Uncovered: the ultimate source of Dinesh D’Souza’s deep knowledge of Islam

N. writes:

If Glenn Beck had really been on the ball in that interview you quoted, right after D’Souza claimed to have spent four years “studying Islam,” the very next question would have been, “What did you study? What did you read?” Four years of Esposito/Armstrong mush would be a very different experience from four years of reading the Koran and Hadith. Someone should ask D’Souza exactly what he studied for four years, in more detail than just “I studied Islam.”

By coincidence I got the answer to N’s question this afternoon from a reader who had corresponded with D’Souza. It turns out his four-year “studies” consisted of reading and regurgitating … well, read on, and you will see.

John S. wrote to LA:

Regarding Dinesh, as soon as I read Robert’s Spencer’s posting about him, I emailed him. He emailed me back. I then emailed him back and never heard a peep back. I thought you might be interested in this brief chat.

John S. to D’Souza

I read your recent interview in which you say it is unfair to say Islam and it’s book the Quran are violent. You also seem to believe that only the last 25 years have had any real violence from Islam? How did you reach these conclusions?

Attached is one of the best analysis of the Quran I have ever read. It should change your mind. As for Muslim terrorism being a recent phenomena, have your read Andrew Bostom’s The Legacy of Jihad?

I do not understand how you can ignore facts that don’t conveniently fit your thesis.

Dinesh D’Souza replied to John S.:

Read Bernard Lewis who is the leading historian of Islam in the West. The Koran is no more “violent” than the Old Testament.

John S. replied to D’Souza:

Hi Dinesh,

Thank you for writing me back. That statement that the Koran is no more violent than the Old Testament is a Bernard Lewis statement. I remember discussing that with others. Don’t you suspect that comparison is suspect? What does it mean in today’s reality? There is no jihad against all others in the OT. No central jihad theme to the Bible. There were wars, but I have never heard verses related to these wars yelled by Christians blowing up a building. If the Bible (or just the OT) is as violent as the Koran, why aren’t the Christians of Nigeria blowing up Muslims, why aren’t the Copts of Egypt blowing up the Muslim?. Why are the Christians of Bethlehem, the few left (I wonder why?), not participating in the Intifada? There is no equivalent “Chapter 9,” the imperial chapter of the Koran, abrogating all benevolence, in the Bible. Is the centrality of war, holy war, different in the Bible and the Koran. Of course, they are.

I do hope you read Amber Pawlik’s article if not to reach the same conclusion, but to enjoy her writing style and interaction with the reader.

Do you believe we should heavily restrict Muslim immigration to America, or have no special restrictions at all?

LA writes:

That’s all D’Souza needed to know. He didn’t have to think. He didn’t have to learn anything about Islam. He just had to refer to the Authority, the Most Illustrious One, the Greatest Islam Scholar in the History of the World, Bernard Lewis. And then he just repeats the mindless phrase, “The Koran is no more ‘violent’ than the Old Testament,” and that’s enough for him. That’s what he means by studying Islam for four years.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at January 23, 2007 06:39 PM | Send