Bernard Lewis at 90: Not a Tribute, but A Complete Idiot's Guide to Him. Let me say it nicely: Bernard Lewis is 90. That is another proof that there is no God. He writes poison, and he has nothing to say--nothing informative or insightfuly anyway--whatever on the modern Middle East. I read all what he writes: his old books (especially his book on Turkey--his best book really) has something--as much as one disagrees with his methodology and his biases, he relishes to find digs about Arabs--but his writings on contemporary politics are just ignorant. Nothing short of ignorant. His writings on the contemporary Middle East do not differ from other ignorant writers on the Middle East, like Michael Ledeen and Hitchens or Luttwack or Berman. His books after Sep. 11 are nothing more than anthologies of cliches, generalizations, and stereotypes, and many inaccuracies. This is a man who does not know that there are public opinion surveys in Arab countries. That is how out of it, he is. Notice that Lewis is now identified as "a senior advisor to the President on Middle Eastern affairs." Do you realize how important this little fact will be when history books are written? But to have Lewis speak or write on gender is like Bush speaking on...gender. This is a man who displayed no sensitivity to women in his entire career, and he only wrote about slavery and color in "Islam" in order to bash the religion and the people, not for any other reason, trust me. Notice that when Lewis speaks about women in present-day Middle East, he typically does not take note of the passage of time. This is typical Lewis: evidence from the 9th century is sufficient as evidence for a matter in the 21st century. Thus, he begins his silly little piece by referring to 1593. Oh, ya. That year really had an impact on Muslim lives today. Thanks for his brilliant insights. In fact, I never thought I would say this, but I do feel sorry for Bush when he meets with Lewis. I can imagine Bush posing a question (prepared to him by aides no doubt) about the present-day Middle East, and I can imagine Lewis answering by: "Well, Mr. President, in 1238, there was a Muslim who was eating a potato, and the way he ate his potato has such an impact on US foreign policy toward Iraq. Oh, ya Mr. President." Show him the door, NOW. Lewis here in this spiel says: "Polygamy and concubinage remain legal, in many Muslim countries." You need to understand that Lewis is that unreliable, most unreliable, on the modern Middle East. He says that concubinage is legal in "many Muslim countries" and yet he does not name one Muslim country. He does not need to because he made that one up as he was going along. It sounds more sexy for his captivated audience, I think. It is not true of course that concubinage is still legal in Muslim countries, and there is not one Muslim country in which concubinage is legal. This does not mean that it does not sometimes take place--there was one case a few years ago in...BERKELEY. But then again; Lewis can easily blame that on the Islamic influence on Berkeley. And then Lewis adds: "and concubinage has almost disappeared except in the Arabian Peninsula, where it still flourishes." Wait, o well-informed fabricator. You earlier said that it is legal, and then you say that it is in decline, except where it is "flourishing" in the Arabian Peninsula. Notice that he still uses the phrase "Arabian Peninsula." I will not be surprised if Lewis does not know that the Peninsula is now divided into several countries. Don't tell him that, he may go into a shock. But if it is in decline it can't be flourishing; and if it is really flourishing even in "Arabia" then it is not in decline. So which is which, o special advisor to the President on Middle East affairs? Please, enlighten me, NOW. And then he talks about the advanced status of women in Iraq: but he hasten to add that it began under the monarchy, while in reality the progress began after the 1958 Revolution, but he can't admit that for deep ideological reasons that blind everything he says or writes on the Middle East. And then Lewis says this (about women in Iraq): "They could go to university." Lewis is shocked. But what Lewis does NOT know is that women can go to university in every single Muslim country. Imagine that he still does not know that. I bet you that Lewis still thinks that Nasser is alive, and that Ahmad Shuqayri poses an "existential threat" to Israel. I bet you. As Professor Laura Nader tells her students at UC, Berkeley: there are more females in Saudi universities than there are at UC, Berkeley. In fact, there are more female college students in Saudi Arabia than there are males. And then Lewis says this: "Women generally do not receive the brain-deadening indoctrination that passes for education in many of these countries, because they're not thought important enough to be given it." So does Lewis think that women don't go to school in Muslim countries? Do you see what he is saying? He is basically saying that women in Muslim countries don't go to school [not true of course] but that this is a good thing. This passes as a feminist authority on women in Islam. If this is feminism what is misogyny? From that "modern" point, Lewis then takes us back to..1826 and to Tahtawi. Typical predictable Lewis. I should have a gig in Vegas just doing impersonations of Lewis. As somebody who has read everything he has written, I qualify. But then it was time to conclude, and Lewis concludes his speech by "Let me end with a quotation from a Turkish woman writer of the 15th century, — she was one of the very few." Well, you judge an advisor by the quality of the policies urged by the advisor. The scene of carnage in Iraq is partly the fruits of the advise of Bernard Lewis. Remember? He assured the president that the Arabs only understand the languge of force.