy land as violent, cruel and bloody may be accurate, but they were of such trivial magnitude as to be described as mere pinpricks against the long tide of bloody conquest and enslavement that has been Islamic Jihad.

It took me at least 4 times as long to read as the usual non-fiction, but I consider it to be one of the most essential in the long list of books one must read to become familiar with Islam.

THIS IS A QUITE INTERESTING BOOK. DONT LET ANYONE TELL YOU THAT ISLAM IS THE RELIGION OF PEACE. THROUGH ITS FOUNDING IT HAS ONLY CAUSED DEATH,MURDER,RAPE,PLUNDER AND MISERY OF "INFIDELS" WHO WERE THE RECIEVING HAND OF JIHAD. EVERYONE TAKE NOTICE. FUNDAMENTAL ISLAM IS A CANCER IF NOT CHECKED WILL DESTROY ALL CIVILIZATIONS AND ALONG WITH IT CHRISTIANS,BUDDHISTS,HINDUS AND ALL THE OTHER "NON BELIEVERS" IN THE CRESENT TIDE..

This book is an excellent read if you want to know how non-muslims fair under islamic law.

Radical Islamists adhere to medieval traditions and laws mandating the Jihad.

subjugated people are given three choices:

1) convert,
2) pay a head tax, or
3) die.

This is not something in the past either today there is no Muslim state, which offers full civil rights to members of other religions. Many Christians work in Saudi Arabia, but they are not allowed to practice their religion in public because there is no religious freedom in Saudi Arabia. The State Department's report on Religious Freedom points out that the Saudis do "not always respect this right in practice and do not define this right in law."

Many previous detailed reviews. This is an excellent book that analyzes the structure, spread and affect Islam has had on the world, how it has treated non-muslims, and shows its many flawed and deceiving faces. Islam needs to be understood for what it is by head-in-the-sand westerners and, besides analysis and understanding, western civilization certainly needs to identify a lasting cure for this violent, self-absorbed, hate-filled, psychotic plague before more demage is done.

"The Legacy of Jihad" is is a history book with all the documentation. Many scholars have spent years documenting the subject of Jihad, and not just back in the seventh century; some of this documentation goes all the way to the current time. This is a most revealing history book that was not available when I was in school, & on a subject that was not even a subject until recently. If anyone has the least curiosity about Jihad, I recommend you read this book.

Having recently read Paul Fregosi's excellent book on this subject entitled "Jihad in the West; Muslim Conquests from the 7th to the 21st Centuries", I resolved to investigate this subject further and this study did not disappoint me in it's depth and encyclopaedic content.

Spanning over 700 pages, the amount of detail provided here is breathtaking and the references are innumerable but the text is commendably readable.

As with Fregosi's work, the writer also strives to provide an objective analysis wherever possible without attacking the fundamental aspects of the Islamic religion - instead attempting to concentrate on the context of it's implications & relationship to the furtherance of Jihad itself.

However, this extensive study includes essays and commentary from many learned scholars of Jihad, and it's early claim to provide comprehensive and meticulously documented research soon becomes substantiated as the reader is confronted with realms of evidence and eyewitness accounts, amid an abundance of Muslim theological and judicial texts etc..

Among eight different parts, separate sections are also provided giving direct reference to Jihad in both the Koran and the Hadith, together with an appropriate exegesis by what are cited as the greatest classical and modern commentators, that dispel the argument that Jihad has only been justified by an alleged misinterpretation.

The book begins by providing the reader with the context surrounding the cover illustration which depicts events surrounding the surrender of the Jewish Qurayzah tribe to Muhammad and it's alleged treatment at the hands of the Islamic Prophet.

The text describes how the Jewish tribe were purported to have aided the forces of Muhammad's enemies and how they were subsequently isolated and besieged. The study proceeds to cite how all pleas for mercy, were rejected and how the Jewish tribe were henceforth delivered for judgment in Medina.

The ensuing judgment described as resulting in some six to nine hundred Jewish men purportedly being beheaded in front of Muhammad and their decapitated bodies buried in already excavated trenches.

Further context being provided as to how the young Jewish males, women and children were allegedly sold into slavery and their property and land confiscated. Muhammad himself is also cited as having taken a Jewish captive for his wife. Conversely the book illustrates how the Jewish tribe of the Qurayzah ceased to exist.

The book then proceeds to examine the worldwide impact of a multitude of named Jihad campaigns over 1300 years against non-Muslims which the book declares were characterised by massacre, enslavement and pillage, whereby the reader is confronted with how such military conquests have subdued millions of indigenous peoples and the expropriation of vast expanses of land.

One notable historical example described in the text is that of the massacre of the Armenians by the Ottoman Turks. The extent of the indiscriminate slaughter described in the text is disturbing with the perpetrators cited as allegedly respecting no surrender, bayoneting the men to death, raping the women and dashing their children against the rocks (page 667).

The exhaustive study also reveals how the teaching of Jihad ultimately determines the relations of Muslims & non-Muslims in the present day.

The reader is frequently confronted with a concern that many governments and religious bodies in the present day, are allegedly prepared to ignore what is cited as voluminous but inconvenient historical data in order to
whitewash the realities of Jihad wars, with a view to purportedly explaining away the warlike expeditions and conquests of Islam as "defensive wars" in order to interpret Jihad as merely a "bloodless striving to spread the Islamic religion".

The writer stressing the significance of how historians in free countries have a moral and professional obligation to provide the veracity underlying such issues, and pleading that these individuals should not submit to what is called any voluntary censorship in the face of those in authority who would expediently wish to falsify the record of the past and to re-write history as they would wish it to have been. (Page 22)

Fears being expressed in the text that by so doing, a distorted, revisionist history may arise which could be purportedly used as a tool of propaganda by many governments and religious bodies who would readily avail themselves of to suit their own agendas by suppressing the truth .

Political leaders and the media in general are described as being worried about the public's perception of Islam and subsequently are cited as usually only being prepared to invite the opinions of those who believe in what is cited as the `myth' of Islamic tolerance. Many such entities are described as, for various reasons, also wishing to play down the history of the dhimmi (non Muslims living under subjugation under Islamic rule).

The revelations provided in this book pertaining to Jihad and militant Islam are both eye-opening and disturbing at times and undoubtedly will be seen by many readers as controversial and contentious. Having said that I personally consider that the book definitely needs to be read and will be a welcome addition and essential reference to anyone with an interest in the Middle East conflict and how Islam is perceived at this time within the world's current landscape.

This is one of those books that depending on the background of the reader is going to get either the very highest rankins or the very lowest. To some it will be heresy, justified only as fuel for a book burning. To others it will explain one of the big questions in history: why did the muslim religion spread so fast through Africa and points east. The answer, according to the author is war, specifically religious based (or at least justified) war called Jihad.

Dr. Bostom, a physician not an Arab schlor) has collected writings on Jihad from the earliest days of the religion to modern times. It makes clear that the muslim conquests of the early times were not the peaceful transitions of willing converts but conquest by the sword. As such, the point is clearly made that the modern day Jihad is not an isolated incident called out by a few radicals, but a tradition going back a thousand years and more.

The muslim reader will probably be offended by this book, saying that it carefully selects stories to deliberately harm the religion. And yes this is true. Unfortunately this does not make the stories less true. I am reminded of the Japanese view of World War II, where they were going peacefully about their business until all of a sudden we started dropping atomic bombs on them.

This is one of those books that depending on the background of the reader is going to get either the very highest rankins or the very lowest. To some it will be heresy, justified only as fuel for a book burning. To others it will explain one of the big questions in history: why did the muslim religion spread so fast through Africa and points east. The answer, according to the author is war, specifically religious based (or at least justified) war called Jihad.

Dr. Bostom, a physician not an Arab schlor) has collected writings on Jihad from the earliest days of the religion to modern times. It makes clear that the muslim conquests of the early times were not the peaceful transitions of willing converts but conquest by the sword. As such, the point is clearly made that the modern day Jihad is not an isolated incident called out by a few radicals, but a tradition going back a thousand years and more.

The muslim reader will probably be offended by this book, saying that it carefully selects stories to deliberately harm the religion. And yes this is true. Unfortunately this does not make the stories less true. I am reminded of the Japanese view of World War II, where they were going peacefully about their business until all of a sudden we started dropping atomic bombs on them.

The position enjoyed by Mohammed as a prophet of God is disputed by his unprovoked attacks on innocent people - Islam was spread by use of the sword. Because Americans are poorly educated on religious history in general and Middle Eastern History in particular, this book is a must read. It is a single source for how Islam became as powerful as it is today. The Editor uses multiple sources to document the facts necessary to allow the reader to support the assertion that Islam is a violent religion.

Having about fifty of the leading books on Islam that have been published over the last century, including "The Jew, The Gypsy, and Islam," by Sir Richard Burton (no, not Liz Taylor's ex--the other Burton), Lothrop Stoddard's "The New World of Islam," and the post-9/11 works--especially those by Bernard Lewis, Ibn Warraq, et al.--I think this book would be the one to read for those who have the time or money to choose only one. That is because it focuses on the two most important points: the historical development of the various divisions of Islam, and the overall ideology of "Jihad," which is what is most important for us to understand.

Judging by what the 1-star voters had to say, this book just proves the point. If you honestly address the history of Islam and Jihad, you are automatically labeled a bigot, a Muslim-hater, a Neocon, whatever.

It's safe to say that these people are:

A) Muslim themselves

B) Fooled by "The Religion of Peace" rhetoric

C) All of the above

Proof lies within the Qu'ran itself. Just browse through 2:193, 9:5, 9:29, 47:4 and a plethora of other verses that are predominant in their book... especially the hadith Sahih Muslim 4294 where Muhammed says non-believers will either convert, be subjugated into slavery, or be killed.

I know it's a lot easier for most people to turn a blind eye and label anyone critical of Islam a bigot. That's what happens when the truth is so disturbing.

"Bostom has brought together a variety of classical Islamic sources, eyewitness accounts, and contemporary historical commentaries related to jihad, or "holy war." He tries to bring balance to understandings of Islam by showing that Islam was spread through brutal military force, and brought slavery and marginalization for non-Muslims. But he is as selective in his choice of sources as are those whose viewpoints he opposes. Bostom also fails to provide any sense of historical and cultural context for the religious commentaries or eyewitness accounts. There is no reference to the medieval Christian Crusades, the Turkic and Mongol invasions of Muslim lands, or the subsequent military campaigns that drove Muslims out of Spain and Eastern Europe and eventually brought most of the Islamic world under colonial rule. Understanding the motives and methods of war through history is critical to a meaningful context. The author uses virtually any military offensive carried out by Muslims as an example of jihad, ignoring restrictions classical and modern Islamic jurisprudence placed on it. There is a need for a work that brings realism and balance to the topic. But Bostom's book is no more than a cleverly constructed anti-Islamic polemic that does much to increase fear and little to increase knowledge."

(...)

"Bostom has brought together a variety of classical Islamic sources, eyewitness accounts, and contemporary historical commentaries related to jihad, or "holy war." He tries to bring balance to understandings of Islam by showing that Islam was spread through brutal military force, and brought slavery and marginalization for non-Muslims. But he is as selective in his choice of sources as are those whose viewpoints he opposes. Bostom also fails to provide any sense of historical and cultural context for the religious commentaries or eyewitness accounts. There is no reference to the medieval Christian Crusades, the Turkic and Mongol invasions of Muslim lands, or the subsequent military campaigns that drove Muslims out of Spain and Eastern Europe and eventually brought most of the Islamic world under colonial rule. Understanding the motives and methods of war through history is critical to a meaningful context. The author uses virtually any military offensive carried out by Muslims as an example of jihad, ignoring restrictions classical and modern Islamic jurisprudence placed on it. There is a need for a work that brings realism and balance to the topic. But Bostom's book is no more than a cleverly constructed anti-Islamic polemic that does much to increase fear and little to increase knowledge."

(...)

This book is a wonderful compilation of documents and writings of Muslim leaders throughout history. It covers a wide spectrum of how Muslims regard so-called infidels.

This book falls into the category of those neoconservative "recommended" booklists, those who endorsed the book speak for neoconservative think tanks, and these "experts", few of whom speak Arabic, opine as absolute truth on the barbarity, belligerence, and destructiveness of Muslims, Islam, and Arabs.

Lets be frank, just like anti-Semitism, this book is nothing more than an anti-Islamica polemic; an outright contempt, if not hatred, for all things associated with Islam (whether theology, culture, civilization, etc.) merely for the fact that the res is Islamic.

Those who endorsed the book (on the book jacket)have known anti-Islamica positions. This polemic ignores historical context and similarity of behavior by other cultures (yet for some reason, these other cultures are typically lauded for their military brilliance, economic vigor, or their democratic tendencies while they subjugated others). One might inquire whether all those who voted four starts for the book have the same agenda as the David Pryce-Jones and Bat Ye'or's of the world.

It is easy to find intolerance in all societies (even among some of those considered to be great thinkers of their time), but it is sloppy to infer that the gestalt of a particular religion and civilization through time, across cultures, and across geographies coincides with that intolerance.

If a Muslim general or sultan conquers a territory, then he is characterized as a jihadist. In contrast, Alexander the Great conquered his way through Persia and India-presumably for "democratic" ideals of Hellenism- slaughtered countless thousands and he is hailed a military genius. This completely ignores the political and economic context for these conquests

Europeans, from the pre-Crusades through the Enlightenment period, have warred on each other- killing millions of innocents (and when so much blood had been shed that it became economically unsustainable, Europeans turned to Asia Minor and the Middle East)- yet, it is the Muslims who are bloodthirsty. By Bostom's logic, what does this say of Christianity?

Much hay is made over the issue of dhimmis (non-Muslims living in Muslim territories having to pay a poll tax), yet the same attitude towards Jews and non-Christians existed all through Europe and colonized lands. In Christian Europe, Jews (and later Muslims in Andalusia) were ostracized, forcibly converted on pain of death (and even then were killed because they were not Christian enough) for no other reason but their religion. Yet, Christianity is exculpated from scrutiny.

Under the auspices of European Enlightenment- the philosophical cornerstone for the fraternity of man entitled to liberty and the pursuit of happiness- European politicians, statesmen, generals and clergy saw no inconsistencies in subjugating the brown skinned people of other regions. Thus, Napoleon invaded Egypt, France and Britain cruelly colonized the Maghreb and Indian subcontinent, respectively, Churchill destroyed the Ottoman Empire for the glory of the defunct British Empire and Hitler killed over six million Jews and Gypsies- and this is viewed as civilization!

I am not purporting that Islam, Muslims or Arabs demonstrated perfect behavior throughout various phases of history, but lets not pretend they are less than any other culture and civilization. There is intellectual dishonesty here, and readers should be cognizant.

Despite its controversial character in a charged atmosphere this important work answers a question for many who have read too many histories of Islam scratching their head, and wondering what was left out. Comprehensive and a bit devastating,the book lays to rest once and for all the ambiguities of the term 'jihad',and will make it harder to study most of histories now available that have sanitized the record. On the other hand, it is a difficult business for those who don't have the luxury of dealing with these issues from a distance. But then as Warraq notes in the Foreword we have a responsibility to assist in the burdern of getting the facts right from just that distance.
Important book indeed, once again from Prometheus Books.

I've always been fascinated by the history of Islam's expansion in the first few centuries after its establishment. And this book does a very fine job of describing it.

I'm neither surprised nor shocked by the way Muslims treated non-Muslims back then. I'm a little surprised that in modern times, when human rights are taken more seriously in much of the world, that many Muslims are given an exemption from all this by much of Western society, but that is another story.

The major theme in this superb book is jihad. And we see one description after another of how Muslims treated Christians, Jews, and other non-Muslims. It wasn't pretty. But as Bostom explains, there are plenty of people in the academic world today who come up with apologetics to pretend that the expansion of Islam was peaceful and benign, and that the rights of non-Muslims were honored. Clearly, books that repeat such nonsense are performing a disservice. So yes, we all need this book.

As Ibn Warraq points out in the introduction, this book is edited (and a substantial part of it authored) by a "nonspecialist," namely Andrew Bostom. Bostom is an M.D. who specializes in clinical epidemiology and randomized clinical trials in medicine. A technical person! And I think academia ought to hang its head in shame that its historians have failed to come up with a work of this caliber.

As I said, I do not find it surprising that Muslims often mistreated many, um, "Sunday People" and, um, "Saturday People." Of course, I'm a, um, "Wednesday Person." I do think we need to be aware of this history and protest if folks deny it, attempt to repeat it, or both.

The most speculative article in this book is surely the 14-page one by the late Jacques Ellul. Ellul wrote many interesting books, including an excellent one on propaganda. In addition, he wrote very good prefaces to the French versions of two of Bat Ye'or's books. But in this article, his focus is the influence of Islam on Christianity. I do not feel qualified to judge all that he says here, but I admit that I'm suspicious about some of it. Nor did it help when Ellul called Henri Pirenne's "Mahomet et Charlemagne," a "fine book." I've studied the works of Pirenne at considerable length, and there is no way I would call any of them "fine." In general, most of Pirenne's main points are not only very controversial but wrong. Still, I always find Ellul worth reading, and this article is no exception.

Two of the articles that I found the most topical for today are the one by John Eibner, on his career redeeming slaves (in Sudan), and the material on the genocide of the Armenians. These days, with the European Union insisting on a Turkish confession and apology for admission to the EU, the question of whether that genocide really took place has become an issue. While neither side disputes the fact that at least a few hundred thousand Armenian Christians died in 1915-1916, there are questions about just how many Armenians were killed, and whether it was premeditated murder.

I have to admit that the evidence for genocide looks very powerful to me. And for those Turks who claim that there was no premeditation, just some bad luck, well, I think that they may be in for a little bad luck in, say, their EU application. I think it was quite proper for this book to include some relevant descriptive material here.

I'm very impressed by this book and by Andrew Bostom for making it happen. I highly recommend it.

I challenge any non-Muslim to give me one verse in the Koran or Hadith that justifies the murder of women and children. Compare this to these bible verse (both old and new testament)which praise violence, pedophilia, genocide and forced conversion:

"The LORD said to Moses, 'Take vengeance on the Midianites for the Israelites.... The Israelites captured the Midianite women and children and took all the Midianite herds, flocks and goods as plunder. They burned all the towns where the Midianites had settled, as well as all their camps.... (Moses ordered) "Now kill all the boys. And kill every women who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man." Numbers 31: 1-18

Deuteronomy 20:13-20
13 And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword (even the unarmed ones):
14 But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee.
15 Thus shalt thou do unto all the cities which are very far off from thee, which are not of the cities of these nations.
16 But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:
17 But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee:
18 That they teach you not to do after all their abominations, which they have done unto their gods; so should ye sin against the LORD your God.
19 When thou shalt besiege a city a long time, in making war against it to take it, thou shalt not destroy the trees thereof by forcing an axe against them: for thou mayest eat of them, and thou shalt not cut them down (for the tree of the field is man's life) to employ them in the siege:
20 Only the trees which thou knowest that they be not trees for meat, thou shalt destroy and cut them down; and thou shalt build bulwarks against the city that maketh war with thee, until it be subdued.

In the following verses we see the following:

1- All men, including the unarmed ones, were to be executed (Deuteronomy 20:13).

2- All women and children were to be taken as spoils of war (Deuteronomy 20:14).

3- For the others, kill and destroy every creature that is breathing - that is all men, women, children and animals (Deuteronomy 20:16-17).

:

"All who would not seek the LORD, the God of Israel, were to be put to death, whether small or great, man or woman. (From the NIV Bible, 2 Chronicles 15:13)"

You may naively say to me like many christians that there's only violence in the Old Testament but not in the New Testament. Well, guess what? Wrong again! Here it is:

Matthew 10.34-35

34. Think not that I(Jesus) come to send peace on earth. I came not to send peace, but a sword.


35. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.


Luke 14.26:

26. If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and children, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple


If Jesus were in a bad situation where in order to survive he had to kill some of his enemies to enable him to run away or something, then this would be a completely different issue. But below, you will see that Jesus had the full power and his enemies were the WEAK!

"He replied, 'I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away. But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them--bring them here and kill them in front of me.' After Jesus had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem.
(From the NIV Bible, Luke 19:26-28)"

Jesus did kill an enemy's kids before. Jesus did honor and believe in the idea of this parable. It is also important to know that Christianity is a religion of swords as Christians say "Islam is a religion of swords":

"He said to them, 'But now if you have a purse, take it and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. (From the NIV Bible, Luke 22:36)"

Jesus killed the woman's children:

"So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds. (From the NIV Bible, Revelation 2:22-23)"

[...]

Bostom's book is fine, though I just sent the following to his publisher:

Dear Sirs:

I am currently reading and enjoying Andrew Bostom's "The Legacy of Jihad." Nevertheless, despite its timeliness, wealth of information and bravery in exposing what has become a taboo subject among the multi-culti tolerance police in the West, it is marred by being one of the least well edited books I have ever purchased. There are errors on every page, sometimes to the point of confusing the subject under discussion.

Honestly, don't you folks have real editors anymore? I'd offer my services but I'm happily employed, and anyway it seems that you and many other publishers are trying to save money at the most critical juncture of a book's genesis. That all-important "last pair of eyes," after all, comes attached to a brain with years and decades of experience that needs to be properly remunerated. In other words I suspect you're too cheap to pay for good work and you're betting that the average vulgarian reader won't even notice.

If that's harsh, I'm sorry, but the impression left by reading the first 150 pages of "Legacy" leads me to no other conclusion.

As we all know, a camel is a horse designed by a committee! :-)

Well, this book was written by dozens of different authors, and their writings were stapled together in order to rush this book into print. So it's a grab-bag, naturally: some articles are excellent, but others are mind-numbing academic mumbo-jumbo.

On the plus side, this book certainly contains almost everything the average informed citizen could want to know about JIHAD. It was a concept which originated with Muhammad, and has been in Islam forever. It refers to WAR -- the kind of war where people kill each other in battles. It is a duty incumbent upon all Muslims. Later arguments that the word JIHAD actually refers to an internal moral struggle (or whatever) are exactly like later Christian arguments that HELL does not refer to a burning place of eternal torment; that is, they are basically progressive eyewash which accomplish nothing until they are adopted as official religious dogma. Don't hold your breath on Islam: the grand muftis in Cairo have long accepted the doctrine that ANYTHING NEW IS EVIL. (Great doctrine, what?)

Another very useful thing: the set of detailed color maps which show the Arab conquest of the Arab empire via JIHAD over a period of 5-6 centuries. [...]

A good book!

As we all know, a camel is a horse designed by a committee! :-)

Well, this book was written by dozens of different authors, and their writings were stapled together in order to rush this book into print. So it's a grab-bag, naturally: some articles are excellent, but others are mind-numbing academic mumbo-jumbo.

On the plus side, this book certainly contains almost everything the average informed citizen could want to know about JIHAD. It was a concept which originated with Muhammad, and has been in Islam forever. It refers to WAR -- the kind of war where people kill each other in battles. It is a duty incumbent upon all Muslims. Later arguments that the word JIHAD actually refers to an internal moral struggle (or whatever) are exactly like later Christian arguments that HELL does not refer to a burning place of eternal torment; that is, they are basically progressive eyewash which accomplish nothing until they are adopted as official religious dogma. Don't hold your breath on Islam: the grand muftis in Cairo have long accepted the doctrine that ANYTHING NEW IS EVIL. (Great doctrine, what?)

Another very useful thing: the set of detailed color maps which show the Arab conquest of the Arab empire via JIHAD over a period of 5-6 centuries. (Another item which puzzles me these days when I read about Islamic zealots in Iran: don't these dudes even remember that they were invaded by Arabs a few centuries ago and had Islam forcibly shoved down their throats? Well, I guess not! :-0 )

A good book!

Don't read this book if you don't want to know what important Muslim scholars through the ages had to say on the subject of Jihad. On the other hand, if you like history, and you want to know the true thinking of Muslim scholars throughout the ages, then this book is for you. It contains the unreboiled dogma of Muslims themselves.

[...]

Westerners desperately need to know this material, cold.

Don't read this book if you don't want to know what important Muslim scholars through the ages had to say on the subject of Jihad. On the other hand, if you like history, and you want to know the true thinking of Muslim scholars throughout the ages, then this book is for you. It contains the unreboiled dogma of Muslims themselves.

Do not listen to those who charge that this book is racist. Islam is a religion, not a race. And if there is any racism against Muslims here, then blame the Muslim authors of the vast majority of its content. Islam is presented as THEY saw it, and the way that these scholars saw Islam remains important today for Muslim clerics around the world.

Westerners desperately need to know this material, cold.

Right next to the Quran.
Lets see if they can ignore 100,000 copies arriving in the next 3 months,

In this world of political correctness, the detractors of Dr. Andy Bostom have the right to their left-wing, counter-culturist propaganda.

Some of the reviewers have opined that Bostom makes sweeping generalizations. Generalizations of what ? What these (two) reviewers don't know is that JIHAD is the bottomline of Islam.

Scholarly opinion by westerners like Edward Said, John L. Esposito and others are actually sanitized versions of a "politically correct" Islam that the gullible, history-ignorant, westerners gulp down. (Probably they think that by being politically nice, they can get to bed with a buxom Arabic belly dancer !!).

However, such naive views reflect a self-imposed ignorance of the reality. What is the reality about Islam ? JIHAD.

This is the opinion of none other than a Muslim scholar, and not a western academic driving a Porsche and eating pork-chops.

Maulana Syed Abul Ala Maududi in his monograph, JIHAD IN ISLAM has written in unequivocal terms (page 6) that the sole objective of Islam is to overthrow any un-Islamic political system anywhere in the world and replace it by an Islamic system (Sharia laws).

To do so, Muslims (belonging to the Party of Allah) must use physical force whenever necessary to quickly attain this objective and keep the application of force forever.

In view of this stark and blatant declaration by Maulana Maududi, who wrote the monograph from an extended speech in April 13, 1939 (at Lahore Pakistan), one can conclude that Andrew Bostom is absolutely right on the money.

The two reviewers are actually revealing their ignorance by simply being clueless and adopting a quixotic attitude towards Islam.

How Islam had ravaged all countries is a matter of documentation. In India the unspeakable atrocities of Islam, simply committed under the guidance of Quranic dictates, has been documented in the eight-volume work:

H. M. Eliot and John Dowson, THE HISTORY OF INDIA AS TOLD BY ITS OWN HISTORIANS.

Instead of trying to rationalize Islam, and spinning false perspectives, cloaked under the pretentious academic posturing the reviewers would do well to read some of the views of Muslim scholars (like Maududi) to see how Osama bin Laden darws his inspiration of Jihad against infidel West.

When we speak of the expanse of the Roman empire, the Persian empire, Alexander, the Isralite nation or the formation of nation states in Europe we do not shy away from dwelling on and in fact reveling in the nature of these movements. Nations don't simply take over parts of the world by mistake or overnight. People in general do not convert en masse to religions other then their own. However when we address the history of Islam we have become conditioned to believe that Islam just existed, it sort of magically came into being and 1/3 of the world magically came under its sway overnight. Then we are told that barbarous Christian's intent only on greed and murder assaulted peaceful Islam through crusades from Spain to the Holy land. This evil crusading didn't stop until colonialism extended over almost all Muslims. This is the classic western and Islamic narrative. But its not the whole story. There was a time when Muslims too reveled in their accomplishments, their great campaigns against infidels and the great booty, then they realized that such stories didn't read well in the new anti-war tolerant secular west and they presented the rise of Islam differently. There was a time when accounts reveled in Mohammad of Ghaznis destruction of thousands of `idolatrous temples' in India and his `200,000 slaves' that he took back with him in the 11th century. Now we are told that Islam is basically indigenous to India, it never colonized India, it just mushroomed up suddenly. History books today wont tell any readers that the ottoman empire was a colonial empire that colonized Arabs in the middle east and Christians in Eastern Europe, instead we are told that the Ottoman empire sort of peacefully conquered ¼ of Europe and then it was the evil Europeans who had designs on carving up that `sick man of Europe' and forcing the ottomans to enact laws that protected minorities and ended slavery.

This book opens our eyes. This book dares to ask the questions "How did Islam expand?" and "what happened to non-Muslims in conquered areas?". In a sense what is being asked also is `how did north Africa and the middle east become Arabic and Anatolia Turkish?' Without war and genocide its not possible that any of these regions would look as they do today. In the 7th century when Islam conquered parts of Persia and Byzantium the region was 90% Zoroastrian and Christian. Today it is roughly 1% of those two faiths. What happened to them.

This book shows that the Islamic treatment of non-Muslims amounted to the fate of those conquered in the new world by Europeans. Non-Muslims were discriminated against, made slaves, raped and then became second class citizens. In an insatiable thirst for slaves and women for harems(places of sexual slavery) Islam declared Jihads deep into Africa and Europe, depopulating Eastern Europe and the coast of Africa. The