Debunking Robert Spencer's Fantasies about Islam
If you think Christian polemist, David Wood is the only man that has devoted his life to trying to refute Islam, think again. A Conservative writer, Robert
Spencer gets the prize for spitting out misrepresentations of Islam. But between David and Robert, At least Robert Spencer is a bit more scholarly. I consider
David Wood to be a hopeless hate monger-- and unschoarly. Richard Carrier has refused to debate David and said "Daivd Wood is a liar and has a temper."
I believe him. Because of this I have blacklist David Wood. I hope other Muslims listen to the advice of Richard (a respected Ph.D.) and avoid David (a man
with no scholarly credentials. Of course his friend Nabeel Qureshi is no better. In fact he is even worse.)
Anyways In 2007 Robert Spencer wrote a book, The Truth about Muhammad: The Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion. After reading the book I wonder
if Rob seriously considers himself a scholar on Islam. If Rob wants to be a scholar on Islam, he has a long way to go. Not only is his book mainly polemical
but its hard to take seriously in the light of acamedics and scholarly reserach. I don't even think he knows a word of Arabic (a common problem among
Christian critics against Islam, just look at our friend Nabeel Qureshi. He doesn't speak a word of Arabic yet he somehow knows the Quran).
A lot of Non-Muslim scholars don't take Rob Spencer seriously. Among them are Dinesh D'Souza (a conservative Christian), Louay M. Safi, Khaleel Mohammed,
Cathy Young Carl Ernst (a Professor of Islamic studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) and Stephen Schwartz have very negative views about his work. I didn't even mention Karen Armstrong here. Wikipedia states: "Ernst notes that Spencer's articles have never been published in peer-reviewed academic journals, nor are his publications similarly reviewed or edited by a qualified scholar and published by an academic or university publishers but by conservative presses such as
Regnerny Press Publications (A Conservative Press). With all these negative reviews about his work, who on earth can take this author seriously? Moreover according
to some, he never studied Islam during his undergrad or graduate studies, rather he studied Early Christianity. 
First let's talk about his appeal to sources. I have documented here that Ibn Ishaq is unreliable and has been condemned by Islamic scholars such as Imam
Malik and Imam Ahmed. However Ibn Ishaq is all over the place in Robert Spencer's book. Out of the 400 footnotes in Rob's book, Ibn Ishaq is mentioned 120
times. Most of the stories Rob cites in his book are merely fairy tales and fictional stories about the Prophet, all taken from his favorite story teller, Ibn Ishaq.
Rob Spencer even admits that the accuarcy of Ibn Ishaq's biography of the Prophet is questionable on page 28 of his book.
In his section, “Assassination and Deceit”, of Chapter Seven, “War is Deceit,” Spencer cites fake stories of Prophet Muhammad ordering the killings of Asma
Bin Marwan a poetress making fun of the Prophet, the Prophet ordering Assination and killing of Abu Afak, a old Jewish Man who wrote poems against the Prophet
and the Prophet Ordering the Torture of Kinana for Money. Of course these are fake stories found only in Ibn Ishaq. At one point Rob calls Prophet Muhammad
a "warlord" despite the fact that Prophet Muhammad only fought about 82 wars for 10 years and only about 1,082 people were killed. That's about it. Another
part of accusations against the Prophet found in Rob's book is the allegation of slavery and rape of women, which I debunk here.
Anyways You can read Rebuttals to Robert Spencer's book "The Truth about Muhammad: The founder of the World's most intolerant religion" in 5 different parts (off site):
I'll try to add more when I have the time.