I agree with the responses above regarding Spencer and Wilders. Just wish to add that I, for one, left Islam primarily because it was not *true* and now intellectual honesty matters to me a lot. Spencer is clearly biased against Islam and takes verses/hadiths out of context (just like the islamist fanatics do!) and ignores other verses/hadiths to suit his agenda. I am not saying Islam is a religion of peace. I just think we have to be honest about what we think the teachings of Islam are.
Does he take things out of context though? That suggests an eternal and peaceful and fixed essence of Islam that is wrongfully being distorted by him and literalist Islam / Islamism.
His wrongness lies elsewhere I think.
It isn't difficult to aggregate all that is wrong with Islam in a modern context, to say nothing of Islamism and its manifestations. All your work is done for you by others, because they are so nakedly self-exposing. It really is like taking candy from a baby.
Even taking apart Islam itself as a belief system isn't difficult when you get past the fear, hysteria and blasphemy taboos that surround doing so.
My issue with Spencer isn't that he aggregates such examples, its the absurdity of his positioning and his blindness when it comes to his associations, most notably for me in his support for the EDL, a ridiculous hooligan firm that had extremist blood coursing through its veins since its inception. To say nothing of the simple binary ways that he tends to reduce issues in many ways.
I remember once reading a piece about a Muslim who had been convicted of a hit and run killing being contextualised as part of Jihad on his site - this is an absurdity, and is self-discrediting.
Islam(ism) is self-incriminating. Its something that can be repudiated on a number of levels, and its easy to do so without flirting with an identity-politics that replicates the kinds of collective communal logic that Ummah identity-politics (and in many ways Islam itself) has at its core.