Help for the History Impaired: On Mohammedanism

Posted in Lifestyle
Wed, Oct 14 - 9:00 am EDT | 3 years ago by
Comments: 52
Be Sociable, Share!
Use Arrow Keys (← →) to Browse

The Wright Perspective - Koran

The American public was largely unaware of events in the Middle East until the Carter administration, when a series of inexplicably bad foreign policy decisions on the part of the United States allowed the secular postcolonial governments there to fall into the hands of persons explicitly adopting the political system called Sharia Law. Since the fall of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, the conflict has occupied the headlines and made blatant what we previously had the luxury to ignore.

The public discourse surrounding these headlines is carried out with a curiously evasive quality, mute and indirect, as if everyone who speaks on the topic dare not name the topic. It is like listening to two Victorian matrons discussing a matter of sexual misconduct, all in hints and euphemisms.

I suggest it is because the history is too terrible, simple, and painful to the pride to admit.

This is no conspiracy, unless a Victorian prudishness unwilling to mention the unpleasant counts as a conspiracy. The facts are plain and are not disputed. They are merely not mentioned by the press and not taught in public schools. There is no hidden history, merely the unmentioned history. I reveal nothing that a few afternoons of patient reading can confirm to any skeptical inquirer.

In 610 AD, Mohammed entered a cave and emerged with the verses of the Koran, a manual containing a plagiarism of the Bible, as dictated to him by a spirit who denied that Christ was the Son of God. In Mecca, Mohammed preached in a peaceful fashion for a dozen years, and converted less than seventy persons all told. The pagan Quraysh princes of the city cast him out, and he traveled to the Jewish city of Medina, where he begged for sanctuary, pretending to be a man of peace.

Here he attracted a large following among the poor and discontent, and after eight years was a political leader to be reckoned with. He and family began raiding caravans from Mecca. He was a brilliant and innovative bandit chief, attacking where and when unexpected and selling the prisoners as slaves. This tactic of attacking economic centers and sources of wealth has been carried on to this day.

After a signal victory against the Meccan princes during what is called the Battle of the Trench, Mohammed besieged his hosts, the Jews of Medina, and drove them out of the city. The Mohammedan taste for torture has its roots in Mohammed’s torture of the Jewish prince of the Medina, whom he staked to the ground and built a fire on his chest. When the man did not yield, he was beheaded.

In 628, making the first pilgrimage to Mecca, Mohammed made a peace treaty with the Quraysh, which was highly unpopular as his companions had just vowed to avenge the rumored death of one of their number, should the rumor prove true. However, the Quranic sura “Al-Fath” (The Victory) assures the faithful that the expedition was still a success, on the grounds that it increased the prestige and reputation of Mohammed, and, more to the point, gave him time to restore his military strength.

The later and more warlike Koran was written at this time, and the verses enjoining Mohammedans to live in peace with Christians and Jews were overruled and reversed. Mohammed fought battles each year of his remaining five years of life: his immediate disciples carried out his will and wish and habits in his name after him.

So the tactic was established: approach in peace, preaching peace, when you are weak; make treaties when you gain political strength and need allies; betray the treaties when you gain military strength and no long need allies. The same tactic was done again and again, with astonishing success, for centuries.

Within twenty-five years after the death of Mohammed, the southern and eastern reaches of the Byzantine Empire, all Christian lands, and all fertile, were reduced by terror and sword to a wasteland. Te Jewish colonies of Yemen were conquered. Libya and much of Egypt to this day retains this character. All seven of the Churches mentioned by name in the Book of Revelation were conquered.

The Mohammedanism, like the Stalinism who came later, demand history be abolished, and are responsible for the burning and loss of nine tenth of the known lost ancient manuscripts of history. The destruction of the Stone Buddha statues in Afghanistan, or the famous museum in Babylon, was not a mistake or the act of some odd extremists: it is a central part of mainstream Sharia. Christian churches and relics are destroyed whenever they fall into Mohammedan hands: to this day, the Church of Saint Sophia in Constantinople is used as a mosque, in triumphant mockery of the defeated Christians.

You have no doubt heard that there was a Golden Age of Islam, where Muslim scholars preserved the works of Aristotle and the ancients, invented the zero, or made great strides in astronomy and mathematics. This is all an outrageous lie, the precise opposite of the truth. There were certain Spanish scholars, mostly Jews and Christians, conquered by Muslims, but who preserved the ancient texts despite the Muslim program of destroying them. The Byzantine Empire preserved what we have of ancient learning, and scholars fleeing the downfall of one Byzantine theme, province, or city after another in the relentless onslaught of Mohammed reintroduced them into the West. The Moslems not only were not the preservers of the knowledge of the ancient literature, they were the main force destroying it.

But one of the main causes of the fall of the ancient world was indeed Islam. The Mohammedans soon had control of the Mediterranean, which was the main trade route of the day, travel by land being prohibitively expensive. By cutting off Egypt from Europe, they cut off the breadbasket of Europe, the main source of grain to Christian lands. The economy of Europe contracted by two thirds during the Sixth and Seventh Centuries.

Spain and Turkey were invaded, hammered over and over again, in relentless and unceasing wars. Each new caliph would renew the wars and attempt to outdo his predecessors in savagery and enormity because this is what Mohammedan law teaches.

By the Thirteenth Century, just when Thomas Aquinas was successfully integrating Aristotelian philosophy into Christian Theology, an influential Mohammedan philosopher named Algazel convinced his world that there were no such thing as cause and effect, no secondary causes, nothing but the direct will of God. Fire does not cause paper to burn, the paper is destroyed by God’s will. In the meanwhile, Christians, everywhere these days portrayed as the enemies of science and learning, established the parallel institutions of the university system and academic freedom. Mohammedan scholars were having their schools and observatories closed.

And the fighting never stopped. Never. In no decade in history did the Moslems live in peace with their neighbors, except a brief respite when they were conquered by European powers.

When they invaded Egypt, it was 98% Christian; now there are nine thousand Coptic Christians left. Most Americans do not even know Egypt was ever a Christian land. Many Americans have heard of the Armenian genocide by the Turk: very few know this was Mohammedan Turks killing Armenian Christians, who had been Christian since the Fourth Century, since before the Fall of Rome.

Europe fed the slave trade of the Moslems for centuries. Our boys and women were routinely captured, sodomized and raped. The African slave trade was entirely Moslem for centuries, until the Spaniards, the only land in history ever to successfully throw back a Mohammedan conquest, adopted this practice from their ex-conquerors. Slavery had been largely abolished in Europe after the Christianization of the Roman Empire, going the way of gladiatorial games.

Ours is a shocking and traumatizing history: merely looking at the maps of the centuries between the sixth and the sixteenth, and seeing the Christian lands that one reached from the Rock of Gibraltar to beyond Persia turning rapidly Mohammedan as they are conquered, enslaved, subjected to this ruthless system of conversion-by-the-sword.

The Mohammedan dominion of Europe was curtailed at the battle of Lepanto; the Barbary Pirates to whom Jefferson (at first) paid tribute were quelled when France conquered Algiers, and then when the Ottoman Empire collapsed there were no longer any major Mohammedan powers threatening anyone.

For a very few, brief years, the main energies of the West were involved in that act of self-destruction known as World War One, and preoccupied with battles against national socialism and communist socialism. The self-absorption of the West, and a foolish notion that democrat republics could exist outside the ambit of civilized peoples, led to the rapid de-Westernization of the Mohammedan territories, and in a few decades, from the end of the Cold War to now, the somewhat secularized and westernized Moslem world returned enthusiastically to their Sharia Law roots, and now attempt once again to resume the endless war against Christendom Mohammedan started in the Sixth Century. Lacking the men and material for a direct battlefield assault, they proceed by the time honored techniques of economic warfare, propaganda, and random acts of terror inflicted on the innocent.

So history teaches that the Mohammedans are relentless, and merciless, and that they have tortured, enslaved, defeated and humiliated Christians again and again and again, with only a brief respite between Lepanto and the Cold War. With the Fall of the Soviet Union, they emerge again.

History shows that only Spain ever repelled the Mohammedan, and only due to a Christian warrior spirit long vanished from the Earth. Asia Minor, Armenia, Syria, and all the Middle East and North African lands never were free again once they fell. As far away as Ireland, whole coastal villages were depopulated by Moslem corsairs, and every man, woman, and child carried off in chains.

And history teaches that we cooperated and collaborated with them. Small wonder our history is not taught: we are ashamed of it. The Crusades are perhaps the sole shining example of a unified Christian world rising against the relentless Muslim aggression, and even at that, the conflict between Byzantine and Roman Christians turned bloody. (Ironically, this one glorious time is the only period modernism heaps shame upon Christianity, when we defended ourselves, and regained the Holy Land for a century.) Meanwhile both Jewish merchants and princes of Italy participated in the Moslem slave trade.

History teaches us that they are a satanic mockery of Christian civilization, the opposite of everything we believe, or a gross parody of it, and the war is endless. History shows that we are cringing losers and they are the insanely sadistic winners, their sadism glorified and made sanctimonious by fanaticism.

History teaches us to be afraid. And so we are. Too afraid to talk about it. Too afraid to name the enemy.

History says this is a religious war. But you cannot win a religious war if you trample your religion underfoot.

Richard the Lionheart might be willing to march to war and face capture, torture and death for the greater glory of Christ; but is any pajama-wearing cocoa-sipping partisan of gay marriage, gun control, socialized medicine or free trade in aborted baby organs willing to march into the hell of war for his self-centered and sick beliefs?

Photo by jackof / Getty Images

Read other articles in the Help for the History Impaired series.

John C. Wright is a retired attorney and newspaperman who was only once hunted by the police. He is a graduate of St. John College (home of Mortimer Adler’s “Great Books Program). In 2004 he foreswore his lifelong atheism and joined the Roman Catholic Church. He has published over 10 SF novels, including one nominated for a Nebula award, and was described by Publisher’s Weekly as “this fledgling century’s most important new SF talent.” He currently lives in fairytale-like happiness with his wife, the authoress L. Jagi Lamplighter, and their four children.

Note: If you follow the retail links in this post and make purchases on the site(s), Defy Media may receive a share of the proceeds from your sale through the retailer’s affiliate program.

Keep up with the best of The Wright Perspective below. Click through the gallery to read more from John C. Wright.

End of Unreason

Let's make 2016 the Year of Reason, when logic came back from its long exile in human affairs and was restored to its proper throne in the human soul.

Photo by Getty Images

Shockproofing Society

Don't miss this two-part series from John C. Wright on the destruction of the West by the Left.

Photo by Getty Images


Read John C. Wright's latest in his "Help for the History Impaired" series -- On Mohammedanism.

Photo by jackof / Getty Images

Natural Law and Unnatural Acts

John C. Wright weighs in on Kim Davis, the SCOTUS and same-sex marriage.

Photo by Ty Wright/Getty Images


Read John C. Wright's piece on the truth about Leftism and literature.

Peace and Nothingness

Despite that the mainstream doctrine of our postchristian and therefore postrational society is that thoughts have no meaning, unfortunately, thoughts do have meaning and ideas have consequences.

Equality and Nothingness

Ours is the first civilization in the history of mankind ever to embrace Nihilism as the mainstream, if not the official, doctrine of our most foundational beliefs.

Help for the History Impaired

This column is one in an ongoing series attempting to shed light into the wide vistas of history which modern education has left dark. Here, we discuss the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.

The Nameless Evil

This odd reluctance to come to grips with their foe, or call things by their right names, is a quirk of Leftist psychology that crops up often enough to form a pattern.

Church and State

Read John C. Wright's column about the evisceration of church and state, as well as these other essays you shouldn't miss:

Faith and Politics

John C. Wright voices his opinion on faith in several of his articles. Read some of our favorites:

Political Correctness

John C. Wright propose that Political Correctness rots the brain, and that brainrot in turn will rot the heart, which in turn will rot the soul.

The Seven Right Ideas of Conservatism

Conservatism is summed up in seven ideas. Read the overview of The Seven Right Ideas of Conservatism, and an in-depth piece on each.

  1. Truth
  2. Virtue
  3. Beauty
  4. Reason
  5. Romance
  6. Liberty
  7. Salvation
Also don't miss The Seven Bad Ideas of Leftism.

The Unreality Principle

Read The Wright Perspective's two-part series about The Unreality Principle:

Talking Past Each Other

Why are political discussions between Left and Right futile? Read John C. Wright's two-part series about talking past each other: Part 1 and Part 2.
Use Arrow Keys (← →) to Browse

Be Sociable, Share!

Related Posts

  • Steven Schwartz

    There’s a lot wrong here, but one particular part got to me:

    “to this day, the Church of Saint Sophia in Constantinople is used as a mosque, in triumphant mockery of the defeated Christians.”

    Look here:

    It’s a museum.

    As opposed to, say, the Mosque-Cathedral of Cordoba.
    (Sorry — the Hagia Sophia is one of my favorite buildings, so seeing mistakes about it leap out in particular.)

    • chrisgale

      Ataturk made it a museum when he attempted to secularize the Ottomans. The Muslim faithful, who now run Turkey, want it to return to being a mosque.

    • James

      Actually most don’t. At least not those in the city nor more likely most in the country.

      Its basically the AKP party and its idiots going at it.

    • Sky Thibedeau

      Don’t worry Putin will make it into an Eastern Orthodox Cathedral again soon enough.

    • borderwalker

      Since we’re all using Wikipedia today:

      Hagia Sophia … is a former Christian patriarchal basilica (church), later an imperial mosque, and now a museum (Ayasofya Müzesi) in Istanbul, Turkey. … The building was a mosque from 29 May 1453 until 1931. It was then secularized and opened as a museum on 1 February 1935.

      So, it was a mosque, but only for 478 years (and it looks like it soon will be again…)

      From the Wikipedia article: Although use of the complex as a place of worship (mosque or church) was strictly prohibited, in 2006 the Turkish government allowed the allocation of a small room in the museum complex to be used as a prayer room…and since 2013 from the minarets of the museum the muezzin sings the call to prayer twice per day, in the afternoon. … Since the early 2010s, several campaigns and government high officials … have been demanding that Hagia Sophia be converted into a mosque again. In an attempt to retaliate against Pope Francis after his acknowledgment of the Armenian Genocide, the Mufti of Ankara, Mefail Hızlı, stated that the conversion of Haghia Sophia into a mosque will be accelerated.

      Even if you’re not a student of history, or an architect, it’s hard to look at that beautiful, giant pile of stone and miss the minarets.

    • Paul Widdecombe

      True enough, it is a museum. A rather curious museum, at that. One that prefers not to display it’s incredible mosaics and frescoes, preferring instead to keep them covered up under black paint, with a big white logo that says something about how great a certain deity is.

      No doubt art historians in Turkey have agonised, long and hard on the implications restoring these artworks to their former glory would have for the historical authenticity lost in undoing the later “modifications”.

      I’m sure religious fanaticism doesn’t even enter the frame when pondering complex aesthetic-cultural-historical dilemmas such as this. We can only be thankful that the stewardship of this incredible legacy is in the hands of enlightened sophisticates who value preservation of authenticity over the shallow capitalistic gains that uncovering this gaudy and, in all likelihood, triggeringly offensive, early chintz.

      On the other hand, the architectural vandalism of the fussy Renaissance additions to the Córdoba mosque’s elegant smplicity need undoing asap.

    • Kirsten Edwards

      One of my “bucket list” things to do was visit it, and see the famous golden dome floating in the sunlight through the windows. Can’t do that anymore.
      It’s been despoiled. My mom was there just a few years ago and confirmed it’s mosaics are covered up and destroyed. Why I should believe your second-hand propaganda claims rather than her first person account is beyond me.
      So I suspect that since your “big mistake” is in fact accurate your “a lot wrong here” that you cannot be arsed to explicate is also bogus.

    • Shawn Smith

      If you see some of the other discussions Schwarz has participated in, you’ll understand; he is allergic to truth and reason. They are painful to him. He must spew lies like a squid squirting ink to protect himself from them.

    • Steven Schwartz

      Can’t do that anymore.
      It’s been despoiled. My mom was there just a few years ago and confirmed it’s mosaics are covered up and destroyed.

      How this contradicts it being a “museum”, I don’t know. It is not preserved the way you want it to be — that doesn’t mean it’s not functioning as a museum rather than as a mosque.

      You don’t need to disbelieve either account, in other words; they are perfectly harmonious.

      And my “lot wrong here” is, in part, because I’ve gotten tired of pointing out in great details Mr. Wright’s problems and having people complain “TL:DR!”

    • George Talbot

      Off topic and out of the blue, is this the same Steven Schwartz who went to the University of Chicago and played in Cliff Winnig’s Amber Roleplaying Game? (Having trouble trying to leave a note on Disqus.)

    • Steven Schwartz

      I am very curious a) about how you know me, as I admit I’m blanking on your name, and b) yes, I am. :)

    • George Talbot

      I thought I recognized your textual style. :) I was also in Cliff’s game and I played the shapeshifting unicorn. You should recall a different name for me. :)

    • George Talbot

      If you have livejournal, you can leave me a message a if there’s no good way to leave a Disqus message.

  • ludomancer

    So what’s this, then? Liberal propaganda?:

    • borderwalker

      Well, it is Wikipedia.

      That said, one counterexample doesn’t prove Mr. Wright entirely wrong.

      Are you claiming that Berber, Algerian, and Arabian Muslims had the same love of learning as the Persian Muslims?

      Are you claiming that Egypt was not once overwhelmingly Christian?

    • Camestros Felapton

      //Are you claiming that Berber, Algerian, and Arabian Muslims had the same love of learning as the Persian Muslims?//

      It is unlikely that different cultures with different histories and in different economic circumstances are going to have, in general ‘the same love of learning’. What does that show? That Islam is just one aspect of multiple groups of different peoples at that time. If your point is that Islam didn’t magically bless all Muslim nations with the same levels of scholarship then I agree. Wright makes the same irrational error but more egregiously – assuming that magically Islam as a religion not only becomes the only relevant aspect of multiple different cultures at one time but also over hundreds of years also.

      The basic factual errors in Wright’s piece are embarrassing.

    • BigGaySteve

      I told a friend about who worried about his insulin if the power went out in the summer about the evaporative coolers the tour guide at Pompeii explained. He looked it up online and said I was wrong a moslem invented zeer pots. I had to explain that Pompeii was not only pre islam but the tour I took was 5 years before the moslem “invention”, I hear a moslem boy invented a “briefcase Clock”
      The best part of reading JCW is when you come across a word you have to look up.

    • Asher Jacobson

      The article you cited explicates that the scholars involved there were primarily Christian and also employed many Jews.

      I remember reading some time ago about investigation into the individuals who were scholars under the Islamic Golden Age, finding that well over 90 percent were non-Arab, non-Islamic.

      Sure, stuff was preserved under Islamic rule but to say that it was only preserved *because* of Islam seems pretty far-fetched.

    • Kirsten Edwards

      Possibly. Even probably. Wikipedia editors have a habit of editing out controversial opinions, deleting sources that contradict a narrative they prefer and shutting down dissent.
      Most of the ones who engage in that sort of behavior are, in fact progressives. I wouldn’t call them “liberal” myself.

  • HMSLion

    People forget that the Crusades were a counteroffensive…against an initial onslaught that was only stopped at Tours. In FRANCE.

    • armenia4ever

      And the various invasions and attacks into Sicily and even a sack of Rome itself in I believe 843 AD

    • BigGaySteve

      Vlad Tepes was willing to elevate moslems over his own people :)

    • Shawn Smith

      Yes, he did so rather pointedly, I recall.

    • Kasimir Urbanski

      Vlad Tepes was declared a hero of Christendom by the pope at the time for his guerrilla war against the Turks in his native Wallachia. He and his brother (who eventually took the name Radu Bey) were made hostages of the Turkish Sultan when they were boys, and both converted to Islam. As it turns out, Vlad was faking it, but Radu wasn’t. As soon as Vlad got away from the Sultan (ironically after the Sultan had sent him, thinking he was loyal, to go conquer Wallachia) he started slaughtering every Turk he could find. Eventually, the Sultan sent his own brother after him. Sometime later, Vlad may or may not have become a vampire.

  • Apollyon

    1683 was a little bit important. Began to push back the forces of Islam. I would argue the point ‘there is no conspiracy’. How does one explain the enthusiastic embrace by politicians, media, multinationals, entertainers, educators, etc. for mass immigration of Muslims into Western lands? It can’t all be from lack of knowledge.

    • BigGaySteve

      It seems to be the same group that invited them into Spain. Did you see the hideous former stasi member jewish lesbian Anetta Kahane, whose job it is to take kids away from people who post truth about moslem refusegees on facebook in Germany?

    • Amaryllis

      I don’t think there is a conspiracy in the sense that there is any structural, organized movement of any kind. But it’s the same reason that moderates on the internet will shoot their nominal ‘friends’ for the sake of their enemies (but never the reverse). Some people just have this perverse, lickspittle-y desire to prove to their opponents that they are ‘one of the good ones,’ particularly when they know that their enemies are far more dangerous and unforgiving than their friends. Christianity is seen as non-threatening, even in its extremist fringes (who are known for being kooky, angry weirdos with mean picket signs, rather than DANGEROUS TERRORISTS), so they have no fear of dumping all over it. Islam is blatantly dangerous, and Muslims are very good at playing the same kind of games of entryism and ‘let’s be friends…until I have enough power that I don’t need you anymore’ that liberals are so fond of. Islam really does perfectly encompass everything that the far left practices and believes (and in actions even follows its central ideas to their logical conclusion), so they are natural allies

    • sweetsuzee

      I cannot understand how anyone can be in favor of this invasion of Muslims. 1683 was important. However, it didn’t quell the Ottomans truly and they rebelled with a hard hand and violent sword until the end of WWI. Prior to that it was the Moors and their conquests for about a 750 year reign until Queen Isabella got totally fed up in 1492. The Crusades were important and they are a very significant reason why many of us are here and alive today.

  • Harry P.

    >You have no doubt heard that there was a Golden Age of Islam, where
    Muslim scholars preserved the works of Aristotle and the ancients,
    invented the zero, or made great strides in astronomy and mathematics.
    This is all an outrageous lie, the precise opposite of the truth.

    The paragraph above is a lie and opposite of truth. Although it’s impossible to deny that Muslims destroyed some ancient text, they were also translating them and thus preserving some. And saying that Muslim scholars didn’t make great strides in mathematics (personally I don’t really know about astronomy) is ridiculous. (Zero was invented by Indians though, that’s common knowledge.)

    Ranting about lies while lying yourself is something one should be wary about.

    Just my $0.02

    • Amaryllis

      I’m personally curious where the information in the article comes from. It says that ‘an afternoon of patient reading’ is sufficient, but I have done a lot of reading (I don’t focus specifically on Islam much, but it’s inevitable to read about it when you start getting into the history of Eastern Europe), and I’ve never seen anything stated like that.

      Not even judging it one way or another, but I’d like to verify that sort of thing for myself.

    • Kirsten Edwards

      It can be a challenge. The Closed Circle by Pryce-Jones is excellent.
      Spend some time browsing through MEMRI

    • Daniel Koolbeck

      The translations were not done by Arab Moslems, but largely by Syriac Christians or Jews, the subjects of Moslem conquerors. The works of Classical Greece which the Caliphate is often credited with preserving were in no danger of being lost in Byzantine civilisation when large parts of it were conquered – the scholars who preserved that knowledge were by and large not Moslems, but rather the subjects of Moslem conquerors.

    • Harry P.

      I love vague statements like “were by and large not Moslems”. Even if I give examples of Muslim scholars who made some translations (Ibn al Banna, Abu al Wafa those two even I know about), you can just say: “but those are just few exceptions, it was mostly done by others… blah blah blah”. Fact is that not only Muslims destroyed some ancient texts and translated others, probably they even destroyed more than preserved, Christians also destroyed and translated some ancient texts. Of course now you could try to quantify evilness of these groups by trying to comparing ratios of destroyed vs. preserved, but I think it’s ridiculous.

      Also notice that you don’t even try to argue about Muslim scholars making great strides in mathematics, because that’s undeniable and I could name dozen of them.

    • Asher Jacobson

      Non- muslim subjects of islamic governments are still not muslims

    • Asher Jacobson

      Several years ago I happened upon a survey of scholars in the IGA of the region around Baghdad. Only about 1 in 20 were Arab. The rest were Assyrians, either Christians or recent Muslim converts (which was the result of Muslim oppression of non-Muslims).

      So, the author is correct that Islam did not make great intellectual advancements. What Islam did was to preside over the waning embers of the greatest outpouring of civilizational advancement ever seen: The Greeks.

    • Harry P.

      Several years ago I happened upon a unspecified paper claiming that 99 % of vague unsubstantiated claims on the Internet are lies.

      Muslims synthesized earlier developments from both greco-roman and indian origins but this doesn’t make their achievements lesser. If you for instance tried to downplay their achievements in mathematics, you would have to ignore pretty much all European developments until Newton’s and Leibnitz’ era.

      And I’m not gonna waste my time trying to research which of the Muslim scholars weren’t really Muslims, but considering that many of the most famous ones were not only scientists but also acclaimed Islamic scholars and theologians (al Banna, al Biruni, al Din Tusi, Alhazen,… hell even Avicenna was one), saying that pretty much all of them were either Christians or recent converts seems like quite doubtful claim.

    • Asher Jacobson

      Those “muslims” were populations of Christian Greeks and Syriacs recently forcibly converted. Yes, ethnicity plays a very important role as Islam is derived from Arab tribal religions. Supposedly in Islam ethnicity has no place but that has not been the usual practice, witness the animosity between Persian and Arab muslims.

      Again, the “Islamic Golden Age” was the dying embers of Greek civilization.

    • Harry P.

      You aren’t really reading what I wrote, are you? I gave you example several of several Muslim scientists/theologians and you claim they were recently converted? If that’s so, they embraced it pretty deeply, didn’t they? And of course forcible conversion was pretty common in middle ages, Christianity in Europe comes to mind, especially Teutonic Order was quite fond of it.

      And again as I already wrote in my previous reply, claiming that “”Islamic Golden Age” was the dying embers of Greek civilization” is same as saying that whole medieval scientific development in Europe was “the dying embers of Greek civilization” and pitiful attempt at hand-waving true facts.

      Ethnicity and animosity between Persians and Arab Muslims is irrelevant, you are trying to move goalposts there.

  • upfrigger

    Charles Martel of France repelled the muslims in 732, Battle of Tours – also two great battles of note in Vienna pushing back the muslims in 1529 and 1683.
    A fantastic book is WHITE GOLD, describing the centuries long pillaging and raping of European coasts for slaves (males for work, females for sex) on the part of the Barbary Coast heathens

  • bob k. mando

    “This is no conspiracy,”

    in point of fact there IS a conspiracy. one paid for by the House of Saud and used to buy the friendship of US presidents.

    when Bush stops holding hands with prince Bandar and proclaiming Islam to be the ‘religion of peace’, i’ll start discounting the “conspiracy” theories.

    i would agree that Barack Obama isn’t part of a conspiracy ( which by definition requires secrecy and hidden motives ) … that’s just right in your face.

  • Yankee Imperialist

    “The American public was largely unaware of events in the Middle East until the Carter administration.”

    That’s historically inaccurate. Americans were acutely aware of OPEC’s monopolistic practices in 1973 and the subsequent factors for their machinations.

    “when Bush stops holding hands with prince Bandar and proclaiming Islam to be the ‘religion of peace’, i’ll start discounting the “conspiracy” theories.”

    Islam is no different than Christianity when it comes to violent proclivities, past or present.

    “You have no doubt heard that there was a Golden Age of Islam, where Muslim scholars preserved the works of Aristotle and the ancients, invented the zero, or made great strides in astronomy and mathematics. This is all an outrageous lie, the precise opposite of the truth.”

    That’s not entirely accurate –>

    Mr. Wright, a fine science fiction writer, has a distinct bias, one that ardently supports Christianity. Nothing wrong in the least with his faith, were the mere exception that he is blinded by it when it comes to ultimately proclaiming “my religion is better than any other religion”.

    • Kirsten Edwards

      That’s historically inaccurate. Americans were acutely aware of OPEC’s monopolistic practices in 1973 and the subsequent factors for their machinations.
      Being aware of OPEC is hardly comparable to actually understanding what was happening in the Middle East. The number of Americans who understood Haram, jihad, the partition of India and Pakistan, the Great Game in Afghanistan, the significance of Wahabi Islam and why the Saudi Princes promoted it… just to name a few could probably be counted on the fingers of one hand.
      I have a bias that ardently supports reason and the scientific method. Doesn’t mean that I’m wrong to proclaim that both are better than superstition.
      Please explain why Islam is better than Christianity, and I’ll agree that Mr. Wright is “blinded”.

    • Yankee Imperialist

      “Being aware of OPEC is hardly comparable to actually understanding what was happening in the Middle East.”

      You conveniently forgot that I added the qualifier “subsequent factors for their machinations”. I lived through it, so I know exactly what I am talking about. The media at that time presented those matters about Muslims and their reasons for “getting back at the West”. Do not forget that Israel had fought also several wars against Muslim countries, and American citizens were privy to the reasons as well.

      “The number of Americans who understood Haram, jihad, the partition of India and Pakistan, the Great Game in Afghanistan, the significance of Wahabi Islam and why the Saudi Princes promoted it.”

      You underestimate citizens of that time frame and what they comprehended.

      “Please explain why Islam is better than Christianity,

      I never made that claim. There are those Christians, Jews, and Muslims who are of the mindset that their religion, compared to other religions, is “better” or “more superior”. Religion is a matter of faith. How is one able to quantify and qualify that one’s faith is inherently “better” compared to another faith? It’s a fools errand.

      “and I’ll agree that Mr. Wright is “blinded”.”

      No, you won’t.

  • Jon Nials

    There are 9 million Coptic Christians, not 9000. Order of magnitude problem, but they are a seriously persecuted minority cut off from all political power.

    The Crusades were a disaster, and spent more time killing Orthodox Christians than moslems. Which enabled the Moslems to conquer more territory faster. See 5th Crusade, sacking of Byzantium.

    But everything else was spot on.

  • Just this once

    “Algazel convinced his world that there were no such thing as cause and effect”

    A question on the grammar of this sentence: Is the “were” here a subjunctive, or is it an error?

    • Kirsten Edwards

      If we’re going to talk edits (assuming the author has the time or the authority to to make these kinds of updates)

      The Prince … whom he staked to the ground and built a fire on his chest should be … who he staked and and on whom he built

      The Mohammedanism, like the Stalinism who came later, should read: The Mohammedists, like the Stalinists.

      The downfall of one Byzantine, theme, province, or city should be, thane? perhaps?

      There needs to be a bit added to the clause following merely looking at the maps either at the end: … shows how much of the West was lost; or at the beginning: One can easily see this merely by etc.

      .. that democrat republics could should be democratic
      The rest of the sentence needs to end after returned enthusiastically to their Sharia Law roots with a period not a comma.
      , and now attempt once again to resume the endless war against Christendom Mohammedan started in the Sixth Century should read: They now attempt once again and war against Christendom that the Mohammedans started.

      It’s a much, much needed essay and deserves reprinting and reposting, so I hope the changes can be made.

  • Kasimir Urbanski

    Oh man, where to begin? I guess with Al-Ghazali. Your fanciful interpretation of his philosophy is an interpretation I’ve heard oft-repeated in certain fanatical anti-Islam websites but not actually an accurate one to anyone whose actually READ him. Like, say, me.

    There’s no question that there were lengthy phases of Muslim aggression and that they expanded through conquest, but (not unlike complaints modern neo-pagans and atheists make about christian expansion) the notion that all conversion was ‘by the sword’ is faulty.

    Spain was not the only nation to beat back a Muslim invasion of Europe; in fact, it took them centuries, while the Franks stopped them in their tracks at Tours. And Poland did it in one shot (on behalf of the Austrians, who didn’t show much gratitude after) at the Battle of Vienna.

    As far as Islam’s theological roots, it was at least if not more inspired by Judaism (as you point out, there were actually a lot of Jews in the region at that time) than by Christianity. It is about as much of a “mockery” of Christianity as Christianity could be said to be a “mockery” of Judaism. If you want to say “derivative of”, then sure; or “based on”/”inspired by”.

    The Hagia Sophia is not currently a mosque and hasn’t been for nearly a century, though the Islamists in Turkey really want it to be again.

    If anyone here wants to get a better idea about what Islam is and isn’t, and what it’s real problem is, by someone who’s actually studied it academically rather than someone regurgitating ultramontine papist propaganda about it, you may want to look at this article, on this very site:

    • Bronson Justice

      Islam’s theological roots: Actually there is a substantial volume of new research that identifies the roots of Islam as, very specifically, Syriac Christianity. Please see:
      - Karl-Heinz Ohlig, The Hidden Origins of Islam: New Research into Its Early History
      - Christoph Luxenberg, The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran

      Muslim Invasion: You have mis-read him. Mr. Wright said that Spain was the only nation to throw off a Muslim conquest. That’s different from turning back an invasion.

      Hagia Sophia: The Hagia Sophia has never stopped being a mosque. Even while it was a museum, part of the building was kept as a mosque out of respect for Islamic doctrine that forbids destroying mosques.

      Al-Ghazali: I have not read him and cannot comment in this regard. In general, however, the notion of the Islamic Golden Age has been strongly rebutted in recent scholarship. See
      - Emmet Scott, Mohammed & Charlemagne Revisited: The History of a Controversy

  • tz1

    Quotes, [sic] (The homies back in Detroit were better, I take it there are no homeschooled 5th graders you can turn to for proofreading)
    strength and no long need allies.
    wasteland. Te Jewish colonies of Yemen
    loss of nine tenth of the known
    foolish notion that democrat republics could exist

    You mention Spain, but last week was “Our Lady of Victory / the Rosary” specifically celebrating the victory at LePanto where the Muslims lost the sea battle due to praying the Rosary.

    “but is any pajama-wearing cocoa-sipping partisan of gay marriage, gun
    control, socialized medicine or free trade in aborted baby organs
    willing to march into the hell of war for his self-centered and sick
    beliefs?” One does not have to march into a locale one is already located at – Unless hell is a metroplex.

    Then there’s Israel. The socialist secular country that has single payer health care, pays for abortion – more liberal than the USA, and has a fraudulent fiat currency and fractional reserve banking. Numbers 25. Evangelicals, but not just them “stand with Israel”. Would it not be better to leave the conflict there (Israel has nukes), and allow EU-than-Asia?

  • Jayne


    The relentless brutality of the enemy.

    After 9/11 I had a nightmare vision of a future under the enemy as I imagine many, particularly women, did. Since then the media keeps lulling us to sleep and I have to actively seek out information on the threat we face.

    Why is the media on the side of the enemy?

    Would they be happier with a quick capitulation by the West? I suppose not, but they do confuse me.

  • verogolfer

    Mr. Wright. I’m a great admirer of your essays and novels. (One of your five-star reviews on Amazon is mine) In a conversation with two progressives on a History link, I used some of this essay, giving you credit of course. I assume since this is on the Web I could use it with proper credit. Then I thought maybe I should double check. The progressive opponents are, as usual, calling my racist, deluded, etc. The typical stuff. So I figured your essay would silence them, All my best
    George Duncan

  • Crusaderking

    There are 9 million Copts in Egypt, not 9000. Certainly a minority but not completely destroyed. (There are some indications that the number has been purposefully understated by the government as well). In addition, it is not only Spain that repelled the Moslem. The Balkans repelled the Moslem, Sicily repelled the Moslem, the Hindus of India repelled the Moslem, Russia repelled the Moslem and most recently, the Jews of Israel have repelled the Moslem. They are easily beatable if one has the will. Had the West wished it, all of North Africa and the Levant, areas taken by the Europeans in modern times, could now all be Christian or Jewish. Had the West supported the Greeks after WW1, western Asia Minor would be Greek Christian and not Turkish All it takes to beat the Moslem is the will to succeed. They are not formidable, merely ruthless, which is not the same thing.

Be Sociable, Share!