Sword of the Prophet: Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam

I must confess that very few things in the world annoy me more than people that lecture others about things they know absolutely nothing about. The opponents of this book are a perfect example. Let me make one thing crystal clear to anyone that hasn't yet read "The Sword of the Prophet": The one-star reviews posted here were written by people that haven't read the book!! This book is not racist and it is not scaremongering!This book is one of the most intelligent and well-written books I have ever read. It pulls absolutely no punches when it examines the origin, historical record, and future implications of Islam as a global force. Political correctness and other left-wing ideologies are ignored for the sake of truth and critical thinking, which is absolutely refreshing to read in this day and age of "historical ignorance" and "deliberately induced amnesia", as Mr. Trifkovic puts it. The first and second chapters examine the life of Muhammad and the creation of the Koran, which is fascinating and eye-opening. The third chapter, "Jihad Without End", is simply frightening. It chronicles the spread of Islam over the last thousand years, and the massive cultural devastation, human suffering, and loss of innovation that went with it. This chapter, more than any other, is the most savage rebuttal of people that insist that Islam is "tolerant" or a "religion of peace". Never, in its entire history, has Islam even approached anything resembling tolerant or peaceful, and anyone that has bothered to actually read history knows it. The fourth chapter shows Islamic misogyny, use of slavery throughout the centuries (and still in practice today!!), and debunks the ridiculous assertion that there was a "golden age" of Islam. The fifth chapter describes the sad and pathetic attempts of self-loathing intellectuals (many of whom are in powerful and influential postions) in North America and Western Europe that want nothing more than to tear down every Judeo-Christian tradition and belief that their country was built on. The false and twisted belief of these "enlightened" intellectuals is that all cultures and beliefs are equally valid, and to question the merits of this ideology is bigotry. A knowledge of history and a good eye for observation reveal this worldview as the hoax that it is, but these people are both blind and deaf when it comes to annoying little things like "facts". The sixth and final chapter paints the bleak picture of Western Europe and (to a lesser degree) North America as countries that refuse to open their eyes to a culture that is completely at odds with Western ideals of democracy and human rights. A war has been unofficially declared on the West (ie. the "infidels") by millions of radical Muslims, and yet many people don't even want to acknowledge that there is a problem! The immigration floodgates are open and yet no-one seems to care which people have something to offer and which people have hostile intentions!! Isn't this common sense!?

Islam is a barbaric religion. This comment of mine is directed atthose who apologize about Islam and Quran. Dr. Trifkovic's detractors, have not provided a single evidence of why the sources he uses are "biased". Not surprsingly Muslims are by default very critical of those authors who have not viewed Islamin a favorable light. Ms. Karen Armstrong (author of Muhammad'sbiography) is viewed as a " credible authority" simply because she almost "worships" and "adores" Muhammad, and rationalizes the failings of the Last Prophet of Allah (Khattam-ul-Nabi). Onethus must view the comments (actually hollow howlers) from these"Defenders of Faith" with much skepticism.Islam, intrinsically, is intolerant of any opposing view. This is clearly stated in Quran (005:033), where the faithful is asked to amputate the limbs from opposite sides of the body for those who will oppose Allah and His Messenger. In a similar veinthe tolerance of Islam is displayed in the verses Quran (009:004),(009:029),(047:004),(008:038),(002:216).All of these call for (physical) fight against those who will oppose Allah and his Messenger. In modern times this means anyonewho will oppose Shariat (laws) and hence Islam, must meet the same fate as described in the above ayahs (verses). The Englishtranslation of these verses can be found in Abdullah Yusuf Ali'sEnglish translation of Quran from Arabic into English. Yusuf Aliis a respected authority on Islam; so if there is any error/aberration, it lies with Ali's translation.The next counter-argument will be that the detractor (myself) has quoted these verses "out of context". This a very familiar ploy intended to give a twist to a debate that is critical andnot favorable of Islamic belief systems. Fortunately, there exists another argument. If these quotes are out of context, then Quran is essentially out of context with modern times. Forthese ayahs (verses) clearly explain the bloody history of Islamas pointed by Dr. Serge Trifkovic. Islam has always thrived on terrorism. Prophet Muhammad himselfterrorized party of caravans carrying goods, simply because he wanted to establish superiority. Women were sold as sex-slaves(concubines) or killed. Also for the naive reader, it must be mentioned that Muslim history is essentially an exercise in gratification. Recognized chroniclers of Islam are always, as a general rule, Muslims - who by the virture of professing their faith (Islam), must glorify Islam and not be critical of their faith. How can then one accept the views of these Islamic scholars, since by default they are tainted ?I would suggest everyone on this forum to read William Montgomery Watt's two-volume treatise on Muhammad biographytitled MUHAMMAD AT MECCA and MUHAMMAD AT MEDINA.In one of these volumes, there is the slaughter of Ka'ab-bin-Ashraaf described. You know why ? Because he spoke up against Prophet's phoney baloney (Islam). Similar was the fate of Asma-bint-Marwan who was decapitated in her sleep because she had recited sarc

This controversial book hit the market by storm in America after 9/11. It leans very much to the right and is considered "racist" or at least "alarmist" by many liberals. I found it to be an extremely worthwhile read that opened my eyes to many aspects of Islamic terrorism in the modern world. Before going into more detail, I would like to qualify my review by saying that I do not necessarily agree with his conclusions proposed solutions.That being said, even if one does not ascribe to Trifkovic's thesis regarding the solution to radical Islam (in short, treating Muslims in western countries as we treated self-avowed communists during the Cold War) one cannot ignore his summary of the history of the expansion of Islam and many of the valid points he makes regarding its historical tendencies. I found the section that explained how the US actually helped create the power behind modern Islamic radicals very eye-opening.To realize that the text is not simply anti-Muslim propoganda, it is important, while reading the book, to pay attention to his (infrequent) qualifications. He does not consider ALL Muslims to be "bad", but seeks to point out the fact that most of the vocal, political Muslims leading countries and organizations happen to be radicals funded by oil money. That is, the extremists have the money and the power, and the moderates, like moderates in most religions, do very little to stand in their way and say, "No, that is not Islam!" One of the more reasonable, albeit difficult to envision, paths to peace that he suggests is to somehow move the power and money into the hands of moderate, non-West-hating Muslims.What Serge does say is that Islam has historically been a religion of war, and that war is justified and even commanded in the Koran. That many progressive believers believe "Jihad" to be an inner, spiritual struggle is valid but does not change the original meaning often used by today's radicals. Other reviewers may decry his interpretation of the Koranic verses as being too literal, and say that the holy text does not actually advocate violence against Infidels as it appears to. However, Serge contends that the history of the religion is more supportive of the literal, violent interpretation than of the more modern, progressive one. Regardless of which interpretation you personally favor, it is important to realize that there are many out there who do believe that Jihad is a perpetual war against all non-Muslims, and that is the point that Serge stresses.

Buy this book. Read it. Then buy a bunch more copies and pass them out to loved ones and influential people. I've read a lot of books on Islam the past year and this is the most straightforward and honest. Be prepared to be frightened and depressed, but it is well past time for the West to get real about Islam. It's not "just another religion", or a "religion of peace". Where goodness retreats and the West sleepwalks to relativism, Allah advances with a sword.

For those of us who are tired of being told Islam is a "religion of peace" and who want to know the facts The Sword of the Prophet comes as a welcome relief. Informative and well written Sword takes the reader through the history and theology of Islam and explains why it has turned violent. This is a drop-everything-and-tell everybody book!