Read It IS About Islam: Exposing the Truth About ISIS, Al Qaeda, Iran, and the Caliphate by Glenn Beck Online

it-is-about-islam-exposing-the-truth-about-isis-al-qaeda-iran-and-the-caliphate

#1 bestselling author and radio host Glenn Beck exposes the real truth behind the roots of Islamic extremism in Muslim teachings in this sharply insightful handbook that debunks commonly held assumptions about Islam and the dream of a renewed caliphate.From the barbarians of ISIS to the terror tactics of Al-Qaeda and its offshoots, to the impending threat of a nuclear Iran#1 bestselling author and radio host Glenn Beck exposes the real truth behind the roots of Islamic extremism in Muslim teachings in this sharply insightful handbook that debunks commonly held assumptions about Islam and the dream of a renewed caliphate.From the barbarians of ISIS to the terror tactics of Al-Qaeda and its offshoots, to the impending threat of a nuclear Iran, those motivated by extreme fundamentalist Islamic faith have the power to endanger and kill millions. The conflict with them will not end until we face the truth about those who find their inspiration and justification in the religion itself.Drawing on quotes from the Koran and the hadith, as well as from leaders of ISIS, Al Qaeda, and the Muslim Brotherhood, Glenn Beck seeks to expose the true origins of Islamic extremism as well as the deadly theological motivations behind these agencies of destruction.Using the same unique no-holds-barred style from his bestselling books Control and Conform, Glenn Beck offers straight facts and history about the fundamental beliefs that inspire so many to kill....

Title : It IS About Islam: Exposing the Truth About ISIS, Al Qaeda, Iran, and the Caliphate
Author :
Rating :
ISBN : 9781501126123
Format Type : Paperback
Number of Pages : 272 Pages
Status : Available For Download
Last checked : 21 Minutes ago!

It IS About Islam: Exposing the Truth About ISIS, Al Qaeda, Iran, and the Caliphate Reviews

  • Khadidja
    2018-11-29 07:08

    This review contains my personal opinion and it is your right to see things differently all i'm asking is for you guys to keep an open mind and to respect it, instead of crucifying me for having a different view and position on the issues. This is not a negative feedback, the book was fine, boring at some parts full of facts that religious people won't like *but who cares, right?* my problem with it is about Islam is that it wasn't well developed the interpretation and discussion of the ideology and facts influences the reader into either liking or hating the book, for me it was intellectually unstimulating!Thirteen Deadly LiesLie #1: “Islam is a religion of peace, and Islamic terrorists aren’t really Muslims.”Lie #2: “Islam is not much different than Christianity or Judaism.” that's not a lie actually, wackos come in all shapes, race, religions, ISIS in Islam, KKK in christianity! the difference is that wackos in Islam are crazier then wackos in other religionsLie #3: “Jihad is a peaceful, internal struggle, not a war against infidels.”Lie #4: “Muslims don’t actually seek to live under sharia, let alone impose it on others; there are so many different interpretations of it anyway.” believe it or not most people DONT want to live under Shariaa's law because it's unfair to women and some of those laws violate the most basic human rightsLie #5: “America is safe from sharia law.” the WORLD is not safe from America!! Lie #6: “The Caliphate is a fanciful dream.”Lie #7: “Islam is tolerant toward non-Muslims.”Lie #8: “Addressing frustration, poverty, and joblessness in the Muslim world—maybe even climate change—will end terrorism.”Lie #9: “Critics of Islam are bigots.”Lie #10: “Islam respects the rights of women.”Lie #11: “Iran can be trusted with a nuclear weapon.” i agree, THEY CANT BE TRUSTED Lie #12: “The Muslim Brotherhood is a moderate, mainstream Islamic group.”Lie #13: “Islam respects freedom of speech.”

  • Ty
    2018-12-16 13:02

    Terrorism and violent non-state actors have emerged in the last several decades as a primary global threat to peace and stability. It is a far reaching and immersive cross-disciplinary subject that thousands of our nation’s best minds dedicate themselves to tracking and understanding; Glenn Beck is not one of those minds. In his new book It IS About Islam: Exposing the Truth About ISIS, Al Qaeda, Iran, and the Caliphate, Beck attempts to analyze Islamism and compel the reader to trace his monolithic understanding of it back to Islamic history and what he deems to be core Islamic concepts. In essence, it is a book about how Islam is fundamentally a religion that naturally yields and encouraged groups like ISIS. The book is divided into four parts: an introduction, a brief account of what Beck believes to be relevant Islamic history, a section on the “thirteen lies” of Islam, and a conclusion on what Beck sees as the way forward. The layout and flow of the book isn’t bad, but unfortunately the content is consistently poor and underdeveloped. Reading through his work, I often found his “facts” to be cherry picked, often given without context, and subjected to high levels of reductionism. Beck routinely falls victim in his writing of the problem of “too much from too little” which occurs when large conclusions are derived from singular, narrow or otherwise unrepresentative sources and is a form of deception that is often the fault of the analyst and the lack of caution and standards that they set for themselves. One of the first issues I had with Beck’s book was his definition of one of his key terms: Islamism. Beck himself states that “terminology is critical” and I wholeheartedly agree, so when I saw him fail to make clear distinctions between different types and groups of Islamists, and indeed making efforts to instead link them all together so that we might treat them all the same (while only reluctantly admitting minor differences) I was rather troubled. Beck makes little differentiation between organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood, and Al Qaeda, and even fewer between groups like Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, and ISIS, and completely fails to mention more liberal or even apolitical Islamists. This is a problem, because there is wide diversity among Islamists and many may see one another as enemies more so than allies with a common cause as Beck would depict them. To quote Princeton’s Readings in Islamist Thought compiled by Roxanne Euben and Muhammad Qasim Zaman: “Islamist thought is a complex system of representation that articulates and defines a range of identities, categories, and norms; organizes human experience into narratives that assemble past, present, and future into a compelling interpretive frame; and specifies the range and meaning of acceptable and desirable practices.” In other words: Islamism is an open playing field with ideological gambits that run the spectrum from liberal to conservative, from political to apolitical, from violent to completely pacifistic, from Salafists to modernists, and everywhere in between. Indeed, Islamism is a modern effort to look at religious foundations and attempt to re-evaluate them for present day use usually in some sort of political or comprehensive manner under some form of sharia law (however such law is interpreted). In this sense, Islamism is a more modern phenomenon that represents a sort of rebellion by some against the traditional schools of formal Islamic jurisprudential thought. As Charles Kurzman writes in his book: Missing Martyrs: Why There are so Few Muslim Terrorists “laypeople have generated a profusion of do-it-yourself theology and jurisprudence. Any college grad in a cave can claim to speak for Islam.” As technology has opened up communication networks, religious texts have become more and more easily accessible. Theological discussion is thus, no longer the purview of only the classically and formally educated (though it never was completely exclusionary). This opened up religious interpretation to the everyman, and indeed most big name Islamists including major personalities such as Hassan al Banna, Sayyid Qutb, and even Osama bin Laden (all of whom Beck references) all lack formal scholarly religious education, and were largely poorly versed in traditional Islamic usul al fiqh (formal legal and theological methodology). Instead, such actors usually claimed to be holders of new revealed messages from God or brought forth new, often politicized interpretations of Islam. In other words, as Beck progresses in his book promoting a singular understanding of Islamists (and indeed a conservative violent one at that) and as he suggests, that said Islamists practice a distinctly medieval version of Islam (a popular refrain in general) here he is flat out wrong, and fails to recognize a bulk of the world’s Islamists when depending on so shallow of a definition. In fact, Salafism (a significant grouping within both Jihadi and Islamist fields), by its nature jettisons much of what would normally count as its history and civilization.Contrary to Beck’s assertions that the Jihadi agenda is “right on track” Jihadis have long been highly disappointed at the poor turnout among Muslims and at the low level of support they have received. “We are most amazed that the community of Islam is still asleep and heedless while its children are being wiped out and killed everywhere and its land is being diminished every day, God help us.” Al Qaeda’s affiliate in Saudi Arabia noted. Major revolutionaries including bin Laden, and Zawahiri have engaged in the same lament, with Abu Musab al-Suri noting that it was “regrettable” that so few Muslims, only “one in a million,” have committed themselves to jihad. The oft quoted revolutionary Sayyid Qutb (who Beck uses to try to link the Muslim Brotherhood to Al Qaeda and other modern terrorist groups) went even further in his analysis and stated flat out: “the Muslim community has been extinct for centuries.” Beck of course quoted the same book that this sentiment appeared in, but for some reason didn’t feel the need to recognize the fact that Qutb openly asserted that his viewpoint was wholly unpopular within not only Islam, but his own Muslim Brotherhood social circles. Indeed, While Beck pushes his readers to link splinter movement such as the Egyptian Islamic Jihad to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, he conveniently leaves out the fact that the Brotherhood’s supreme guide at the time, Hassan al-Hudaybi wrote his own book at the same time as Milestones was published entitled: Preachers not Judges, which categorically rejected the kind of violence that Qutb supporters would utilize in their formation of Egypt’s early jihadi groups and which would go on to inspire Al Qaeda. Why Beck decided to ignore Hudaybi’s work, despite his role as the supreme guide and despite the books popularity, and instead focus only on Qutb is something of a curious mystery. Numerous other examples of seeming intellectual dishonesty or simple mistakes surfaced while reading Beck’s book. He tends to lump all Shias together and to then equates Shia beliefs with the revolutionary government of Iran. As Vali Nasr notes though in his book: The Shia Revival: How Conflicts within Islam Will Shape the Future; Such an oversimplification of Shi’ism is not particularly useful in terms of analysis or even in terms of a basic understanding of how 12er Shi’ism traditionally functions. Nasr instead showcases the fact that revolutionary and even political Shi’ism is historically new and very uncommon. Indeed political Islam is not popular within Usuli Shiism at all where apolitical theology tends to rule the day. Most 12er Shias, he contends, look elsewhere for spiritual guidance and tend to see Ayatollah Khamenei as a state and political authority rather than a truly religious spiritual leader (Beck on the other hand incorrectly identifies Khamenei as the most dominant and popular spiritual guide for Shias). Instead, such religious guidance tends to focus around a cadre of other Ayatollahs usually based out of Qom and Najaf. In fact, one of the most popular spiritual guides of 12er Shi’ism (Ali al-Sistani – who has a larger religious following than Khamenei), as I write this, is supporting protests in southern Iraq against the Shia Iraqi government which Beck asserts is a puppet state of Iran. The notion that Shias are a force that the Grand Ayatollah of Iran can order around or who owe their religious loyalty to the Iranian state completely ignores how Usuli Shi’ism traditionally works, and completely ignores the strong tradition within Usuli Shi’ism where ayatollahs, by religious custom / law hold significantly differing views from one another in order to promote diversity and debate. Unity of message within 12er Shi’ism is a rare thing. Beck’s inability to notice such wide diversity within a major Islamic community is telling as to his inexperience in, and unfamiliarity with, the subject matter that he is attempting to write on. Another issue that I had with Beck’s work was his depiction of ISIS. He uses its apparent popularity to showcase how strongly the group’s message rings with Muslims. Yet as David Kilcullen, Former Chief Strategist in the Office of the Coordinator for Counter-terrorism at the U.S. State Department, and previous senior counter-insurgency adviser to General David Petraeus notes in his recent work Blood Year: Terror and the Islamic State; many ISIS recruits aren’t well versed in the Islamic faith or are even largely secular remnants of the Iraqi military. Indeed he details, contrary to Beck’s purely religious ideological depiction of ISIS, how ISIS was buttressed by fighting support from factions that don’t share its core ideology, but share a common goal in opposition to Iraq’s Shia dominated central government. A big concern that I further had with Beck’s book, and one I frequently run into is his treatment of the Quran and the hadith as reference material. To his credit, Beck makes the uncommonly admitted note that hadiths are all judged based on their independent weakness or strength, but despite recognizing this, cites hadith as if they were all the same and makes absolutely no distinction between hadith collections as if Shias would be inclined to follow largely Sunni hadiths. Similarly, while he makes the crucial note that the Quran, unlike the Bible is written in the first person and thus must be read differently than third person narratives, he proceeds to treat Quran as a self-evident third person narrative in his citations without any care for the crucial historical context under which the revelations were revealed. Far from supporting Beck’s interpretations of scripture, Islamic theologians would cringe at his severely poor methodology. Indeed he often treats many of his personal interpretations of scripture and other texts as universal, when they, in reality, represent minority viewpoints or aren’t even used at all by most Islamists, let alone most Muslims. At other times Beck routinely take specific works and then attempts to paint them as having universal application.A good example of the above latter was his use of Reliance of the Traveler as a single source to cover all of Islam when discussing his understanding of the concept of Takiyah. Apparently unbeknownst to him, he wasn’t citing a work widely used by Islamists, or even by most Muslims, but rather a text which focuses on discussions within the formal Shafi’I school of Islamic jurisprudence: a school that ISIS not only rejects as valid, but against which it is in open rebellion. Likewise, most Salafis, through their desire to look to Islam’s roots, and who reject most medieval Islamic literature, would similarly reject the Reliance of the Traveler given its roots in the 14th century. It is simply too modern for such Salafis. His historical overview is highly stilted and dishonestly parsed to support his main theme: he tries to link Islam with Nazism during WWII while ignoring the hundreds of thousands of Muslims who fought for the allies; he links the Armenian Genocide to Islam without mentioning that it occurred under the auspices of the more secular Young Turk movement; He brings up the execution of the males of the Banu Qurayza as an example (his only example) of Muhammad’s “massacres,” but completely fails to mention that it wasn’t ordered by Muhammad, but by a third party arbitrator judging not under Islamic law, but under Judaic law (as detailed by Karen Armstrong’s Muhammad: A Biography of the Prophet). Another major point of contention and poor analysis was Beck’s attempt to point to the Arab Spring a proof that Muslims want to overturn liberal democratic forms of political representation with Islamism. To do this, Beck focuses primarily on Egypt, and the fact that after Mubarak was ousted, an Islamist party (the Freedom and Justice Party) was able to capture the presidency and a significant portion of the parliament. Beck makes sloppy assumptions here, claiming that because an Islamist party was voted into power then it meant that people voted for them specifically because they were Islamist. He offers no supporting evidence for this theory, and unfortunately for him (but fortunately for us) the professional analytical world is saturated with research precisely on this topic.Caryle Murphy a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, points out in her book Passion for Islam: Shaping the Modern Middle East: The Egyptian Experience that if Islamist parties were swept into power based on their Islamist ideals then support for Islamist parties should remain durable in the face continuing economic hardship; this is not what we have seen happen though as is clearly evidenced by the fact that the Muslim Brotherhood and Morsi quickly lost popular support during their rule ushering in widespread protests and an eventual popular coup. If it were really all about Islam as Beck suggests, then we would have expected to have seen continued strong support from the bulk of the Brotherhood’s supporters even during the constitutional crisis and continued periods of political and economic instability. There are numerous other structural, social, and organizational causal variables, but few have to do with leaning purely on religious ideological attitudes. Beck continues with his stilted dialogue by painting a picture of the Muslim Brotherhood being allies of Al Qaeda when in fact, the opposite is true. Al Qaeda has remained publicly critical of the Muslim Brotherhood and has directly blamed it for its inability to better radicalize Islamic populations and call them to the task of Jihad. Al Qaeda is fundamentally against participation in political elections and secular governments that the Muslim Brotherhood engages in and groups like ISIS and Boko Haram go as far as to label them unbelievers for such activities. Marc Lynch, director of the Institute for Middle East Studies, notes in his paper, Jihadis and the Ikhwan (Muslim Brotherhood) that: “In a series of tapes and writings, Zawahiri savaged Hamas and the Egyptian MB for their participation in elections and public life. Al‐Baghdadi and Abu Hamza identified the MB as the driving force behind the setbacks of the jihad in Iraq, pointing not only to the Iraqi Islamic Party (an MB affiliate), but also to a wide range of other Sunni Islamist adversaries lumped together under the MB label.”In fact, Ayman al-Zawahiri, the current head of Al Qaeda himself published a work specifically denouncing the Muslim Brotherhood that he titled Bitter Harvest that clearly elucidates major doctrinal divides. Likewise, the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood (and its regional affiliates) have been similarly highly critical of groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS with Lynch noting: “the group has consistently condemned virtually every al‐Qa’ida attack in the Muslim world, from Morocco and Algeria to Indonesia and India, as well as Abu Mus’ab al‐Zarqawi’s attacks on civilians and on the Shi’a in Iraq” Such a division between these groups is perhaps even larger than the Sino-Soviet split was during the Cold War, and yet Beck cannot see it because he is too focused on his version of the Red Scare. Beck continues his book recounting how successful terrorists have been in executing their “grand plan” and the phases therein; once again, the reality is the exact opposite. He points to the Arab Spring as the “uprising” that Al Qaeda had been hoping for, but it was anything but. Al Qaeda had no interest in a liberal uprising against governments, or movement towards political discourse and engagement by opposition parties such as the Muslim Brotherhood, nor were they interested in opposition messages articulated via primarily economic and social grievances. Egypt is not an example of how Al Qaeda and ISIS are winning, it is an example of how their influence failed to drive discourse in Egypt. Zawahiri stated himself: “There is no solution except through jihad, all other solutions are futile. Rather, other solutions would only worsen the state of dilapidation and submissiveness in which we live; [purported solutions that exclude jihad] are equivalent to treating cancer with aspirin.” Thus the notion that they would see the elections in Tunisia for example as a success as Beck would have us believe; instead indicates a fundamental lack of basic knowledge and understanding of these actors. Of particular note is his rather disgusting assertion that the fact that Sunnis and Shias are apparently killing each other is a “silver lining;” a grossly inhumane take on the murder of tens of thousands of civilians and relatively innocent individuals who are the primary casualties among such conflicts. It is also ignorant the fact that such fighting is good for ISIS and that ISIS indeed depends on it in order to promote their agenda and regional propaganda message of being the “protector of Sunnis.” Beck’s silver lining is nothing more than an utter disaster for peace and stability, anti-terrorism campaigns in general, and the eradication of ISIS as an entity specifically. Overall, my largest criticism of Beck’s work is not his lack of knowledge, it is not his reductionist, or low academic and analytical standards and methodologies; but rather his central thesis that the Quran specifically supports terrorism and mass violence, and that this is the most accurate method of practicing Islam thus supporting his notion that ISIS is indeed greatly Islamic. Never mind his complete lack of analysis of the four main schools of Sunni Jurisprudence and the fact that they all disagree with him, or how a majority of Muslims decide to practice their faith. The problem with this flat uncompromising stance is that it empowers ISIS and its ilk, and showcases it as the only true expression of Islam. Beck utilizes the same takfiri sentiment that ISIS does, and would deny the validity of how over one billion people chose to define their personal faith and relationship with their God. I find that highly arrogant and indeed highly ignorant, and it offers us absolutely no tactical advantage, but rather alienates possible allies while empowering our most bitter foes. He claims he hopes for an Islamic reformation, but he would make groups like ISIS the sole drivers of authentic religious discourse. Toward the end of his book he makes the comment: “We need to see peoples and groups for what they really are, not what we want them to be.” I couldn’t agree more, I just wish he would take his own advice.

  • Ron
    2018-11-26 10:08

    I hate Glenn Beck and I always have. So the idea of reading anything by him was both embarrassing and repulsive to me. Unfortunately, I feel like our media has been too politically correct and an apologist towards the threat of ISIS, other jihadist groups, and so called "lone wolves" on western civilization so I reluctantly picked up this book to see how the far right view events.I have to admit that the book was excellent! He has provided a lot of quotes from the Quran and from Islamist terrorists to support the claim that the terrorist will not stop until Sharia Law is governing everyone on the planet. This is not an indictment of all muslims but it is an indictment of jihadists who have taken the words from the Quran and used them further their goals of creating an islamic nation.If you want to know how and why ISIS is motivated and why people are flocking to join them, this is the book you must read.And no, I cannot believe that I said ANYTHING from Glenn Beck is a must read but if you are concerned about what's going on without a politically correct filter, this is a must read.

  • Haitham
    2018-12-07 12:52

    I read one chapter which is "Lie #3: Islam is not much different than Christianity or Judaism." There is no thing more than superficial information. Actually, it's like what you see in Fox News.

  • Yelda Basar Moers
    2018-11-28 07:10

    With the bombings in Istanbul yesterday I hope Glenn Beck and his publishers will see that it is NOT about Islam. ISIS has bombed innocent civilians in a country that is 99 percent Muslim. Clearly it is NOT Islam. Shame on you Glenn Beck! And shame on your publishers for printing this reckless, unfair and untruthful book.Get your facts straight. You may want to start by visiting the Muslim world. Ignorance breeds ignorant writing.

  • Jordan Anderson
    2018-11-28 09:01

    I sat here, and tried to come up with a decent, conclusive review of Glenn Beck's newest book, but the longer I stared at my computer screen and tried to formulate something that wouldn't make me seem like a biased reader, it quickly became apparent that that wasn't going to happen.You see, while I've had my own concerns about Glenn Beck in the past (neo-conservative, nutjob, conspiracy theorist), I already had my own conceived notions about Islam and terrorism. Though I was only 13 when the events of September 11, 2001 unfolded before my bowl of Cheerios, it was at that moment I realized there were people out there who hated me as an American and would do whatever they could to strike fear in my country.Fast forward 14 years (and isn't it slightly ironic that I picked up and finished this book just a few days after the 9/11 anniversary?), and those that were responsible for such a significant event are still out there, still trying to make Americans feel like there is a target on their back, while at the same time celebrities and authors and politicians still try to defend those that practice this form of Islam and continue to wage Jihad upon us, our allies, and anyone who refuses to bend to their wills.I could try and summarize this book, but there are a lot of others who have done a far better job than I ever could. Let's just say what Beck has managed to cram in a such a short book is eye-opening, fascinating, and utterly scary. Other authors wouldn't even dare to publish such a scathing (yet true) summary of a religion that spews so much hatred, and yet Beck bravely wrote here is possibly one of the best non-fiction publications I've ever had the pleasure to read.

  • Robb Menlove
    2018-11-20 08:51

    I am a very conservative individual that loves America--the greatest nation in the history of the earth. I generally like Glenn Beck but this was simply an irresponsible effort. He repeatedly uses quotes from the world's most odorous terrorists and then says, "See, that's what Muslims believe" as if those butchers speak for the 1.7 billion Muslims of the world. He concludes every chapter with a ridiculous manipulative deduction that leaps far beyond what his shallow sources even suggest. At best, this is crude and reckless yellow journalism.

  • RJ
    2018-11-24 06:56

    Can we stand against the threats to practice our freedoms and resist the fears in order to retain our Constitution as the laws of the land? I hope so, but considering the lack of backbone displayed by our leaders of politics and industry, I have my doubts. Sharia law holds no relevant place in this country. We open our doors to all immigrants to share in our rights and privileges, not to pollute and destroy our democracy with incompatibilities. A must read for all Americans.

  • AnaVlădescu
    2018-11-28 07:10

    Pretty militant in its tone, and if you can get over the author's permanent sense of self-righteousness, it offers good and fact-based insight into why "islamism" should not be considered the same as "islam", particularly by constatly referring back to the Quoran and higlighting the mistakes that moderates make in trying to argue that Islam is a religion of peace.FYI: this book is a cherry-picked version of why people should be completely against islamism. It is militant and the tone can be downright annoying, especially at times when it argues that "too much political corectness can hurt everybody". that's true, but too much of everything can hurt everybody, and Beck's pow is definitely on the extreme side of the spectrum. not once does he mention prevention or rehabilitation, not once does he propose an actual solution to the problem: just free speech here, free speech there, free speech everywhere, don't be afraid to say something against ISIS, even at the threat of being blown up. I find his criticism on South Park refusing to air an episode joking about Mohammed after they have received bomb and death threats to be absolutely ridiculous. No, not everyone can be "one of the righteous ones", like Beck hopes to be by puting himself out there and claiming to write a book for your enlightenment, you poor coward you. I maybe wouldn't want to share a table with Beck, but I still believe in the same thing as he does: ISIS (and all other islamist groups) need to be taken at face value and obliterated.

  • Zarah
    2018-11-30 06:48

    Concise and fact based book. I didn't see any assertions made in the entirety of this book that was not backed up by multiple sources. The back of the book has all the sources listed for each chapter. What I particularly like is that Beck encourages more research be done individually by the reader. Too many authors of non-fiction expect you to take their word as gold. I found this to be a good starting point for understanding Islamic extremism.

  • Clint Priest
    2018-11-23 11:59

    Can best sum up this must-read by a quote in the epilogue: 'Silence in the face of evil is evil itself.'

  • Ciera Harris
    2018-12-10 13:46

    "Political correctness is beating common sense. Once the floodgates open—once a visible system of sharia courts is allowed to operate and coexist with U.S. law—there will be no going back." (pg. 133)Heck! This book was a GOOD READ. Glenn Beck cites a multitude of credible sources to back up his claims that Islam, yes, Islam, is at the root of the terrorism around the globe, and he gives us a call to action to stop the oppression. I like how relevant his claims are, and how he provides legitimate possible solutions to fight extremism. Unfortunately, the world is probably doomed, but we as citizens can still attempt our best to save as many lives as possible until the devil which lurks underneath the veil of Islamism is ripped off and the devil is exposed for what it really is. I hate political correctness, I really do.Five stars.

  • Cindy
    2018-12-03 07:58

    Controversial and valid ... well narrated and recommended.,

  • Rama
    2018-11-21 14:56

    The emerging faces of Islam This book consists of three parts; Islam 101, Thirteen Deadly Lies, and What Can Be Done (about these lies). Glenn Beck provides a good introduction to Islam, its teachings and its political influence in the first section of the book, but the critical piece is in the second section that deals with 13 lies that liberal media and our leaders spread about Islam and make us believe that it is peaceful, and the violence is committed only by a few “radicalized” extremists who have nothing to do with Islam. Beck uses this section to analyze if Islam is peaceful? Is Islam similar to Christianism? Is sharia law harmless? Does Islam believe in women’s rights? And is the freedom of speech compatible with Islam. The scary part is that Islamic ideologies such as sharia law, jihad, fatwa, jizya (a capitation tax levied on non-Muslims), beheadings of infidels, death for apostasy, intolerance to other faiths and cultures are real and here to stay in Western culture. My favorite part of the book is about the rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and the dangers it poses to the rest of the world. There are scriptural backing to show that ISIS’s killings of non-believers in Iraq and Syria. The enslavement of Christian and Yazidi women in ISIS-controlled areas and their harsh treatment is a gross violation of human rights. Minorities who want to remain in the "caliphate" face three options: converting to Islam, paying a religious levy (jizya) or face death. ISIS believes that they are following the warriors of the original caliphate and it has recruited large populations of young Muslims from around the world, including Iraqi children as young as nine. The caliphate of ISIS states that the legality of all emirates, groups, states and organizations becomes null by the expansion of the Khalifah's [caliphate's] authority and arrival of its troops to their areas. They are also stepping up their military capabilities in all possible ways. The Islamic State's propaganda says the terrorist group could purchase a nuclear weapon in Pakistan and smuggle it through Latin American trafficking networks and into the United States through its porous border. Obama’s most significant legacy is the rise of the Islamic State. His cut and run of American troops from Iraq left the country open to ISIS occupation. It was revealed in 2013 that the National Security Agency (NSA) was listening to phone calls and reading emails of honest citizens of this country, but the this surveillance excludes jihad schools, the Muslim mosques, where homegrown terrorists are radicalized. ISIS believes that if they strengthen and solidify in the West, conquering the rest of world would be easy. Glenn Beck provides solutions to combating Islamic extremism. Over the years, I have read several books by Glenn Beck, watched on Fox Network and listen to his radio show. He is a fearless fighter. This book is very illuminating and I strongly recommend this book if you like to know about Islam and its violent extremism.

  • John
    2018-12-10 06:47

    IT IS ABOUT ISLAM has all the drawbacks of a very little book covering a very big topic: it oversimplifies certain issues and often fails to provide much in the way of context. Beck doesn't go into detail on all the various schools of Islamic thought, and some have argued that his grasp of Middle Eastern politics is flawed (although, this book wasn't really written by Beck himself, but rather a panel of experts).Beck's argument is that, when terrorist groups claim Islam as the reason behind their atrocities, we ought to take that seriously. Sure, there are a lot of ISIS foot soldiers fighting for non-religious reasons, but that doesn't change the fact that the group's ultimate agenda is deeply rooted in Islamic thought. The American government and media would have us think that Islam is purely a religion of peace, and that anyone who invokes it in the name of terrorism is either insane or a betrayer of the faith. Unfortunately, such is not the case.Beck uses quotes from the Quran, as well as other Islamic texts, to show that there is indeed a religious basis for the terrorists' actions. Sure, most Muslims have come to a more enlightened understanding of such passages, but that doesn't necessarily invalidate a more literal interpretation. Rather than more apologists for Islam, the world could use a few more critics.Beck also demonstrates why Islam, in a strict sense, is incompatible with the values that America was founded on. As the country moves ahead with a greater and greater emphasis on multiculturalism, Islamists living in the U.S. are doing a better job of assimilating us into their culture than we are at assimilating them into ours.

  • Chase Parsley
    2018-12-10 08:10

    I can't stand Glenn Beck. I still hate him, and the only reason why I read this book is because a more conservative family member of mine gave it to me. That being said, to my huge surprise, I thoroughly enjoyed this book, and it comes across accurately. I say this as a history teacher who knows a fair amount about religion, and also as someone who has read books like "Islam" by Karen Armstrong, who is known as more of a moderate historian on religious studies.As expected, the book is an attack on Islam. Beck (or whatever guy on his staff wrote it) does not dive too deeply into how Islam has helped people, but wow, it REALLY exposes Islam's dark side! However, I feel that Beck is totally fair. He even references, and agrees with, Bill Maher and Christopher Hitchens if you can believe it, and uses direct quotations from the Koran and Hadiths throughout.The one problem I had was that Beck does not call out all of organized religion like I wish people would do. He does mention that he is a Mormon and mentions that Christianity and other religions were deadlier at different time periods, but most of his focus is squarely on the evils and dangers of Islam. Regardless, I appreciated this book and would recommend this to anyone who wants to learn what motivates Islamic terrorists.

  • Alex
    2018-12-17 08:43

    I read "It IS about Islam" by Glenn Beck last week as I recall but I'm only writing the review now. I liked it. I've read a different book explaining Islam that I liked better but this one is reasonable too. It's only weak spot is that it doesn't explain how Islam of today is any different from Christianity during the Protestant Reformation and the 30 years' War. Since I've studied the period I can tell you that there are very few differences. I think in that one chapter Glenn Beck wanted to avoid a comparison between Christianity of TODAY and Islam of TODAY. There is very little comparison. Islam is out of control. Not all of it. I worked for Sunni Muslim for years. He was the very model of goodness, peace and love. I have a very good impression of Islam from him, but there is a small but significant number of Muslims (mostly overseas) who are out of control. I don't know what to do about that, but Glenn Beck goes through the basics and offers his opinions. I'd read this book again but only for reference.

  • Adrasto
    2018-12-13 07:12

    “It is about Islam” proved me that everyone could write an essay, and see it published, no matter what he/she writes on it.The author took absolutely the worst part of Islamic doctrines and it used them as arguments to explain why whole Islam is a threat. I used his same narrow minded way to analyze things, and I applied his method to the western civilization and several Christians doctrines. I had pretty much the same result. So yeah, apparently we are a trehat too.Everything would be kind of hilarious. If the book wasn’t a best seller on New York Times (from 20/09/2015 – to 4/10/2015). WTF.In short: when I finished to read it I didn’t know if I wanted to cry or vomit.It isn’t about Islam. It is about stupidity.

  • Josh Miller
    2018-11-30 09:57

    All Americans should read this book. You will find quotes directly from the Quran & the Hadith that makes it clear that the Islamic State is following what is laid out in their religion.In addition, you will find a haunting 20 year plan laid out in 2000 by the IS that is right on track fifteen years in.As a Christian, it made me realize we are that much closer to the return of Jesus Christ. Even so come Lord Jesus!

  • Sundarraman
    2018-12-08 13:07

    The book started very well, however as I kept reading further, the details provided became more and more superficial. Many quotes from The Quran specified in this book seem out of context and I feel that the quoted lines could mean something different if we read the whole page or passage in The Quran.

  • Jason
    2018-11-29 11:46

    Holy cow, what a great read! I finished it in 2 days, which is remarkable since I have a full-time job and a family. But I couldn't put it down. Beck uses research to make his point and he does it well. Read it!

  • Kaylynn Johnsen
    2018-11-29 09:11

    I knew all this 10 years ago. I'm glad someone finally wrote about it.

  • David
    2018-12-16 11:03

    Great book explaining the reasons why sharia law is incompatible with American law. A must read for liberals and conservatives alike.

  • Caitlin Hunter
    2018-12-09 09:07

    Fantastic book! Factually based, with specific citations and direct quotes from the Quran and prominent Muslim leaders, this book educates what Islam really is and the motivation of ISIS and other terrorist groups. I highly recommend to anyone who seeks a better understanding of the global conflict of today. It is a sober and eye-opening experience that will have lasting effects. The most stunning information for me was the Twenty-Year Plan (pg. 68). Favorite Quotes:The time for worrying about being insensitive or hurting other people's feelings is long past. (pg. 7)51% of U.S. Muslims seek to embrace sharia over the U.S. Constitution. (pg. 9)If you take Islam out of ISIS, you have nothing left. (pg. 11)Caliphate, a global governance of Muslims that will impose Islamic law, or Sharia, on any survivors. (Pg. 21)They believe they are charged with playing an active role in bringing the end times about... it's why they will never stop. (pg. 22)Islam is not just a faith but complete submission (a direct translation of the word islam.) (pg.40) Islamism- the use of Islam as a political system- a revolutionary ideology that aims to restore the Caliphate. (pg. 52)It was the grand mufti al-Husseini... who gave Hitler the idea of making Jews wear a yellow Star of David. (pg 58)Ahmad Shah Massoud, the Northern Alliance leader in Afghanistan, warned the media and countries like the U.S. about the Taiban's terrorist foot soldiers was assassinated on Sept. 9, 2001. (pgs. 65-67) [9/11] was terrorism of a magnitude never before witnessed by mankind. Hundereds of Americans were dying before our eyes live on television. (pg. 68)The truth is that freedom has a different meaning for most Muslims in the Middle East than id does for the rest of us. In the Islamic tradition, freedom, is freedom from man-made laws... Islamism cannot coexist with freedom in any meaningful way. (pg. 75)We haven't been honest with ourselves for a long time. We've allowed political correctness, fear, and simple ignorance to mask basic truths... We need to stop allowing ourselves to be lied to. (pg. 85)Edward Said believed that a European or American talking about the religion of 1.6 billion Muslims is inherently racist... and taught to hurl accusations of 'hostility' and 'racism' when they disagree with someone... taking offense as tools of control... taught socially acceptable ways to censor each other... and to suppress beliefs they don't agree with... his cult of censorship all advance the Islamist cause.(pg. 87-88)The American people aren't stupid (pg. 89)The faith of 1.6 billion people... is not inherently bad, but those who insist on a fundamentalist, outdated, supremacist reading of it are... The key distinction between Islam and Islamism, is the totalitarian vision that knows no separation between religion and politics and is utterly incompatible with freedom and individual liberty. (pg. 90)Lie #1 (Islam is a religion of peace, and Islamic terrorists aren't really Muslims): -May 2015, ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi provided his own blunt commentary: "O Muslims, Islam was never for a day the religion of peace. Islam is the religion of war." (pg. 100)-It is foolish to insist... that the violent acts of radical Islamists can be divorced rom the religious ideals that inspire them.(pg. 99)Lie #2: (Islam is not much different than Christianity or Judaism)-Nov. 2013, Fahad Qureshi, an Islamic leader in Norway, "Every Muslim believes in these things... just because they are not telling you about it... doesn't mean that they don't believe in them." (pg. 106) Lie #3: (Jihad is a peaceful, internal struggle, not a war against infidels)-Muhammad himself said: I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah. (pg. 113) Lie # 4: (Muslims don't actually seek to live under Sharia, let alone impose it on others)- 2002, Osama bin Laden declared: They say that our Sharia does not impose our particular beliefs upon others; this is a false assertion. For it is, in fact, part of our religion to impose our particular beliefs upon other. (pg. 125)-[U.S.] Constitution comes into conflict with Islamic law in numerous places. (pg. 123)Lie #5: (America is safe from sharia law) -Sharia... must take precedence over the laws of man... only Sharia can properly govern Muslims (pg. 129)-146 cases of sharia law coming into conflict with American law (pg. 130.)-Great Britain, more than eighty sharia courts in 2009... can run counter to British law. (pg. 132)- Beth Van Duyne, mayor Irving, TX: Our nation cannot be so overly sensitive in defending other cultures that we stop protecting our own." (pg. 132)- Political correctness is beating common sense. (pg. 133)Lie #6: (The Caliphate is a fanciful dream)-Hassan al-Banna, started the muslim Brotherhood: It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated. (pg. 135)-Junee 28, 2014, ISIS formally established a Caliphate... three years to the day after CIA director Brennan said it would never happen. (pg. 136)Lie #7: (Islam is tolerant toward non-Muslims)-The Dhimmi (guilty) contract: 1. Jizya- Tax in cash 2. Second class citizens 3. Restricted religious practice 4. Required shows of deference 5. Wearing distinctive clothing. (pg. 145)-Infidels (unbelievers) "become captives of muslims"- Christian girls sold into sex slavery 1-9yrs old for up to $172... "Inevitable consequences of Jihad" (Fatwa No. 64)-If that's your idea of tolerance for other faiths then I'm afraid we have very different definitions of that word. (pg. 146)Lie #8 (Addressing poverty, joblessness, climate change- will end terrorism)-We tend to frame our perceptions in order to give us the impression we are in control of something we are not. Making ourselves the cause of the terrorits' violence... is still less threatening that the realization that we are absolutely not in control... this compulsion to blame ourselves resembles the relationship between addicts and enablers. An addict typically blames his behavior on the enabler, who accepts responsibility and endlessly searches for ways to fix it... Put simply, they come after us because we are not them; not because of anything we do. (pg. 149)-U.S. Legislator: If only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided. (pg. 150)-Would Osama bin Laden have called off 9/11 if he'd been given a voter registration card? (pg. 151)-Osama bin Laden... a Saudi millionaire... was worth $300 million... 60% of al-Qaeda terrorist members had college degrees and many came from middle- or upper- class backgrounds. (pg. 151)-It isn't the reason... it's just an excuse...They cannot be reasoned with. (pg. 153-154)Lie #9 (Critics of Islam are bigots)-Sir Winston Churchill: All know how to die but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world... Mohammedanism is a militant faith. (pg. 156)- 1843, Alexis de Tocqueville: There have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of Muhammad. (pg. 158)Lie #10 (Islam respects the rights of women)-The Quran gives Allah's permission to keep women as captive slaves (pg. 167)-Women captured... are so traumatized... that they are strangling each other to commit assisted suicide... Worse is the fate that awaits non-Muslim women. (pg. 168)Lie #11 (Iran can be trusted with a nuclear weapon)-Iran does not want to be our friend. They do not want peaceful coexistence. They want us, the Great Satan, gone... Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister in Israel: A nuclear Iran is a far greater threat than ISIS. (pg.173) -If Iran obtains a nuclear weapon, there is the distinct possibility, if not likelihood, it will use it to destroy Israel and threaten the United States. We know this because its leaders have said so over and over again. (pg. 178)Lie #12 (The Muslim Brotherhood is a moderate, mainstream Islamic group)-Tariq Ramadan, grandson of the Muslim Brotherhood's founder, "Muslim Martin Luther": We should all be very careful...It should be with our understanding of Islam... colonizing positively the U.S.A. (pg. 183)-[Americans] who believe that our Constitution should be the law of the land for all our citizens, no matter their religion. (pg. 183)-The Brotherhood, the center of a civilization jihad... is just as threatening to the long-term survival of our Constitution. (pg. 186)Lie #13 ( Islam respects freedom of speech)-Government exists to protect us and our rights, not the other way around. (pg. 191)-[Clinton and Obama] use some old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming to silence and intimidate Americans. (pg. 199)-58% of U.S. Muslims do NOT believe that criticism of Islam or Muhammad should be permitted under the Constitution's First Amendment. (pg. 200)-Of course, it's easy to be a fan of free speech... when people say things you agree with. It's much harder when you try to imagine upholding the right of someone to say the most offensive thing imaginable to you. And that is the entire point.Saying that Islamism has nothing to do with Islam is like saying that a particular cut of beef has nothing to do with a cow... there are plenty of choices in cuts of steak- but they all come from the same place. (pg. 205)Our leaders may say we're not fighting a religious war, but the jihadists most certainly are... the jihadists are not distorting their religion. (pg. 204-205)Not all Germans... Not all Italians... Not all Russians... Nevertheless, the regimes of Nazi Germany, fascist Italy, and Soviet Russia were implacable foes and existential threats to our way of life. They needed to be defeated militarily and ideologically. (pg. 208)Nearly all Muslims reject ISIS. BUT pretending that [the Islamic State] isn't actually a religious [group]... has already led the U.S. to underestimate it. (pg. 208)President Bush was due to meet personally with Muslim leader Alamoudi n September 11, 2001. The meeting of course, canceled. Alamoudi was later sentenced to 23 years in prison for plotting with Libyans to assassinate the prince of Saudi Arabia. (pg. 212)Dzhokhar (Boston Marathon bomber): Know you are fighting men who look into the barrel of your gun and see heaven, now how can you compete with that. (pg. 215)Growing pack of jihadi wolves (pg. 215)The obvious difference is that Christians and Jews don't try to murder people who publish anti-Christian or anti-Jewish cartoons. (pg. 216)**The U.S. not only needs leaders to stand in the face of violence and intimidation; it needs citizens who are unafraid to speak the truth about the origins of the threat we face and hold our leaders accountable when they resort to political correctness or refuse to call a spade a spade (pg. 217)Our leaders have failed us. Many of us have forgotten who we are as a people and a country. We've forgotten God. (pg. 219)** August 1790, President George Washington- For, Happily, the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support. (pg. 221)** Remember, the righteous didn't suddenly become righteous. They just refused to go over the cliff with everyone else. (pg. 227)***The Islamists did not expect followers of Christ to remain so calm, so determined. They cannot understand why they haven't broken their will. The answer is simple: They refuse to go over the cliff... I am with the Nazarene. I am with the Jew, the homosexual, the atheist, or the Muslim who just wasn't Muslim enough... GOD WILL NOT HOLD US BLAMELESS. SILENCE IS THE FACE OF EVIL IS EVIL. NOT TO STAND IS TO STAND. NOT TO SPEAK IS TO SPEAK... "Never again" is now. All lives matter. (pg. 229)

  • Karly Grice
    2018-11-23 09:48

    I really tried to read this one...but I couldn't get all the way through it. Perhaps I shouldn't claim it as "read," but considering that I felt like a year of my life was sucked away by the chunk I did read, I think I did enough. Furthermore, I got the gist of his argumentative style from the introduction and first significant "researched" chapter he wrote. The best way I can explain its representation of Islam is in the following way: Replace "Islam" with "Christianity" in the title. Now, the only resources that are used to help better understand Christianity are 1. What Westboro Baptist Church has to say, 2. What the KKK has to say, 3. The Crusades and religiously-driven violent acts of colonialism 4. Select quotations from the Old Testament where more violence and sacrifice is present than in the New Testament (which is understandable from a cultural-historical perspective), and 5. All the chaos of the Book of Revelations. But write your entire argument saying, "SEE! Even their own religious texts and believers AGREE with these horrible things! It's directly from THEIR MOUTHS! If you did that, Christianity would sound terrifying. Furthermore, the supposed origin of Beck's interesting in writing this book is because Thomas Jefferson had a Qur'an in his possession and had written that Islam and the way it's religion met and was used for politics would lead to a disaster (note: Jefferson felt this way about all religions when it came to politics, not just Islam). Based on this genesis, the book would've made much more sense as a text that discussed the importance of all religions being "checked at the door" of politics--but that's definitely not what Beck's book does. At best, this book is terror/torture porn. At worst (and, well, in reality) this book is the epitome of first world fear-mongering (even down to its "Why should WE have to put our toiletries in a plastic bag or take off our shoes at the airport because of them!?") with cherry-picked resources in order to act as a rallying cry for a violent response from those convinced by its words ("They want to kill us! We have to do something!"). Instead, let me suggest a few other resources for those of you who want to learn about Islam in a more responsibly researched way (and, in general, importance of learning more about the world's religions in order to be a better citizen). * Religious Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know--And Doesn't, by Stephen Prothero. I strongly suggest going to the detailed Chapter 6: "A Dictionary of Religious Literacy" Prothero provides in order to better understand what words from Islam mean when not being used as fodder by hate groups or fomentation against Islam. Prothero's explanation of the 5 pillars of Islam and the term "fiqh" are very important for anyone who read Beck's book and think that the religion is all about violence (as he claims) and/or that it's entirely archaic and outdated. * The Religious Literacy Project, by Harvard University Divinity School (here's the page to Islam, http://rlp.hds.harvard.edu/islam). Please consider looking up in Harvard's glossary of religious terms more informed and less politically (and fear) driven explanations for key terms for Islam such as "jihad" and "Shari'a."

  • Hal Mahaffey
    2018-11-23 14:01

    The only thing I like about Glenn Beck is Jon Stewart's parody of him back in the day. So why I bought this ($2) from the remainder bin at Ocean State Job Lot is a little mystifying, but I guess I was curious if it had any good background info on Islam, as Beck fancies himself a historian.So yes, there is a lot of good info here regarding Islam. There is also a lot of unnecessary bashing of past administrations. Worse, there is a lot of illogical nonsense. We are supposedly compelled to conclude that Islam will not rest until there is a global caliphate based on the truth (and it is true) that there are psychotic madmen around the world using religion as a means to stir the ignorant to rise up and fight for them, and that these madmen are all Muslim.Um, no.What it means is that the universe of psychotic madmen is not devoid of Muslims. (Or Catholics, or left-handed people, or Pastafarians, or...). Big deal. And it's not like religion has never been used to inspire people to great heights of madness (Inquisition, Reformation, Blue Laws...)What angers me about Beck is to have such an inflammatory title (It IS About Islam) for a book that only ever says "It IS About Islamism". See, "IslamISM" is the word to describe the psychotic madmen who cherrypick quotes from the Quran to inspire other, perhaps budding, psychotic Muslims to kill. Why is the title not "It IS About Islamism" for a title? Guess it's not as catchy.It is an unfortunate effect of religion -- with its reliance on faith, and its tendency to create an 'us vs. them' worldview -- that makes it such a rich source of inspiration to lash out at perceived "heretics". It makes your job easier when you don't have to actually prove anything you say.If the focus of these psychotic assholes were in fact the spread of Islam, why do they primarily kill fellow Muslims? Answer (but don't bother telling Beck): Because their reason for killing has to do with power, and nothing to do with spirituality. The "religion" is only used as a motivator.So yes, the Quran (and Hadith) have quotes regarding dealing with non-believers and women that would make me uncomfortable in the light of day were I a Muslim. I would expect that a good Muslim scholar would explain it all to us to allay our fears. And I see this has been done. Repeatedly. And, sadly, apparently ignored. I guess unreasonable fear is just plain... well, FUN.Certainly lucrative for Beck.

  • Grant Barnes
    2018-11-23 12:52

    Wow. Everyone should read this book. We don't hear about 1/100th of the atrocities that occur around the globe that are done in the name of Allah. We receive such a watered down, rose colored picture of what's going on outside the US and such a horrific, doom and gloom view of what we're causing here within the US. My notes from the book:The Muslim Brotherhood is the root of every radical Islam terroist group today. Difference between Islam and IslamismIslamism cannot coexist with freedom in any meaningful way. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, leader of ISIS said: "Islam was never for a day the religion of peace, Islam is a religion of war."Results of a 2013 PEW Poll of 40,000 Muslims% of Muslims who condone stoning women for committing adultery by country:Pakistan - 89%Afghanistan - 85%Palestinian Territories - 84%Egypt - 81% Jordan - 67%Even in Russia 26% of Muslims support stoning women for committing adultry. % of Muslims who support making Sharia the official law in their country:Afghanistan - 99%Iraq - 91%Palestinian Territories - 89%Malaysia - 86Pakistan - 84%...Thailand - 77%...Russia 42%NOTE: Many countries on this list have received BILLIONS of dollars in support from the US government. We have a tendency to blame ourselves for terrorists actions to give ourselves the impression that we are in control of something we are not. It's an easier pill to swallow that we have some control in the matter (even if it's that we are the cause) than that we are absolutely not in control.Compulsion and blame of terroris is similar to adict and enabler. Invites more bad behavior. Terrorists continue to pose as victims and we continue to fall for it. Trying to justify terrorist behavior as "oh their just so angry because of poverty or lack of jobs, let's help give them jobs nd maybe they won't be so angry" is asinine and earth-shatteringly short sighted. This shiz has been going on for thousands of years! How ignorant are people. That's about as stupid as what a US legislator said during WWII:"Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided."In fact, if a Muslim lashes out in anger and kills someone, according to their teaching, they are giving up their spot in paradise. Islamic teaching forbids killing out of anger, it has to be on behalf of Jihad. A 2004 Harvard study found that there was "no significant relationship between economic conditions and terrorism" in fact a British study showed that education and wealth are positive indicators for possible terrorist activities. Even Bill Mahar said, "There's only one faith that kills you or wants to kill you if you draw a bad cartoon of the prophet. There's only one faith that kills you or wants to kill you if you renounce the faith. ...comparison of Muslim violence to Christianity is liberal bull shit."Here's the truth, the radicals in charge of Iran seek our destruction, they want to kill us. There's a mural on display in the Iranian Capitol in Tehran (that could only be displayed if it aligned with the views of the Iranian government) that has the phrase, "Down with the US government" printed on it in English. The actual translation in Persian below it says, "Death to the USA". Bastards. The Muslim Brotherhood's campaign to intimidate and silent those in Washington Who link Islam and terrorism is working brilliantly. The 9/11 commission report from 2001 used the word Jihad 126 times, Muslim 145 times, and Islam 322 times. A decade later, they have been virtually banished from official US documents. The FBI's Counterterrorism Analytical Lexicon and the 2009 National Intelligence Strategy have zero mentions of Jihad, Islam or Muslim, instead they refer to "violent extremism" in general. This is madness. Blasphemy carries the death penalty in Pakistan but is not defined by law, anyone who says their religious feelings are hurt for any reason can file a case. When American Muslims were asked, "Do you beliefs that criticism of Islam or Mohammad should be permitted under the Constitution's First Amendment?" 58% said, "No"."truth advances, & error recedes step by step only; and to do to our fellow-men the most good in our power, we must lead where we can, follow where we cannot, and still go with them, watching always the favorable moment for helping them to another step."Thomas JeffersonThe war on women and on homosexuals is real but it is not in the US, it is over there, it is in the Muslim world. Try to lecture a gay man in Iran, if one dared to surface, about American intolerance to homosexuals and he'd laugh at you. Tell a Yazidi refugee about the plight of American women being denied birth control, and she'd scoff at you. Muslim Refugees:The bosom of America is open to receive not only the Opulent and respectable Stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of all Nations And Religions; whom we shall wellcome to a participation of all our rights and privileges, if by decency and propriety of conduct they appear to merit the enjoyment.GEORGE WASHINGTON, letter, Dec. 2, 1783"In the end, Islam will either reform or destroy itself. If it's the latter, then our job is to trust in God, speak without fear, and make sure America isn't destroyed along with it."

  • Miles Fowler
    2018-11-28 14:00

    This book goes against a politically correct shibboleth that has only grown stronger and more pervasive since the day that a terrorist attack, deliberately planned by subordinates of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, resulted in the deaths of thousands of Americans. Politically correct doctrine since 9/11 has held Muslims to a generous standard of conduct as a non-western and ethnically-linked minority group that is presumed to be culturally oppressed. (1. This seems to be a classic example of the bigotry of low expectations, and 2. it blithely ignores the fact that there is no ethnic restriction on membership in the “ummah” or Muslim community.) More importantly, any misconduct by an individual member of this group must not be tied in any way to Islam or to any sect or group thereof.We seem to have learned since that day to downplay or even deny any connection between terrorism and Islam, but at least three administrations – before during and since 9/11 – assumed that “Islam is a religion of peace” and that terrorists cannot be “good Muslims” or reflect the true interpretation of Islam. Part of the “logic” (or “wish fulfillment”) of this narrative has to do, at least partly, with a fear that by making war on terrorists who happen to be nominally Muslim, the U.S. might be seen to be at war with all Muslims – all 1.6 billion of them, which would be imprudent and untenable. As Glenn Beck writes in this book, “According to the Clarion Project, President Bush was due to meet personally with Muslim leaders—many with [Muslim] Brotherhood connections—in 2001. One of the invitees, Abdurahman Alamoudi, had also met with officials in the Clinton administration. Alamoudi would later be sentenced to twenty-three years in prison for plotting with Libyans to assassinate the crown prince of Saudi Arabia. That meeting, which was to happen on September 11, was, of course, canceled.” That cancellation was not due to Alamoudi’s criminality being found out by the administration, but was only because the events of 9/11 effectively cleared the president’s schedule of business as usual. The Muslim Brotherhood, alluded to in the above quotation, plays a major role in this book. Founded in the early twentieth century to promote a return to Islamic purity and supremacy, the Brotherhood has spawned many spin-offs including al-Qaeda. Subsidiaries of the organization have been cited by U.S. government investigators for raising money for terrorist groups and spreading violent Muslim supremacist propaganda. The Brotherhood also directly backed the overthrow of President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt and his replacement with Brotherhood member Mohamed Morsi whose subsequent autocratic rule and repressive measures earned him little popular support when a military coup removed Morsi not too long after he became president.The comedy of errors that has come out of the West’s inability – or unwillingness – to make an effort to distinguish the bad guys from the good guys has resulted in anything but a comedy. Across administrations, nominally Muslim front groups for terrorists have been both indicted and welcomed into the halls of government. They have even had a hand in deleting any references to Islam from government manuals on dealing with terrorism. When a Muslim member of the U.S. military slaughtered 13 of his fellow soldiers while crying “Allahu Akbar!” (Allah is great!), it was classified as “workplace violence,” even though Major Nidal Hasan, the perpetrator, had been in contact with a radical Muslim cleric and had told colleagues that he believed the U.S. position in the Middle East was wrong and that he sided with the enemy. This sounded dangerous to some of his colleagues, but they dared not report Hasan because, by 2009, it had already become U.S. government policy to treat Muslims with kid gloves even if they preached violence against the United States. Other mass murders that followed had an obvious religious component, too, but were dismissed as “lone wolf” acts – even when connections between these lone wolves and known terrorists were identified, and even when the so-called lone wolves acted jointly with others as in the massacres that took place at the Boston Marathon and in San Bernardino, California. Two or more “lone wolves” acting in concert with each other are rather obviously not alone. (Facilitating the argument against a foreign-inspired operation – even when contacts with foreign operatives via the internet have been established – is the fact that most of the American cases have been amateurishly carried out – for example, San Bernardino; whereas more of the European attacks, such as the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris, were perpetrated by well-trained combatants.)The notion that terrorists cannot represent Islam or reflect its values and aims is not tenable, and not just because it ignores the statistical reality that the majority of terrorists around the world turn out to have Muslim ties. A Pew Poll of Muslims in various countries notes that large numbers – sometimes large minorities and other times actual majorities – are sympathetic to some of the goals of terrorists, including a brutal, literalist interpretation of sharia (Muslim law) and the imposition of sharia on non-Muslim societies, and violence against those who leave or criticize Islam. The trouble is that, despite western attempts not to offend the rank and file Muslim, the terrorists are winning hearts and minds to a worrisome degree.Much of this book is devoted to a history of Islam, what the Quran – the holy book of Islam – actually says and how Muslims interpret it, as well as their interpretation of other Muslim texts. Are terrorists who say they represent Islam to be taken at their word or should we say that they must not be real or good Muslims? I have looked into this question myself. I happen to have two versions/editions of the translation of the Quran by Abdullah Yusuf Ali (1872-1953), who divided his life between his native India and England. I took a passage that has often been cited as proof of Islam’s violent intolerance, and I consulted Ali’s commentary on the passage. Ali’s basic position throughout his commentary is that the language in many Quranic passages should not be taken literally. After all, when it comes to stoning people to death, chopping off body parts, or sanctioning battlefield atrocities, people do not do such things anymore, right? The trouble is that people who call themselves Muslim today are engaging in exactly those kinds of things, and they can justify their behavior by taking the Quran literally. Indeed, it is my impression that the more literally one takes the Quran, the more one must agree that the terrorists’ interpretation is correct. It is not up to non-Muslims to either tell Muslims that they must not make literal interpretations or to pretend that they don’t when a great many of them do.It is sometimes argued that the scriptures of Judaism and Christianity are just as violent as the verses of the Quran, and, indeed, they are; but most Jews and Christians have long since taken the position with their own scriptures that Ali nearly a century ago took with his: that they are to be taken non-literally and that civilized people no longer stone criminals to death or preach the subjugation and/or extermination of members of other groups. Again, the more literally one takes one’s scriptures, the more intolerance, cruelty and violence seem like holy ideals.*As to the alliance that has grown up between the political left and the radical Muslim cause, I would feel remiss if I did not mention the utter incongruity of this alliance. Theoretically based on the left’s championing of the underdog and the radical Muslim’s self-identification as just such an underdog, oppressed historically by colonialism and still oppressed by colonialism’s legacy, the alliance has to overlook many glaring contradictions. The left has come to champion open sexuality, rights for homosexuals, gender fluidity for transgender individuals including equal access to public restrooms, equal rights for women and other groups, religious freedom including freedom for secularists and atheists, and political freedom (at least for socialists). Swept under the rug is the fact that many hardcore Islamic radicals would kill LGBTQ persons, oppress and abuse women, and oppress or massacre religious minorities, especially Jews. There seems to be a sell-by date on this alliance. (If you want to see “A Handmaid’s Tale,” you needn’t look for it in some fantasy dystopia; just look at life under the Islamic State.)As Beck writes:“Islam is increasingly becoming intolerant, not just of Westerners and others around the world who seek to stand up for basic freedoms and human rights, but of millions of Muslims as well. These voices for moderation, for a classically liberal approach that recognizes faith as something between God and an individual, not to be imposed by governments—are being silenced, and in some instances, targeted and killed.”It is true that historically speaking, the fact that Jewish and Christian communities in territories held by ISIS are only now being forced to flee, after centuries of living relatively peacefully under majority Muslim rule, tells the tale on the abberative nature of radical Islam. A valid criticism of Beck’s dismal take on Islam’s civilization quotient is that it doesn’t take into consideration Islam’s past ability to tolerate other groups now and then. Beck does not tell and perhaps does not know about the great Muslim king of northern India, Akbar the Great, who was a model of tolerance. The trouble is that his successors decided to embark on warlike jihad and, at first, expanded the kingdom, but then over-extended themselves and had to pull back behind even Akbar’s borders. I wonder whether the current expansion of radical, warlike jihad has already spent itself. (Beck published this book while Obama was still president, and things have changed since then.)Both George Bush and Barack Obama tried to speak for the “religion of peace” that they could not properly represent. Beck declines to make that mistake. “I believe that only when Muslims themselves decide they need a reformation will there be a real chance at one,” Beck says. “But it isn’t for you or me to say. I’m not a Muslim. I cannot tell a Muslim how he or she needs to resolve the deep—and perhaps irreconcilable—conflicts between their faith and freedom.” Beck, nevertheless, tries to tease apart Muslim terrorists from Islam, notwithstanding the caution he urges in doing this when we are not part of the “ummah.” He takes his cue from those who try to distinguish Islam from “Islamism,” the taking of Islamic traditions and texts so literally that terrorism seemingly must be embraced, but he also concludes that, “Saying that Islamism has nothing to do with Islam is like saying that a particular cut of beef has nothing to do with a cow.”*I am reminded of John Tuturro’s movie “Fading Gigolo” in which Woody Allen’s character, Murray, is accused by an Orthodox rabbi of being a pimp, and is reminded that, in ancient times, a pimp could have been stoned to death under Jewish law. Murray replies, “Let me tell you how glad I am that you no longer do that.”

  • Susan
    2018-12-08 14:47

    I enjoy listening to Glenn Beck on the radio most mornings. I had heard him talking about his new book, "It IS About Islam: Exposing the Truth About ISIS, Al Qaeda, Iran, and the Caliphate," and wanted to read it.The book begins with a history of Islam, and to be honest it was a challenge to keep focused here. There are only so many names like Ihsanoglu, al-Qaradawi, and Tamimi that I can read before glazing over.I've often heard commentators say that the word "Islam" means "peace." Actually, the book says, "salam" is the word for peace, Islam means submission. Middle East scholar Daniel Pipes: "these are 2 distinct words with unrelated meanings."Christianity and Judaism began as persecuted minorities of believers, but Islam has almost always been associated with power and conquest.The next part of the book was more interesting to me; each chapter is a "lie" we have been told about Islam. For instance: "Jihad is a peaceful, internal struggle, not a war against infidels." Many details and quotes from the Koran follow, showing that this is not true. For Muslims, they see their violent actions as defensive. When Muslims massacred staff at Charlie Hebdo after the magazine ran a comic featuring the Prophet, the assassins saw their actions as justified -- they were not going on the offensive, but were defending the Prophet.Another lie: "Most Muslims don't really want to live under Sharia law." A 2013 Pew poll of 40,000 Muslims reveals that many actually do. 99% of those in Afghanistan do want to live under Sharia law (Sharia law is the most stringent reading of the Koran, which features cutting off hands, stonings, etc). In Iraq, it's 91%, and so on. Some sharia courts have now been established in America. Trust me, if you think our courts based on the Constitution are bad, a court based on sharia law is far worse.Another lie: "Islam is tolerant toward non-Muslims." According to the Koran: "And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers." Okay then.The book describes a disturbing tenet of Islam called "taqqiya" -- lying for the sake of Islam. This means that it is acceptable for Muslims to lie (about nuclear weapons, treaties, intents, ANYTHING) if the lie advances the cause of Islam. Obviously it's a little dicey trying to negotiate with people who have this belief. I just kept thinking of the US's recent nuclear treaty with Iran.I also read about how Islam and US first amendment free speech rights conflict. The US animated TV show South Park planned an episode with Mohammed as a character. The outcry over this from Muslims was so great that the network decided against it. "We can do whatever we want to Jesus, and we have," said the show's creator. "We've had him say bad words. We've had him shoot a gun. We've had him kill people. We can do whatever we want. But Mohammed, we couldn't just show a simple image." Hmmmm. And lest you think only a few Muslims feel this way, when asked, "Do you believe that criticism of Islam or Muhammad should be permitted under the Constitution's First Amendment?" 58% of US Muslims surveyed replied, "no." 58 percent.Small quibble -- the book mentions a muslim academic project at "the University of Indiana." Ummm, that's my alma mater, and it's "Indiana University." Small thing, I know, but in an academic-type book, these things should be correct.Scholarly, scary book, but one I feel like many people should read. Our eyes need to be open as to what is going on in our world.

  • Sriram Srinivasan
    2018-12-11 13:09

    This is a 272 pages length book, which talks about Islam in a much different way. Not a positive one, which I can assure. This book is divided into 3 parts,1. Introduction to ISLAM 2. Lies about ISLAM3. What we can do about it.I want to warn readers that, from the word go, this book projects a highly negative picture of Islam. In fact at one point I started to think who is this Glenn Beck? Is he a right wing extremist? The overall goal of this book is to come out with a picture that depicts ISLAM in the following way.1. ISLAM is not a religion of peace2. Islamism is nothing but waging Jihad on non-believers3. ISLAM is not a religion that is tolerant to other religions4. Muslims want sharia law to be the only law ruling the world and they will do anything to achieve this5. Quran asks believers to wage war on non-believers and install a caliphate that rules the entire world. The author goes on and provides actual quotes from Quran and also from what Muslim leaders have spoken, articles written etc., etc., As a case building measure, author provides 13 lies about Islam in his book. Those are1-Islam is a religion of peace ...2-Islam is not much different than Christianity or Judaism3-Jihad is a peaceful, internal struggle ...4-Muslims don't actually seek to live under sharia ...5-America is safe from sharia law6-The caliphate is a fanciful dream7-Islam is tolerant toward non-Muslims8-Addressing frustration, poverty, and joblessness ...9-Critics of Islam are bigots10-Islam respects the rights of women11-Iran can be trusted with a nuclear weapon12-The Muslim Brotherhood is a moderate, mainstream Islamic group13-Islam respects freedom of speechI have not read Quran or any other views written by others including Muslim leaders, so I cannot say how the author came to this conclusion. But one thing is for sure, I am 100% certain that not all Muslims want to take a gun and fight a jihad. They are also human beings, who want to get educated, get married, have kids and live a normal life. I am not saying not to read this book. Read, but be very open minded as the negativity that spreads across this book is really hard to digest, even though this is written keeping America in mind. I can say one thing for sure, India was ruled by Muslims, Muslims fought alongside with others for her independence, when an option was given to Muslims to choose between India or Pakistan, many millions chose India. India is a proof, plurality is possible and we all can live alongside without any issues. But the author of this book might not have read about our history hence I can say that he is wrong in many ways. Sriram’s Recommendation: Read this book with very open mind