"…per Michelle Malkin’s request, next week this series will continue at Jihad Watch."

Wow. Will you still do the occasional “Jihad Watch” video here at Hot Air? I hate to see you leaving the Hot Air site but will follow your work at your site. Thanks Robert.

Posted by: Zorro at August 24, 2008 8:55 AM

Zorro

No vids at Hot Air -- again, per Michelle Malkin's request. I may do some here and post them at YouTube, but I'm not sure.

Posted by: jihadwatch at August 24, 2008 9:08 AM

"…per Michelle Malkin’s request, next week this series will continue at Jihad Watch."

Ah screw 'em. More traffic for you!

Posted by: TheBigOldDog at August 24, 2008 9:14 AM

I didn't exactly get the significance of the model on the model. What gives? Is that an 'unbeliever strutting around the land'?

I understand that with election centric coverage at HotAir, the Quran blog would stick out there like a sore thumb, but am disappointed to see that end there. Well, whatever suits Michelle

Posted by: Infidel Pride at August 24, 2008 9:51 AM

The angels pray for the believers around the throne of Allah (vv. 7-9) and will address the unbelievers in hell, telling them that Allah hates them even more than they hate themselves (v. 10). Qatadah explained the mainstream view: “Allah’s hatred for the people of misguidance -- when Faith is presented to them in this world, and they turn away from it and refuse to accept it -- is greater than their hatred for themselves when they see the punishment of Allah with their own eyes on the Day of Resurrection.” Yet here again the decision as to who is guided to the truth and who remains an unbeliever is entirely up to Allah: no one can guide to the truth those whom Allah leaves to stray (v. 33) – which means, explains Ibn Kathir, that “whomever Allah sends astray will have no other guide except Him.”

Time for some logical gymnastics:

1. Why would you create something you hate? That is, unless, you made a mistake... or you're a sadist, or you just don't care.

2. While we're told Allah creates some souls with no intention of saving them (v. 33), we're also told everyone is a Muslim at birth until familial and societal forces introduce unbelief. Does Allah hate them at that early state anyway, or love them until they choose against Islam? But that would introduce an element of free will.

Posted by: MarisolJW at August 24, 2008 10:32 AM

I was disappointed to read that MM decided to discontinue BtQ at Hot Air, Robert, but I'm glad you're continuing it here.

Now, to do some reading....

Posted by: Anthony (Los Angeles) at August 24, 2008 11:42 AM

but the Qur’anic reader ... seeing Allah’s constant concern for his prophet, faces two choices: he can view the repeated Qur’anic statements of Allah’s immense concern for his prophet as an attempt by Muhammad to bolster his stature and privileges as a prophet among his followers,...

That's my choice. It's been evident to me (as, I suspect, it has to anyone not looking for a bridge to buy) that Allah's solicitude toward Muhammad is awfully convenient. Is Muhammad attracted to his adopted son's wife? No problem! Allah says it's OK to marry her! Does Muhammad want revenge against those who opposed him? No problem! The earlier, peaceful admonitions of the Qur'an are now abrogated! *snap!* Allah reveals the real "real truth:" It's OK to kill those who slag Muhammad (who's conveniently now ensconced with his followers in Medina, where he got rid of those nasssty Jews).

What amazes me is not that Muhammad had the brass to play this con game, but that so many fell for it -- and still do.

Posted by: Anthony (Los Angeles) at August 24, 2008 12:18 PM

"...and per Michelle Malkin’s request..."

This is really disappointing. Is space at HotAir so valuable to justify booting this series? Maybe it's better that i read this series at jihad watch anyway, but an explination would be appreciated.

Posted by: meandchi at August 24, 2008 12:19 PM

Yeah, I don't understand the chic photo, either. But, I like it.

Posted by: HotSpur at August 24, 2008 12:37 PM

"an explination would be appreciated.
Posted by: meandchi at August 24, 2008 12:19 PM"

That probably won't be forthcoming, but hey! nobody puts baby in a corner.

Posted by: Connie at August 24, 2008 1:10 PM

"Time for some logical gymnastics:"

I think Calvin would have no problem with these pretzels of predestination.

Posted by: DenverRodeo at August 24, 2008 1:18 PM

Infidel Pride:

I didn't exactly get the significance of the model on the model. What gives? Is that an 'unbeliever strutting around the land'?

Yeah, that was the idea. I try to think of grabby photos and captions that also have something to do with the material. Obviously I don't always succeed.

I understand that with election centric coverage at HotAir, the Quran blog would stick out there like a sore thumb, but am disappointed to see that end there. Well, whatever suits Michelle

Yes. As everyone knows, the Qur'an has nothing whatsoever to do with the coming elections.

RS

Posted by: jihadwatch at August 24, 2008 1:21 PM

Marisol:

1. Why would you create something you hate? That is, unless, you made a mistake... or you're a sadist, or you just don't care.

2. While we're told Allah creates some souls with no intention of saving them (v. 33), we're also told everyone is a Muslim at birth until familial and societal forces introduce unbelief. Does Allah hate them at that early state anyway, or love them until they choose against Islam? But that would introduce an element of free will.

These sorts of things may be why questioning is discouraged in Islam.

RS

Posted by: jihadwatch at August 24, 2008 1:23 PM

Anthony (Los Angeles) - Yep, it would appear to a neutral reader of the Qur'an that Allah is a deity created for Mohammed's benefit. Whenever Mohammed is in a dicey situation, Allah furnishes a sura to get him out of it. It far too convenient for Allah to admonish the wives of Mohammed when they get uppity with the prophet's sexual adventures. Allah's attention to the prophet's well being and the subsequent sura informing the wives that Allah can replace them with wives "more obedient and submissive" is one of the more chilling and disturbing passages in religious writing.

"What amazes me is not that Muhammad had the brass to play this con game, but that so many fell for it -- and still do."

As Abraham Lincoln once said, "You can fool all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time."

Mohandas Gandhi - "Evil fails. Everytime."

Martin Luther King - "The arc of history is long, but it bends towards justice."

If you are interested in why and how Muhammad was so successful - read any book about the behavior of sociopaths.

Posted by: tanstaafl at August 24, 2008 1:27 PM

meandchi:

This is really disappointing. Is space at HotAir so valuable to justify booting this series?

I expect it is quite valuable, and I don't think this series inspired reader interest at anything like the level they and I were hoping for and expecting, and that is my fault.

If I had made it more snarky, it might still be there, but I didn't want to feed the "Spencer hates Muslims" myth. And I tried to work from Islamic sources, to show that this is what Muslims believe about the Qur'an, but that made it...pedantic. Boring. It's my fault.

That said, I hope that some people find it a useful resource. There certainly isn't anything else like it out there.

Maybe it's better that i read this series at jihad watch anyway, but an explination would be appreciated.

Michelle Malkin told me they were going to full election coverage. And as everyone knows, the Qur'an has nothing whatsoever to do with this coming election.

RS

Posted by: jihadwatch at August 24, 2008 1:28 PM

"as everyone knows, the Qur'an has nothing whatsoever to do with this coming election."

I like your new tagline.

Posted by: Connie at August 24, 2008 1:43 PM

Michelle Malkin told me they were going to full election coverage. And as everyone knows, the Qur'an has nothing whatsoever to do with this coming election.

RS

Does that mean she'd want you back once the election is over? Or do you expect the QB to be complete by then?

Whether we have it here or there doesn't make a difference, other than the level of exposure. But I am disappointed that the JW video series on hotair is canned as well.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at August 24, 2008 1:47 PM

Mr. Spencer,

In verse 21:

Have they not traveled in the earth and seen how was the end of those who were before them? Mightier than these were they in strength– and in fortifications in the land, but Allah destroyed them for their sins; and there was not for them any defender against Allah.

Is this a reference to the Romans, whose Western Empire had fallen by Mohammad’s lifetime? Did anyone in Mohammad’s time call him on the fact that he had not “traveled the earth” outside of Arabia?

I will read your series where ever you choose to post it. You are far more influential and less boring than you give yourself credit for. Any regular reader can now speak with some intelligence on the subject.

Posted by: dentalque at August 24, 2008 1:47 PM

Infidel Pride:

Does that mean she'd want you back once the election is over?

She didn't broach that possibility, which leads me to believe that the answer to your question is No.

Or do you expect the QB to be complete by then?

I expect to pick up quite a bit of speed, and soon, so that it will be very close to being finished by then, if not finished altogether.

Whether we have it here or there doesn't make a difference, other than the level of exposure.

That is a very big difference.

But I am disappointed that the JW video series on hotair is canned as well.

So am I. But don't forget: Michelle Malkin gave me exposure at her well-traveled website when the vaunted "politically incorrect" conservative talking heads on TV wouldn't touch this issue fully or honestly. I will always be grateful to her for that.

RS

Posted by: jihadwatch at August 24, 2008 1:49 PM

Robert, To me, this blog has never been boring or pedantic. I've learned a great deal from it and always enjoy your straight forward style of presenting complex information. I can imagine that people with short attention spans and little curiosity would find the series dull, but there is not much sense in catering to that audience on a topic like this. That is, after all, the approach that the "Religion of Peace" sloganeers take and that rhetoric dissolves on the first contact with reality.

Posted by: leporello at August 24, 2008 2:01 PM

dentalque:

Mr. Spencer,

In verse 21:

Have they not traveled in the earth and seen how was the end of those who were before them? Mightier than these were they in strength– and in fortifications in the land, but Allah destroyed them for their sins; and there was not for them any defender against Allah.

Is this a reference to the Romans, whose Western Empire had fallen by Mohammad’s lifetime? Did anyone in Mohammad’s time call him on the fact that he had not “traveled the earth” outside of Arabia?

According to Islamic tradition, he traveled to Syria as a young merchant in the employ of his future wife Khadija, and before that as a youth. And then there is of course the fabled Night Journey to Jerusalem.

In any case, I don't know of any tradition of anyone calling him on this.

This "Have they traveled through the earth" theme recurs several times in the Qur'an. I doubt it has to do with the fall of the Western Roman Empire, which was pretty remote from Arabia. More likely it is simply a reference to ruins of earlier civilizations that were in Arabia itself.

I will read your series where ever you choose to post it. You are far more influential and less boring than you give yourself credit for. Any regular reader can now speak with some intelligence on the subject.

Thanks, I appreciate that very much, although I'm not at all sure you're right about either my influence or ability to inspire interest. But anyway, thank you.

Posted by: jihadwatch at August 24, 2008 2:04 PM

leporello:

Robert, To me, this blog has never been boring or pedantic. I've learned a great deal from it and always enjoy your straight forward style of presenting complex information. I can imagine that people with short attention spans and little curiosity would find the series dull, but there is not much sense in catering to that audience on a topic like this. That is, after all, the approach that the "Religion of Peace" sloganeers take and that rhetoric dissolves on the first contact with reality.

Thank you very much. I do appreciate it. And of course the phenomenon you identify is compounded by the cultural assumption that if you're not hot or snarky, you have nothing to say.

RS

Posted by: jihadwatch at August 24, 2008 2:06 PM

Robert:

And as everyone knows, the Qur'an has nothing whatsoever to do with this coming election.

Thus proving two things:

1) The Left has no monopoly on shortsightedness.
2) The threat from the should be an issue transcending the Right-Left divide. It does, but these days only to the extent that both sides seem to want to bury it.

Posted by: Anthony (Los Angeles) at August 24, 2008 2:14 PM

Sigh.

Point two should have read:

The threat from the renewed jihad should be an issue....

Note to self: proofread before posting.

Posted by: Anthony (Los Angeles) at August 24, 2008 2:16 PM

Dear Mr. Spencer -

Please keep blogging the Qur'an. For this reader, you supply a great deal of the context which the Qur'an is lacking. Your blog is vital to us who realize the threat that jihad poses to our western (nay, humanitarian) values.

Posted by: tanstaafl at August 24, 2008 2:18 PM

"Yes. As everyone knows, the Qur'an has nothing whatsoever to do with the coming elections."

Does anyone else read the sarcasm dripping from that statement?

As far as HA goes, I think Michelle's excuse is a lame cop-out, similar to the one O'Reilly used when he kicked her to the curb in favor of Geraldo the buffoon.

That's the way the blogging world is, welcoming in friends and neighbors, that is until there is a disagreement. Ed Morrissey's criticism of the use of the word Jihad and Allahpundit's non-starter on the Tyson Eid holiday, with written respectful criticism by Robert to both, apparently hasn't sat well with them.

Another victory for the stealth jihad today, in my estimation.

Oh, and for anyone whos checking, I can't wait to see what 100% election coverage mean at HA, going forward.

Posted by: awake at August 24, 2008 2:29 PM

Michelle Malkin gave me exposure at her well-traveled website when the vaunted "politically incorrect" conservative talking heads on TV wouldn't touch this issue fully or honestly. I will always be grateful to her for that.

Agreed. While I disagree with her decision, the last thing I'd do is call her a dhimmi, which some followers of this series have suggested. She just seems to have made a decision to go with wall to wall election coverage, and her readership, barring the ones on the QtB thread, seems to be interested in just that.

Ed Morrissey's criticism of the use of the word Jihad and Allahpundit's non-starter on the Tyson Eid holiday, with written respectful criticism by Robert to both, apparently hasn't sat well with them.

Ed did a pretty good interview with Robert on his audio program, which happened to be very interesting even to one uninterested in Islam because it happened on the same day as the bombings in India, which therefore got discussed. Allahpundit is good about criticizing Islam when it comes up with misogynist, or other anti-secular moves, but when there is a religious conflict between Islam and Christianity, he chooses to be a fence sitter on the grounds that he doesn't want religion to prevail. Myopic IMO.

However, like I said above, I wouldn't call them either dhimmis nor stealth jihadis for their decision - not unless they do something like actually promote an Islamic voice, or censor anti-Islam critics either on their forum, or criticize public figures who attack Islam. There are too many real dhimmis and stealth jihadis as it is, to charge someone with being that simply because they decided that Islam centric columns didn't have the audience in this election cycle. However, let's see how it goes come January, and whether HotAir continues to highlight the occasional Islamic outrage that takes place, usually within the US, and sometimes beyond. Somehow I don't see Michelle ever becoming pro-Islamic, although I could end up being proven wrong.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at August 24, 2008 2:51 PM

"No one can dispute about the Signs of Allah but the unbelievers."
From the title of the article.

This means that the unbelievers haven't been brainwashed to the point where they lose their critical faculties. Although apparently intended to be critical of anyone who is incapable of not being able to recognize the "Signs of Allah" as the "truth," it's actually a compliment.

Posted by: Eastview at August 24, 2008 2:54 PM

"Another victory for the stealth jihad today, in my estimation."

Yep. Today's winners.

By the way, for those of you with facebook accounts, we are working on building up the Robert Spencer Appreciation Society as another way to inform more people. Feel free to join and post comments and appropriate links to Robert's various articles.

Posted by: Connie at August 24, 2008 2:54 PM

Let me try this again (note: read before posting).

No one can dispute about the Signs of Allah but the unbelievers.
From the title of the article.

This means that the unbelievers haven't been brainwashed to the point where they lose their critical faculties. Although apparently intended to be critical of anyone who is incapable of recognizing the "Signs of Allah" as the "truth," it's actually a compliment.

Posted by: Eastview at August 24, 2008 2:56 PM

Robert, I, too am disappointed at HA's discontinuing the BQ series. However, I see it is still (Aug 24) listed under the War on Terror section of Hot Links, along with JihadWatch, Laura Mansfield, LGF and MEMRI TV and others.

Does she intend to de-list BQ completely?

Posted by: Eastview at August 24, 2008 3:03 PM

Everyone:

Let me be perfectly clear: I am not calling Michelle Malkin, Ed Morrissey or "Allahpundit" dhimmis. They are not dhimmis.

RS

Posted by: jihadwatch at August 24, 2008 3:07 PM

I have enjoyed the Blogging the Koran segment. Given the nature of the Koran - repetitive - the segment is going to be a bit repetitive itself.

It is a useful segment regardless of where you finally put it.

Posted by: Jerry M at August 24, 2008 3:07 PM

Eastview:

Robert, I, too am disappointed at HA's discontinuing the BQ series. However, I see it is still (Aug 24) listed under the War on Terror section of Hot Links, along with JihadWatch, Laura Mansfield, LGF and MEMRI TV and others.

Does she intend to de-list BQ completely?

In her email to me ending the Q-Blog series and videos at HA, Michelle Malkin did not mention anything about this. You would have to ask her.

RS

Posted by: jihadwatch at August 24, 2008 3:09 PM

"Posted by: Infidel Pride at August 24, 2008 2:51 PM"

Agree that the dhimmi charge is unfair. No one was calling them stealth jihadists, however. There are plenty of the latter who read Robert's series via Hot Air, so I think the reference had to do with them, not AP or Michelle.

I do, however, think there has been an effort lately to avoid any appearance of supporting the "fringe," so-called "Islamophobic" element; to be slightly more PC during the last months of the election.

Robert does an excellent job of maintaining the necessary dry, scholarly approach in his analysis of the Qur'an. Commenters on his threads (including me) are not always so well-healed.

Is that problematic during this election? Perhaps.

Posted by: Connie at August 24, 2008 3:12 PM

Don't be too hard on yourself re: traffic. They put up a radio show there all the time that doesn't seem to get much traffic.

Just different priorities, not being judgmental at all, just different priorities. I'm sorry to see you go from there though, the well-rounded natural of that site was one of the major attractions, imho. But things change.

Regardless, keep up the good work. It's not always where the spotlight is, but it's important nonetheless.

Posted by: Spirit of 1776 at August 24, 2008 3:24 PM

Robert Spencer, once BQ is complete will you blog the hadith?

Posted by: kyros at August 24, 2008 3:25 PM

Kyros:

Robert Spencer, once BQ is complete will you blog the hadith?

No. The hadith is volumes and volumes, thousands of pages of stuff. I would need several lifetimes to do that. Anyway, this experience has put me off "Blogging the..." series ideas. I will finish what I started, and I am much closer to finishing than it may appear, but that will be it. It is a useful exercise even with only a few readers, as research and preparation for my 2009 book The Infidel's Guide to the Koran, which I plan to make more breezy and readable.

RS

Posted by: jihadwatch at August 24, 2008 3:33 PM

Robert,

I can't believe that Michelle is claiming that the series didn't generate enough interest and that you're blaming yourself for that because you weren't snarky or entertaining enough. For crying out loud, how many times did many of us commenters bring up the fact that Hot Air is a CLOSED blog? You can't comment if you're not registered and they almost never open up registration.

They could have made it an open blog. I never understood why they didn't do that because they do it when they think they'll generate a lot of replies. You were never given the chance to generate a lot of replies.

If they didn't like the comments from people like me they should have just deleted them. They didn't have to stop the whole series.

Full election coverage? Please. The only reason Hot Air has as many posts as it does this weekend is because of the stunt Obama pulled with his VP pick. That blog is usually dead on the weekends.

Posted by: Jaynie59 at August 24, 2008 3:36 PM

Jaynie59:

I can't believe that Michelle is claiming that the series didn't generate enough interest

She didn't say that. All she said was that they were going to full election coverage. And as we all know, the Qur'an has nothing whatsoever to do with this election. But obviously if the series had generated interest beyond you handful of wonderful people, her decision might have been different.

and that you're blaming yourself for that because you weren't snarky or entertaining enough.

Well, I do think that is true, both in the videos and in the Q-Blog.

For crying out loud, how many times did many of us commenters bring up the fact that Hot Air is a CLOSED blog? You can't comment if you're not registered and they almost never open up registration.

Well, that was something beyond my control.

They could have made it an open blog. I never understood why they didn't do that because they do it when they think they'll generate a lot of replies. You were never given the chance to generate a lot of replies.

I don't think this is fair to them. It's a closed blog for all their entries. When the closed blog gets 500 comments for a post on Obama and 25 for the Qur'an blog, that tells you something about the Qur'an blog, not about the closed blog.

If they didn't like the comments from people like me they should have just deleted them. They didn't have to stop the whole series.

I have no reason to believe that Michelle Malkin ended the series because of the comments.

Full election coverage? Please. The only reason Hot Air has as many posts as it does this weekend is because of the stunt Obama pulled with his VP pick. That blog is usually dead on the weekends.

That is none of my affair.

RS

Posted by: jihadwatch at August 24, 2008 3:54 PM

Somehow I don't see Michelle ever becoming pro-Islamic...

That would be a sign of the End Times, were she to do so. :)

Seriously, while I'm disappointed with Hot Air's decision, I suspect it was strictly a business decision, not a sell-out to political correctness.

Regarding snark, I'm glad Robert's series there wasn't snarky. It's that quality that puts me off Allahpundit's posts and, if that's what HA readers want, well, that probably is one explanation why I rarely read the comments sections.

(Honestly, the only reason for me to read now is to follow Ed's posts. I've liked his work for quite a while, since he started with Captain's Quarters.)

Posted by: Anthony (Los Angeles) at August 24, 2008 4:01 PM

"We have seen the centrality of Muhammad in Islam is what led to Muslims being called “Muhammadans” in the West. Muslims universally reject this term as offensive, insisting that they do not worship Muhammad..."

I found this out pretty quick when I was posting about Islam on the message board I frequented when I was first reading about Islam.

It was right after the beauty pageant riots. Stupid me thought that since everything I was reading at pro-Islam websites obviously showed that Muslims worship Muhammad, that they, you know, worship Muhammad. So I said that in a post about the riots.

Jeez! The self proclaimed Muslims of the board went ballistic. It's the only time any of them actually got mean with me. I had more trouble with the liberals than I ever did with any of the Muslims. Muslims are very polite. Most of the best links I got were from Muslims who wanted to "educate me".

Even the women, and I was brutal with them. I had this blurb in a text file and whenever I found out the other poster claimed to be a female Muslim I would c/p it in a reply:

"No woman in her right mind would choose to be a Muslim. So you are insane and are not worth talking to."

Even they were still polite to me. They always wanted to explain how "free" they felt under Islam.

But don't ever tell a Muslim they worship Muhammad. That really pisses them off.

Posted by: Jaynie59 at August 24, 2008 4:04 PM

Robert Spencer, your BQ series has taught me a lot. I will continue to read the posts here at JW. Your work on this subject is a huge contribution to my understanding of Islam. Thank you

Posted by: kyros at August 24, 2008 4:12 PM

Oops..."well-heeled" in my post above.

I was just listening to Robert's interview on his new book "Stealth Jihad" with Pamela Geller for Voices of Freedom and it was excellent

I don't know what it's going to take to wake Americans up. People keep falling over themselves to protect something they know nothing about.

In all fairness to FOX News, Megyn Kelly did a special on honor killings and did make the connection with Islam. And both E.D. Hill and Catherine Herridge did brief reports on the ISNA participation at the DNC convention and pointed out the Muslim Brotherhood connection.

Posted by: Connie at August 24, 2008 4:31 PM

"Posted by: Infidel Pride at August 24, 2008 2:51 PM"

Agree that the dhimmi charge is unfair. No one was calling them stealth jihadists, however. There are plenty of the latter who read Robert's series via Hot Air, so I think the reference had to do with them, not AP or Michelle.

connie

That's correct - I was referring to a few posts on the HA counterpart of this post that called this decision a dhimmi one. I agree with Robert that none of them were, and the fact that a post on Biden has 500 entries, and a Quran post only 25 seems indicative of interest levels. Although those who said that they read, but rarely post, had it right as well.

As for stealth jihad, awake seemed to be suggesting that this decision was a victory for stealth jihad, and if he was, I disagree.

But don't ever tell a Muslim they worship Muhammad. That really pisses them off.


Posted by: Jaynie59

Jaynie59

If you go to faithfreedom.org, and look at Ali Sina's essays, look for one that asks 'Islam: religion or cult', where it examines the features of a cult, and demonstrates that Islam is the cult of Mohammed. I therefore invariably nowadays have quit using the word 'Muslim' or even 'Islamic', and substituted it for the term 'Mohammedan' (noun or adjective) not only because it pisses them off, but because terminologically, it's more accurate.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at August 24, 2008 4:39 PM

Robert, your work is a cut above the rest. The scholarly nature of your writings is refreshing and serves an important purpose. You help us frame and think about complex issues. Your videos are better than any network or cable segment I have ever seen. I, for one, look forward to the remaining suras and future videos.

Posted by: Zorro at August 24, 2008 5:04 PM

Robert,

I just want to say that I have been reading your blog - you could say religiously - every Monday morning when it appears here in Australia.

I've taken issue with you at times over your view of Islam but I also recognize that you offer a service and a viewpoint that is much needed in the arena of public debate.

I never commented at HotAir because the membership never appeared open and, in any case, your blog is the only thing that interests me there.

It's sad that it is losing out on traffic but it's also true that the latter part of the Quran is perhaps less contentious than the early chapters. That's certainly not your own fault.

I look forward to following this series to its end and want to thank you for your persevering efforts.

Posted by: Arizona at August 24, 2008 5:25 PM

Guess I'll be spending Sundays here now! When will people learn that comments do not equal hits, or interest.

Keep up the good work, Robert.

Posted by: Trollhammer at August 24, 2008 5:44 PM

Robert, please keep up with blogging the Koran! Something like this is really needed! I just recommended this series to a friend of mine, who said she didn't much like what (very little) she'd read of the Koran, but everybody around here keeps telling her it's a beautiful book, full of lovely messages.

I told her to check out your "Blogging the Koran" right away. So please, please, keep up the good work.

(The fact that it's not cool, or snarky, is, in my opinion, greatly in its favor. 1. It makes it more scholarly and believable. 2. Snarky humor is getting pretty tiresome, whether it comes from the left or the right. Past time to drop it.)

Posted by: TalkinKamel at August 24, 2008 5:51 PM

Been lurking at this site and Hot Air for years. When I saw you were not going to be posting at HA any more, thought I better get an account going here. Keep up the good work, Robert.

Posted by: Poor Kinght at August 24, 2008 6:28 PM

Looking forward very much to RS's Qur'an for Infidels...
FOr some time now, when people ask me how come I feel confident to speak about menace of Islam to non-Muslims, I tell them I don't speak about Islam from the Muslim point of view, but from the infidel's...and that I'm expert on being an infidel who sees great danger coming from the Islamic quarter towards me and mine -- and the other four fifths of humanit!

Posted by: jewcat at August 24, 2008 6:49 PM

Robert, your work is a cut above the rest. The scholarly nature of your writings is refreshing and serves an important purpose.
Posted by: Zorro

I agree with Zorro. One of the things that distinguishes JW from many other sites devoted to analysis and discussion of Islam, but which adopt a more casual tone, is that you adhere to and enforce very high standards of scholarship and discourse. It is precisely because you are not "snarky" or try to play to the galleries with breezy or excessively clever comments or plays on words that makes JW so valuable. And these high standards, are, in turn, reflected in the quality of the comments of the regulars who post here.

You're an academic at heart, Robert. Why aren't you on a faculty somewhere?

Posted by: Eastview at August 24, 2008 6:52 PM

Thank you Michelle Malkin for allowing Robert Spencer to post at Hot Air for as long as you did. If you did not, I never would have known who he was nor learned as much about Islam an the threat to Western Civilization that it poses. I suppose, to be fair, I should thank David Horowitz as well.

Because of MM, Mr. Spencer you have sold several (dozen) books as I continue to buy them and give them to my friends.

Mr. Spencer, in your own words you stated your intentions thus:

So over the course of the next few months, I’m going to read it, and discuss it in a series of columns. All of it. Not “cherry-picked” or “out of context.” The whole thing, beginning to end. Some of you may be familiar with David Plotz’s series on Slate, “Blogging the Bible.” This series will be similar to that one, but rather than just write about what I think or feel about a certain passage, I will, unlike Plotz, refer to commentaries – all Muslim ones – on the Qur’an. I’ll try to explain how mainstream Muslims who study the Qur’an will understand any given passage, and what its import might be for non-Muslims.

Well I guess a few months turned into years but by continuing the series you show yourself to be a man of your word and an all around class act. Many people of accomplishment are not recognized in their own time. I hope (and pray) that it will not take another 9/11/01, or something much worse for the public opinion to think that of your work.

I still hope to have you over for that pig roast we talked about!

Posted by: dentalque at August 24, 2008 7:03 PM

hello Robert l to have learned so much from your bloggin, it might be boring for some who want instant points sent to them, but the rather tedious work of explaining the koran and its meaning needs more than a glimpse or quick review to understand the koran. l come out realizing how much the koran makes no sense at all, is so full of holes that any person especially a critical Western person can see through this garbage. l am still amazed at those WEstern people who actually fall for this tripe. you can understand those born into this society where you if you question anything from the koran you can be tortured and killed. l know my nephrew once told a muslim co-worker he was an ateist, and the muslim shuddered and said that if you said that in his old country you would be killed!

Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at August 24, 2008 7:17 PM

Robert and all:

the "delisting" from HA may prove a blessing in disguise, if only for the folks like me who have been following the blog series as an amazing study in how the adherents (sp?) of Islam relate to the rest of the world, and have not found the voice to express their support and thanks to Dr. Spencer for this series. Well, I found the way to log in here and: thanks. And thanks to all of the regular posters on this series who have made the reading of the threads enjoyable and more to the point, educational. It's been such a long journey to this point, I think I have many points I'd *love* to comment on, but I haven't the time just this moment.

Again, thanks from some one who has read the series from the begining
(new to posting, not sure how to sign off)MSgt, USAF, Ret

Posted by: Thrag at August 24, 2008 7:53 PM

"In all fairness to FOX News, Megyn Kelly did a special on honor killings and did make the connection with Islam. "

From a posting above.

That's correct. FOX also had Phillis Chesler on and she clearly did make the connection with Islam.

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at August 24, 2008 8:12 PM

Please take the long view, Robert. Your decision not to resort to snarky and flashy was the right one. Your blog series is being recorded for posterity. Who knows, it may some day become a valuable (and possibly even illicit tool) in a dhimmified future.

You've approached it with your usual scholarly integrity. Whatever the short-term benefits, going snarky would have delegitimized the series down the road...not to mention making it appear dated, as all pop-culture curiosities become.

Besides oh fearless leader, "snarky" just ain't you.

Posted by: Cornelius at August 24, 2008 8:50 PM

I had wanted my reading of the Koran to coincide with this blog, but it didn't work out. I found it such difficult reading that I had to keep setting it aside. Not so much difficult in style of writing, but the content.

What a horrible creature this so called god of Islam is. I could not believe the times it talks about how much Allah hates me as an unbeliever! Over and over again!

Contrast that with the (true) God as represented in the Bible. He does also offer judgment when needed, and will do so again at the end of time. But it's a hatred for the sins of mankind, not people in general. And the love of God in Christ is always held forth, so that people may turn to Him and be forgiven. The tone is always one of beseeching people to follow Him out of love.

Where, in this Koran is Allah's love? Even in reference to Muslims there's the phrase 'those who believe and do good works' repeated over and over. It seems you can never do enough to please Allah. And even when you try with all your might, he seems ready to wipe you out for the slightest misdeed.

At the conclusion of it all I was left with a deep sadness for the countless millions who follow this hateful, capricious god.

Posted by: Mo at August 24, 2008 9:09 PM

Robert -

Please don't ever get snarky. (Even though it is so easy and feels good at the moment.) But it would just add fuel to the fire and give people reason to discount what you're saying. Now that I'm done reading the Koran for myself, I look forward to going back to the blog and reading with more understanding than ever before. Thanks for all your hard work.

Oh, and the blog has never been boring and neither were the videos. I hope you do more, and I'll continue to spread the word where I can.

Posted by: Mo at August 24, 2008 9:18 PM

I have been reading Blogging the Qur'an since it started. I've read it at HotAir AND also when Mr Spencer duplicated it here, which meant that for quite some time there would be two quite different sets of discussions focusing on precisely the same blog entry. (Fascinating!).

All of us here should be lining up to buy copies of Mr Spencer's upcoming 'The Infidel's Guide to the Koran". Each person should plan to buy one for his or her self, one for their church or synagogue or temple library (as appropriate), one for their political representative/s, etc.

I have something else to say, as well.

A number of people here today have commented on Mr Spencer's high standard of scholarship. I concur emphatically - and I do so as someone who spent twelve years in tertiary study, doing first a Bachelor's (with Honours) and then a Doctoral degree, at two of Australia's major universities, under some very good teachers, and I do know good scholarship and good teaching when I see them. Mr Spencer is one of the most lucid, thorough, sensible, readable, humble and humane scholars I have ever come across.

Honestly, if there were even one university in the Western world with any sense at all, he should have received, by now, an Honorary Doctorate in Islamic Studies.

Each of us who has read Mr Spencer's Qur'an blog so far, has received *at least* the equivalent of a University-level course on the topic, each week, for months. I can't think off the top of my head what such a course would cost, at any major western university, or even in a 'community college', but it wouldn't come cheap.

So, to the nitty-gritty: on the jihadwatch website main page there is provision for persons to put money in Mr Spencer's hat. It would be appropriate for all of us who consider ourselves unofficially enrolled Students in this Virtual Hedge School of the Resistance to the Jihad, and who are more than satisfied with the standard of the tuition supplied, to place a truly substantial sum in the teacher's hat, as a sign of appreciation.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at August 24, 2008 9:38 PM

Thrag

I must assume you are 'spreading the word' among your fellow Veterans?

And are there avenues by which retired defence force members can share their newly-acquired knowledge with those presently serving?

If knowledge of Islam - of the centrality of jihad, of the ugliness of sharia, of the nazi-style supremacism that justifies the imposition of dhimmitude, of the 'permission to lie' with all that that means - spreads widely enough, fast enough, amongst kafir soldiers and policemen everywhere, we may have a chance.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at August 24, 2008 9:50 PM

Glad to see the Hot Air folks posting here.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at August 24, 2008 10:02 PM

jewcat

I think you're Australian, as I am, from things you've said elsewhere. There's quite a few Aussies who post at jihadwatch.

Get in touch with 'sheik' (sheikyermami) and let's all of us Aussie jihadwatchers get cracking on a practical plan to bring Mr Spencer to Australia, ASAP.

(We would also have to have a practical plan to stymy any Muslim attempt to pressure the government not to let him in...but since TARIQ RAMADAN was allowed to visit and spew his sugar-coated poison, and Sheik Catmeat has been permitted to spout all kinds of hateful nonsense without being either stripped of citizenship, or deported, and Hizb-ut-Tahrir operates here with impunity, I don't see that our authorities could reasonably refuse entry to Mr Spencer!).

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at August 24, 2008 10:09 PM

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at August 24, 2008 9:38 PM

I would simply like to echo what was said here. This level of information is equal or superior to any I've encountered in my study including my doctorate.

Posted by: Spirit of 1776 at August 24, 2008 10:42 PM

The angels pray for the believers around the throne of Allah and will address the unbelievers in hell, telling them that Allah hates them even more than they hate themselves.
From the Article -

Even the angels of Islam are messengers of hate, tormenting those already in Hell no less. It seems hate is not enough for Allah, extra servings of cruelty are necessary as well.

Posted by: butterfly at August 24, 2008 11:24 PM

You have taken on awesome responsibility and dedication, Robert...The ordinary man could not do it...I am not an expert on much, but I know an extraordinary man when I see one.
I get a lot more out of reading your Quran blog than I get out of reading Quran alone. Thanks...

Posted by: duh_swami at August 25, 2008 1:05 AM

Robert,

Can you pls explain why Muhammed (or rather Allah!) did not speak anything in Quran about Hinduism or Budhism - the other two major religions of the world even at his time?

Posted by: Jack at August 25, 2008 2:22 AM

The angels pray for the believers around the throne of Allah (vv. 7-9) and will address the unbelievers in hell, telling them that Allah hates them even more than they hate themselves (v. 10).

Wow. Just... wow. That's the complete opposite of John 3:16.

Posted by: crazy_legs at August 25, 2008 10:41 AM

I expect it is quite valuable, and I don't think this series inspired reader interest at anything like the level they and I were hoping for and expecting, and that is my fault.

Robert,
I think I and others from Hot Air agree that a lot of the time you cover a sura in such detail and so logically (a nearly impossible task, give the material being discused!) that there really isn't anything to comment on (verses 7 through 10 and their diametric opposition to John 3:16 is the first time in a while that I've felt the need to comment, to be quite honest). That doesn't necessarily mean that it fails to generate traffic.

Now, I know I don't have access to traffic stats for Hot Air, but I do know for a fact that in my case I rarely go on the computer on Sundays (between house/yard work or a paintball game I rarely have time), but Monday mornings the Q-blog is the first thing I read. But again, more often than not I don't feel the need to comment on something that everything's already been said and I wouldn't be adding anything new.

So maybe it didn't increase traffic on Sundays, but it wasn't through any fault of yours. And snarky would've been a mistake, IMO.

Posted by: crazy_legs at August 25, 2008 10:53 AM

I've been following this blog since it began, and was visiting Jihad Watch and Dhimmi Watch before that. The only reason I've never commented before was that I had never been around when Hot-Air registration was open.

If there were not enough comments, then part of the responsibility rests on the registration policy at Hot-Air. They certainly have the right to restrict registration, but that will have an impact on how many are registered.

Since I was mainly going there for "Blogging the Qur'an", I'm not really worried about that any more. I did not realize that commenting here was a possibility, since I'd always been linked to the blog as hosted on Hot-Air. However, I'm now registered here, and will stay here instead.

Dr. Spencer is addressing what I see as the central issue of our times, and I intend to focus my time on understanding and working to defeat the jihadis.

Posted by: Marcus_P_Hagen at August 26, 2008 3:05 AM

Similar to many other who have posted on this site, I have not had the opportunity to comment previously on the series due to HA's closed-registration policy. I admit having come late to the game in terms of understanding the apparent nature of Islam and what I have found over the last few months is frightening, indeed.

I continue to seek opposing viewpoints that can be supported by the Qur'an, hadiths and other work; however, I have come up dry thus far.

I must therefore assume that the information put forth by Dr. Spencer is essentially correct and that the core tenets of Islam do actually promote global submission to what appears to be a particularly pernicious cult.

Dr. Spencer, Diogenes the Cynic never did find the honest man and you have obviously convinced more than a few persons of the fundamental correctness of your position.

Posted by: dadcito at August 26, 2008 2:02 PM

"In hell the unbelievers will argue with each other over whose fault it was that they ended up there."
I take it hell is not so hot as to stop a bit of conversation? If I so much as badly burn my finger I am in no state for any exchange of talk. So is the Qur'an hell fire literal or metaphorical in the minds of most Muslims?

Actually I like the idea that I can finally comment on this blog. Maybe that was the positive idea behind the move: To allow more participation?

Posted by: ish at August 26, 2008 8:33 PM

Robert,

I always go to the BtQ through http://jihadwatch.org/articles/bloggingtheq.php
so whether your are on HA or not is not relevant to me.

Your BtQ is the only site that gave me adequate information about the Quran. I did not find any site like this one (not in French nor in German nor in Dutch).

I followed your explications from the beginning after having read the Bible essay which was more a tongue in cheek comment from a modern Jew. I appreciated his comments.

Your BtQ is more matter of fact, giving the dangers emmanating from the "Ummah".

Thanks a lot for your time and expertise.

Posted by: Euro_Izlam_O_phobe at August 27, 2008 2:30 PM

Robert~ I would like to add Thanks for all you do. I always read Blogging... but rarely feel the need to post a comment or question to the thread. And like this week, I don't always read it on Sunday or Monday, but come back later to read the comments that are posted.

I'm sure you have many, many lurkers who never post. I'm sure some fear being tracked.

Posted by: Borg at August 28, 2008 11:35 AM