2 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Karen Armstrong the wannabe historian part one

Reader comment on item: Bolstering Moderate Muslims
in response to reader comment: Karen Armstrong the wannabe historian

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Apr 29, 2007 at 18:08

Karen Armstorng is a strange lady who pretends to be a historian but her command of history and logic and Arabic and the Quran and the islamic tradition and the history of Islam is poor and what is just amazing why does she keep publishing books?I must admit that whwn you first read one of her books one may say that this woman knows what she is talikng about but if you dig in in what she is writing you come to realize that she is nothing but hot air and total ignorance.

Well this is a review of her bogus reveiw of Robert Spencer's book "The truth about Muhammad" and you will find it in the "Financial Times" on line date 4/27/2007

Now she writes

>Ever since the Crusaders, people in the west have seen the prophet Muhammad as a sinister figure

Again this is a case of reversing cause for effect very typical of Ms Armstrong. Well the sira and al-maghazi literature (Muhammad's biography and his "invasions") tell us that Muhammad was a caravan raider and an Arabian warlord who ordered the killikng of a female poet while suckiling her infant and he married a 6 year old girl when he was 53 years old, and he did not mind the killing of Jews. My source? The hadith and the sira!

>During the 12th century Christians were fighting brutal holy wars agaist Muslims

Ms. Armstrong forgets to tell us and in 633CE and to parapharse what she worte: "During the 7th century Muslims were fighting brutal holy wars against the people of the Middle East, Persia, the Byzantine Empire and Spain and the destuction of such great empires was appalling" She also fogets to tell us that if the Arabs did not invade Palestine in 633CE there would have been no reason for the crusaders to fight a "holy war against Muslims" and that the Arab invasion of the Middle East was instigated (yuharid) by Allah and the crusades were an act by Christians depite of Christian teachings.

>even though Jesus had told his followers to love his enemies

That is the point. The crusades were conducted _despite_ of Christian teachings. Why does she not get it? The Arab invasion of the Middle East? It is Allah that must be blamed for such atrocity and war.

>The scholar monks of Europe stigmatized Muhammad as a cruel warlord

But this is what the sira and al-Maghazi literature tell us! again Ms Aramstrong is reversing cause for effect as usual!

>who established the false religion of Islam

I would call any religion where Allah and his rasul are to get 1/5 of the loot from infidels (Q8:42) as a false religion

>by the sword

But islam was spread by the sword at least in the case of the polytheists of Mecca and the infamous ayat al-sayf (Q9:4) or kill the polytheists unless thay convert to islam. How come Ms Armstrong did not know that?

>They also with ill concealed envy berated him as a lecher and sexual pervert at a time when the popes were attempting to impose celibacy on the reluctant clergy

Bogus. The Islamic tradition tells us that Muhammad had at one time 23 wives and concubines (see Ali Dashti)! I suspect that most monks would be happy with one wife. 23? that is a bit bizarre and kinky! Just think of VD! What Ms. Armstong does not tell us that the so called "reluctant clergy" could leave the clergy and have a wife, but 23 women? this is bizarre!

>Our suspicion of Islam is alive and well

And it should be, but Ms Armsting does not tell us why no one seem to have any suspicion about Hinduism and Buddhism and Jaisnism and Sikhism.

Why is that Ms Armstong? Stay tuned for part two

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Karen Armstrong the wannabe historian part one by dhimmi no more

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2021 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)