• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Real Time with Bill Maher : Maajid Nawaz Interview

rjc571

Banned
The panel discussion was outstanding this week as well, and Richard Painter totally stole the show every time he spoke. Easily the best epsode this season.
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Yeah, real standup guy:

Southern Poverty Law Center said:
Maajid Nawaz is a British activist and part of the ”ex-radical" circuit of former Islamists who use that experience to savage Islam. His story, which has been told repeatedly in the British and American press and in testimony to legislators as well, sounds compelling enough — Nawaz says he grew up being attacked by neo-Nazi skinheads in the United Kingdom, spent almost four years in an Egyptian prison after joining a supposedly nonviolent Islamist group, but had a change of heart while imprisoned and then returned to England to work against the radicalization of Muslims. But major elements of his story have been disputed by former friends, members of his family, fellow jihadists and journalists, and the evidence suggests that Nawaz is far more interested in self-promotion and money than in any particular ideological dispute. He told several different versions of his story, emphasizing that he was deradicalized while in Egypt — even though he in fact continued his Islamist agitation for months after returning. After starting the Quilliam Foundation, which he describes as an anti-extremism think tank, Nawaz sent a secret list to a top British security official that accused ”peaceful Muslim groups, politicians, a television channel and a Scotland Yard unit of sharing the ideology of terrorists," according to The Guardian. The same newspaper reported that in 2009, a Quilliam official said that ”gathering intelligence on people not committing terrorist offences ... is good and it is right," discounting civil liberties concerns. His Quilliam Foundation received more than 1.25 million pounds from the British government, but the government eventually decided to stop funding it. One of Nawaz's biggest purported coups was getting anti-Muslim extremist Tommy Robinson to quit as head of the violence-prone English Defence League, trumpeting his departure at a press conference. But Robinson later said Quilliam had paid him some 8,000 British pounds to allow Nawaz to take credit for what he already planned to do. Shortly afterward, Robinson returned to anti-Muslim agitation with other groups.

I'd say their argument is pretty sound.

https://www.splcenter.org/20161025/journalists-manual-field-guide-anti-muslim-extremists#nawaz
 

SexyFish

Banned
One of Bills best interviews if you ask me, Maajid Nawaz is founder of an Anti Muslim Extremist think tank. He him self was recruited at a young age to preach a jihadist caliphate, he turned his life around a founded a great think tank. If your from the UK he has one of the best segments on LBC each week. Well worth a watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlAw7qYLk5w&t=4s


Awkward.
 
Is anyone going to critique what he says in this interview or is this thread going to turn into one that revolves around that quote from an organization he's currently suing for defamation?
 
Did he rebut any of SPLC's statement?

No

Erm.. yes to a certain degree. And the Interview cant sole be about rebutting every claim from SPLC, The show has other topics to talk about.But i'm sure more information will come out now that his pushed a lawsuit their way.
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Is anyone going to critique what he says in this interview or is this thread going to turn into one that revolves around that quote from an organization he's currently suing for defamation?

He is crowdfunding a defamation suit.
And makes no effort whatsoever to counter SPLC's claims I posted earlier in this thread.
But makes sure to bash Identity Politics.

Erm.. yes to a certain degree. And the Interview cant sole be about rebutting every claim from SPLC, The show has other topics to talk about.But i'm sure more information will come out now that his pushed a lawsuit their way.

Maybe I missed it, care to tell me which ones he rebutted?
 

-Plasma Reus-

Service guarantees member status
What's with Maher and Harris taking corrupt people as friends?
First Ayan Hirshi . Then this Nawaz guy. Can't you find stand up good ex-muslims? There's plenty out there. Or are you afraid they don't share your hatred for Muslims.
 
OP should summarize video if they want content to be discussed.

Just saying this is a great video doesn't really start a discussion.

Especially when the person in the video is controversial and possibly suspect

Nearly 20 minutes is a lot of time to ask someone to dedicate just because you say it's good
 

fade_

Member
Is anyone going to critique what he says in this interview or is this thread going to turn into one that revolves around that quote from an organization he's currently suing for defamation?

Yes, when he mentioned that there are 23,000 Jihadists that UK said they should be following he just grabbed a number out of his ass and said that there are 3 times or more as many that are potential jihadists that are a threat with no clear data.
 

Scoops

Banned
Islam in practice terrorizes millions of people every day. No problem with saying that. We should always be critical of religions (and not just Islam) that oppress people.

Great interview.
 
No, because I actually listened to it and don't really see much to disagree with him on in it.
I dunno, do you just watch anyone on youtube and agree with them because "they're making sense"?

Or do you do some research on your own and find out that Nawaz guy's story does not add up from anyone of his acquantainces, and that Quilliam foundation created software to spy on kids? Or how about it sending a "terror list" of peaceful Muslims, politicians and even a Scotland Yard unit to MI-6?
 
Islam in practice terrorizes millions of people every day. No problem with saying that. We should always be critical of religions (and not just Islam) that oppress people.

Great interview.

Being critical of something immaterial holds little value. Better to be critical of individuals.
 

Scoops

Banned
Being critical of something immaterial holds little value. Better to be critical of individuals.

Except no, because you can only be critical of individuals once they've already killed people.

Islam in the Muslim world, oppresses women, gays etc. everyday. No need to wait for an individual.
 

anaron

Member
Islam in practice terrorizes millions of people every day. No problem with saying that. We should always be critical of religions (and not just Islam) that oppress people.

Great interview.
It really weirds me out how islam is this untouchable topic for so many progressives.

It's a religion, not a race and is deserving of the same criticisms that apply to the many other toxic ideas shared by just about any other religion on this planet.
 
Except no, because you can only be critical of individuals once they've already killed people.

Islam in the Muslim world, oppresses women, gays etc. everyday. No need to wait for an individual.

'Islam' isn't a physical entity capable of oppressing people. Certain practitioners who oppress people are.

Edit: Also what the hell are you talking about you can only be critical after someone has killed somebody? You can be critical of the actions people take other than killing.
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Except no, because you can only be critical of individuals once they've already killed people.

Islam in the Muslim world, oppresses women, gays etc. everyday. No need to wait for an individual.

Who is advocating waiting until someone commits an act of Terrorism before arresting them?
I am however advocating not arresting Muslims purely because of their ideology.
 

Scoops

Banned
'Islam' isn't a physical entity capable of oppressing people. Practitioners who oppress people are.

Well then you're delusional. Ideologies certainly have and still do oppress people through out history and present day. Would you argue Christianity hasn't oppressed certain people here in the US and other places at times?

It's sad you chose to stick up for said oppression. Religion is a choice, so it deserves less deference then say race or sexuality.
 
LOL, a racist talking this his self hating uncle Tom friend.

This is like agreeing with Jim Brown just because he is black.

Well then you're delusional. Ideologies certainly have and still do oppress people through out history and present day. Would you argue Christianity hasn't oppressed certain people here in the US and other places at times?

It's sad you chose to stick up for said oppression. Religion is a choice, so it deserves less deference then say race or sexuality.

But this thread isn't about religion. It's about Islam. If your beef is with religion thats fine. But if you seem obsessed with Islam only for some reason and ignore Judaism and Christianity all the time, you're obviously a bigot. Anyone who has studied religion even a little knows the Old Testament is by far the most violent of all the books, relative to the three main books of the three main monotheistic religions.

There's a shitload of religious violence all over the world. Almost all religion has some violence in its roots.
 

Sadsic

Member
What's with Maher and Harris taking corrupt people as friends?
First Ayan Hirshi . Then this Nawaz guy. Can't you find stand up good ex-muslims? There's plenty out there. Or are you afraid they don't share your hatred for Muslims.

forgive my ignorance, but what has ayaan hirsi ali done wrong? (whom im assuming you typoed)
 
Are you being obtuse on purpose? That is not the number I was disputing. He says that there are 3 times or more that should be labeled as threats.

If you where referring to his 3 times figure then your statement was poorly written. The 3 times figure is unverifiable and random
 

Scoops

Banned
Who is advocating waiting until someone commits an act of Terrorism before arresting them?
I am however advocating not arresting Muslims purely because of their ideology.

The far left. Would you find it acceptable to arrest a Muslim for Facebook posts?
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Well then you're delusional. Ideologies certainly have and still do oppress people through out history and present day. Would you argue Christianity hasn't oppressed certain people here in the US and other places at times?

It's sad you chose to stick up for said oppression. Religion is a choice, so it deserves less deference then say race or sexuality.

Do you agree with these statements?

Ed Husain of the Quilliam Foundation said collecting intelligence on people not accused of crimes is ”good and it is right" if the purpose is to ”prevent people getting killed and committing terrorism," according to an Oct. 16, 2009, story in The Guardian. He added that this kind of intelligence gathering outweighs civil liberties concerns. ”That's the name of the game," he said. ”It's not about doing the right thing by Islamists or liberal do-gooders, it's about creating a society where liberal do-gooders survive freely." Nawaz backed up his colleague, saying, ”Is it right to spy on Muslims? The hypocrisy of the pro-extremist, paralyzed guilt-driven reverse-racism brigade over the recent ‘spying' controversy is repugnant to say the least. ... [N]o one, least of all Quilliam, advocated a police state, or spying on Muslims en masse as a community."

In the list sent to a top British security official in 2010, headlined ”Preventing Terrorism: Where Next for Britain?" Quilliam wrote, ”The ideology of non-violent Islamists is broadly the same as that of violent Islamists; they disagree only on tactics." An official with Scotland Yard's Muslim Contact Unit told The Guardian that ”[t]he list demonises a whole range of groups that in my experience have made valuable contributions to counter-terrorism."

This is what many of us posting here have a problem with. Edit: Tactics fucking matter.

The far left. Would you find it acceptable to arrest a Muslim for Facebook posts?

I'm not going to get into the political debate about far left and progressive in this thread.
 
That's like going to an art gallery and saying everything sucked because you hate the artist.

No it's really not.

Well then you're delusional. Ideologies certainly have and still do oppress people through out history and present day. Would you argue Christianity hasn't oppressed certain people here in the US and other places at times?

It's sad you chose to stick up for said oppression. Religion is a choice, so it deserves less deference then say race or sexuality.

So ideologies are these non-corporeal entities that excerpt force over humans? Sorry, but as an atheist I don't buy into that. It's humans that excerpt control over other humans.
 
Well then you're delusional. Ideologies certainly have and still do oppress people through out history and present day. Would you argue Christianity hasn't oppressed certain people here in the US and other places at times?

It's sad you chose to stick up for said oppression. Religion is a choice, so it deserves less deference then say race or sexuality.
Criticize religion all you want. But people like Bill Maher use their special anti-Islamic "critique" into anti-Muslim bigotry, which is no different than any other form of discrimination.
 
forgive my ignorance, but what has ayaan hirsi ali done wrong? (whom im assuming you typoed)
Lets see, lied on her forms, lied about her childhood, and advocated militarily defeating Islam.
However, the controversy has been stoked by a television documentary last week, which showed members of her own family striking at the very heart of her dramatic life story - her claim that she fled a forced marriage to a cousin she had never met.

Relatives, including her brother, said she had not been forced into marriage, and had nothing to fear. The documentary showed images of her family's comfortable middle-class home in Kenya.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...m-to-quit-Holland-after-lies-are-exposed.html

If you analyze enough, all these anti-Muslim extremists like Maajid Nawaz and Ayaan Hirsi Ali have one thing in common. They lie a lot.
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
I like how in their "IN HIS OWN WORDS" section they talk about him tweeting an innocuous cartoon that got him death threats and petitions to remove him as a candidate because it had a picture of Mohammed.

But yeah he's the bad guy in that situation.

Yeah, just ignore the other 3 examples given. Throw out the entire dinner cause a fly landed in your Chardonnay.
I'll agree that example is pretty poor, and it's his right to post that if he wants.
 
Criticize religion all you want. But people like Bill Maher use their special anti-Islamic "critique" into anti-Muslim bigotry, which is no different than any other form of discrimination.

Bill has absolutely said some stupid shit about Muslim's in the past. But at least in recent times it seems like he's attempting to scale it back and move to a different position. Earlier this year he talked about the goal of progressives should be to standby Muslim progressives in their push to change the religion from within in the same way that Christianity has managed to change over time. That seems completely reasonable and a much different approach than his ranting and raving and attempting to group all Muslim's together that he'd do years ago.
 

reckless

Member
Yeah, just ignore the other 3 examples given. Throw out the entire dinner cause a fly landed in your Chardonnay.
I'll agree that example is pretty poor, and it's his right to post that if he wants.

Well when a quarter of your examples are terrible, you don't get a lot of benefit of the doubt for the rest.

The last example takes what 2 sentences out of an entire oped and goes and uses that and ignores the context?
 
Top Bottom