Is Robert Spencer right all the time? I think of the quotation at the front of Czeslaw Milosz, The Captive Mind, in which he points out that if one is right half the time it’s pretty amazing and good; but that if one is right more often than that, it becomes suspicious, the moreso the more often one is “right.” But what do we say of mathematicians? Are they worse for being right most of the time? And is this to say that Islamic scholarship is as precise as maths? No; but one must be right on the facts, if not the interpretation, to be “right” at all. Spencer is right on the facts, regardless of how one sees his interpretation, which is open to interpretation. But given that he is right on the facts, consistently for years without fail, other than a few minor slips which he publicly acknowledges and corrects upon discovery, (a trait we might welcome in our president,) we might take much if not most of what Spencer says as accurate generally in interpretation. Spencer is not only informed, he is honest. I repeat that: Spencer is honest. One doesn’t find that often in anyone. It is highly valuable. We have an honest man in Spencer. One might– possibly– have some respect for Muslims if they had an honest disagreement with Spencer’s interpretations of Islam; but what I encounter from Muslims is simple lies, and more lies. There’s a clear and historical reason for the inherent dishonesty in Muslims, but such discussion must wait for another day. Till then, look at Spencer’s work and decide for yourself is the man is what I claim he is: Honest.