Support NeoGAF

[Alexander DeLarge]

He's Sam Harris token Muslim friend. I don't trust him

What's wrong with Sam Harris? I've always got the impression he's a very reasonable guy. Especially in that Bill Maher segment with Ben Affleck.
https://youtu.be/vln9D81eO60

 

[RustyNails]

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.

Bill Maher sure as fuck has never scaled back his acidic nonsense about Muslims. Who are these "progressives"? They're not people like Maajid if that's what you're getting at. The reason why he liked Maajid is because they say exactly the things Bill Maher likes to hear about Muslims, that it's fundamentally an intrinsic problem with these communities. That's why people like Maajid are invited by people that don't have a favorable view toward Muslim communities, and that's how they have gotten filthy rich. Read this book.

 

[Shadowhelper]

forgive my ignorance, but what has ayaan hirsi ali done wrong? (whom im assuming you typoed)

Holy shit man. Along with her husband she's a disgusting bigot. Maher surrounds himself with these horrid bigots, and has isolated himself from so many great progressives now.

Jeremy Scahill used to come on, won't anymore. Chomsky has never been on. There are historians who wouldn't come on Maher, either because they don't like him, or Maher is not willing to get guests who would absolutely destroy him.

Maher is dangerous. The guys has had on Milos, and the editor of Breitbart and seems to agree with them on almost everything. Deep down, it seems he really agrees with the far right on many things. It's just disgusting how he now wants to bring back Milos for the express purpose of bringing him back into the spotlight. It's not like Maher has a different point of view of exposure, he understands this he is normalizing them and in fact he openly admits thats why he is going to bring back Milos.

 

[AcademicSaucer]

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.

Whats wrong with Ayan Hirshi?

 

[NoblesseOblige]

What's wrong with Sam Harris? I've always got the impression he's a very reasonable guy.

I mean, among many things, he says stuff like this ...

There's something about that critical posture that is to some degree intrinsically male and more attractive to guys than to women. The atheist variable just has this- it doesn't obviously have this nurturing, coherence-building extra estrogen vibe that you would want by default if you wanted to attract as many women as men.

Basically implying atheism is aligned to maleness because men are more 'critical'. Not exactly a reasonable sounding person to me.

 

[RustyNails]

What's wrong with Sam Harris? I've always got the impression he's a very reasonable guy. Especially in that Bill Maher segment with Ben Affleck.
https://youtu.be/vln9D81eO60

We should profile Muslims, or anyone who looks like he or she could conceivably be Muslim, and we should be honest about it. And, again, I wouldn’t put someone who looks like me entirely outside the bull’s-eye (after all, what would Adam Gadahn look like if he cleaned himself up?) But there are people who do not stand a chance of being jihadists, and TSA screeners can know this at a glance.

VERY REASONABLE GUY EVERYONE

 

[Future]

Good interview. Hard to find where people wouldn't agree with these points

 

[Autodidact]

If a Moderate Republican Darling can claim to be bipartisan yet support the party 99% of the time, I guess Liberal Icons can claim to be open and accepting yet insult minorities and normalize bigots.

Words no longer mean anything ~~~

 

[Sadsic]

Holy shit man. Along with her husband she's a disgusting bigot

can you give any examples of her being a 'disgusting bigot'? I only say this because I read her most recent book like a year ago and it was pretty reasonable sounding in it's dissertation of an islamic reformation - she didn't seem to inherently hate muslims, but rather the extreme dogmatic beliefs of much of the middle east

 

[Trokil]

Good interview. Hard to find where people wouldn't agree with these points

It is not about the arguments, it is never about the arguments. So unfortunately it does not matter. But not even statistics are an argument in this context.

 

[SirRattleBalls]

So you have no problem with him using unverifiable and random numbers to condemn people? That is fearmongering.

Dont think i ever defended that.

 

[Chumley]

This thread going about as expected, few posts actually even trying to refute the content of what was said, just a bunch of bloviating about how racist Maher is and straight up pathetic posts calling this guy an uncle tom.

Embarrassing. Proving every point Maher makes about the left when trying to talk about Islamic extremism.

 

[Foffy]

I mean, among many things, he says stuff like this ...



Basically implying atheism is aligned to maleness because men are more 'critical'. Not exactly a reasonable sounding person to me.

That's a bad quote, because he was making a joke.

You happened to ignore the first few parts of what that bit comes from..

"I also asked Harris at the event why the vast majority of atheists—and many of those who buy his books—are male, a topic which has prompted some to raise questions of sexism in the atheist community. Harris' answer was both silly and then provocative.

It can only be attributed to my ”overwhelming lack of sex appeal," he said to huge laughter."

This was not a serious response of his. If you want to attack him, deal with points, not spun ones.

 

[SirRattleBalls]

This thread going about as expected, few posts actually even trying to refute the content of what was said, just a bunch of bloviating about how racist Maher is and straight up pathetic posts calling this guy an uncle tom.

Embarrassing. Proving every point Maher makes about the left when trying to talk about Islamic extremism.

Thats a door on Neogaf you don't want to open.

 

[AcademicSaucer]

This thread going about as expected, few posts actually even trying to refute the content of what was said, just a bunch of bloviating about how racist Maher is and straight up pathetic posts calling this guy an uncle tom.

Embarrassing. Proving every point Maher makes about the left when trying to talk about Islamic extremism.

That term was amazing, is the bigotry of low expectations

 

[fade_]

This thread going about as expected, few posts actually even trying to refute the content of what was said, just a bunch of bloviating about how racist Maher is and straight up pathetic posts calling this guy an uncle tom.

Embarrassing. Proving every point Maher makes about the left when trying to talk about Islamic extremism.

And you've come and done the same from the opposite end of the spectrum. Congratulations.

Dont think i ever defended that.

Sorry, I mistook you for the person I originally was replying to.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

This thread going about as expected, few posts actually even trying to refute the content of what was said, just a bunch of bloviating about how racist Maher is and straight up pathetic posts calling this guy an uncle tom.

Embarrassing. Proving every point Maher makes about the left when trying to talk about Islamic extremism.

I'm not british, but everytime i see his name mentioned among british muslims, he is massively rejected as a fraud. So i don't think it's an issue of the left but more of reliability. A lot of muslim scholars are fighting everyday against terrorism in the West, they don't get half the audience, why ?

A lot of people are getting into this whole "crisis within Islam/terrorist threat" to get a place under the sun. We have the same kind of people in France.

Edit: Ayan Hirshi Ali is another example of that. Totally incoherent. One day she make a book about Islam being evil, next time she present herself as an "Muslim Reformist" but her whole discourse is against the faith in itself. Being reformist is about criticizing the institutions, Luther did not criticize Jesus, peace upon him, but the Church. You cannot be called a Muslim Reformist if you're problem is with God's words or His Prophet ﷺ.

 

[Suikoguy]

Whats wrong with Ayan Hirshi?

I was not familiar with her, and some quick searching shows she is still quite conflicted but still seemingly not as extreme as she was in the examples on SPLC. She considers herself as part of a reformist movement. If she really is for the reformation of the religion, wants to focus on specific issues with it, and not advocating for the elimination of the religion perhaps the SPLC should reevaluate her inclusion on the list.

But, looking at her very recent Op-Ed in the WaPost:

The second group — which composes the clear majority throughout the Muslim world — is loyal to the core creed of Islam and worship devoutly but is not inclined to practice or preach violence. Like devout Christians or Jews who attend religious services every week and abide by religious rules in what they eat and wear, these “Mecca Muslims” focus on religious observance. Sometimes some members of this group are mistakenly termed “moderate.”

She views this group as a problem, saying:

They [Politicians] would much rather make nice with the self-proclaimed representatives of “moderate Islam,” who on close inspection often turn out but to be anything but moderate.

So, still ways to go it seems. But maybe not a lost cause? I don't know if she is still pushing the lie that she called her backstory. She does not use it to bolster her argument in the Op-Ed.

You can read her op-ed here.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Bill Maher sure as fuck has never scaled back his acidic nonsense about Muslims.

At least in recent times it seems that he has. Maybe i've missed something recently that he's said on the subject, but I haven't seen anything as idiotic from him on the subject like a few years ago when he actually advocated profiling Muslim's. For someone that claims to be progressive, that's really about as far away from progressive as you can get. And that rhetoric he's at least moved away from, at least from what i've heard of him recently.

 

[Trokil]

If a Moderate Republican Darling can claim to be bipartisan yet support the party 99% of the time, I guess Liberal Icons can claim to be open and accepting yet insult minorities and normalize bigots.

Words no longer mean anything ~~~

That is true, look at Evergreen and how that e-Mail made Bret Weinstein a racist piece of shit that must be weeded out.

Words can be redefined at any moment now.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

That's a bad quote, because he was making a joke.

You happened to ignore the first few parts of what that bit comes from..

"I also asked Harris at the event why the vast majority of atheists—and many of those who buy his books—are male, a topic which has prompted some to raise questions of sexism in the atheist community. Harris' answer was both silly and then provocative.

It can only be attributed to my ”overwhelming lack of sex appeal," he said to huge laughter."

This was not a serious response of his. If you want to attack him, deal with points, not spun ones.

I'm not certain how that asserts he was intending the following statement to be a joke. If a bigot says "It may just be my white privilege speaking but I think black people are subhuman." and laughed would you just shrug it off?

 

[Suikoguy]

That's a bad quote, because he was making a joke.

You happened to ignore the first few parts of what that bit comes from..

"I also asked Harris at the event why the vast majority of atheists—and many of those who buy his books—are male, a topic which has prompted some to raise questions of sexism in the atheist community. Harris’ answer was both silly and then provocative.

It can only be attributed to my “overwhelming lack of sex appeal,” he said to huge laughter."

This was not a serious response of his. If you want to attack him, deal with points, not spun ones.

In context it's not as bad, but the atheist community has developed some serious anti-women issues. Kinda sad to just play that legitimate point off with a joke.

 

[fade_]

At least in recent times it seems that he has. Maybe i've missed something recently that he's said on the subject, but I haven't seen anything as idiotic from him on the subject like a few years ago when he actually advocated profiling Muslim's. For someone that claims to be progressive, that's really about as far away from progressive as you can get. And that rhetoric he's at least moved away from, at least from what i've heard of him recently.

A lot of this is recent. https://youtu.be/sZGC56pfWKo

 

[NoblesseOblige]

In context it's not as bad, but the atheist community has developed some serious anti-women issues. Kinda sad to just play that legitimate point off with a joke.

It's not even the atheist community he was specifically speaking about, but his own brand of 'new atheism' which manages to be even less welcoming to women than the larger community. Which is no shocker when he apparently "jokes" about women being less rational. He actually attempted to explain the quote further saying ...

I believe that a less ”angry," more ”nurturing" style of discourse might attract more women to the cause of atheism. However, I haven't spent even five minutes thinking about how or whether to modify my writing or speaking style so as to accomplish this.

Basically rehashing the gender norm that women are nurturers.

 

[Trokil]

In context it's not as bad, but the atheist community has developed some serious anti-women issues. Kinda sad to just play that legitimate point off with a joke.

You mean a worse anti-women issue than in Muslim countries? Wow, this is amazing how fast the point in the interview is getting proven. That why this joke is the most terrible thing, but that it is allowed to hit your wife in Pakistan is not that terrible.

So the bigotry of low expectations. It is crazy that everything he said is shown within this topic.

 

[Suikoguy]

It's not even the atheist community he was specifically speaking about, but his own brand of 'new atheism' which manages to be even less welcoming to women than the larger community.

Yeah, that's the group I was talking about.
There are so many of those insufferable bastards on Youtube (and a startling number with considerable view-counts).
For channels that are supposed to be about atheism, they sure spend a considerable amount of time complaining about Anita Sarkeesian, SJWs, etc.

You mean a worse anti-women issue than in Muslim countries? Wow, this is amazing how fast the point in the interview is getting proven. That why this joke is the most terrible thing, but that it is allowed to hit your wife in Pakistan is not that terrible.

So the bigotry of low expectations. It is crazy that everything he said is shown within this topic.

Did you just whataboutism with Muslims?

 

[effzee]

Ah yes the n word saying and Milo promoting "progressive" Bill Maher who gets shit on by other progressives until unless he is on his anti-Muslim BS.

 

[firehawk12]

Maher had another Muslim against Islam speaker a few months ago. It's his fetish.

 

[SaviourMK2]

Ok, I'm confused. Is Nawaz a founder of sn organization for Anti "Muslim Extremists" (being again Muslim Extremists) or a group of Anti-Muslim "Extremists" (extremes who are anti Muslim).

 

[firehawk12]

Ok, I'm confused. Is Nawaz a founder of sn organization for Anti "Muslim Extremists" (being again Muslim Extremists) or a group of Anti-Muslim "Extremists" (extremes who are anti Muslim).

The latter I suppose. He's accused of being Islamophobic.

 

[BocoDragon]

It's very simple: the Southern Poverty Law Center has a garbage list and is incapable of separating liberal criticism of Islamic issues from anti-Muslim bigots.

Any list with Ayan Hirsi Ali on it means it's worthless in defining what is bigotry.

The latter I suppose. He's accused of being Islamophobic.

Nawaz is a even now a believing Muslim so that'd be "interesting."

 

[Trokil]

It's very simple: the Southern Poverty Law Center has a garbage list and is incapable of separating liberal criticism of Islamic issues from anti-Muslim bigots.

That is wrong, for them they are the same. The whole Evergreen debacle at least has shown, any form of criticism is somehow offensive; if not, you can still change the meaning of words until it is. Even quoting statistics is offensive, if the result is not in your favor. That is also why gender studies has so many publications about why the scientific method or statistics are oppressive tools.

To make it short, if you believe it is offensive, it is offensive.

 

[Zampano]

Maher had another Muslim against Islam speaker a few months ago. It's his fetish.

Not sure how anything Nawaz said was against Islam?

Great interview - thanks for sharing OP.

 

[madstarr12]

The whole thing with using religion as a means for destruction, that should definitely be called out and it should be stopped by the hands of those who can stop them. People should be critical of religion if it causes harm to others. Extremism is a danger to the world.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

It's very simple: the Southern Poverty Law Center has a garbage list and is incapable of separating liberal criticism of Islamic issues from anti-Muslim bigots.

Any list with Ayan Hirsi Ali on it means it's worthless in defining what is bigotry.

You can clearly see where she is coming from:

In a 2007 article in Reason magazine, Hirsi Ali said that Islam, the religion, must be defeated and that "we are at war with Islam. And there's no middle ground in wars."[6] She said, "Islam, period. Once it's defeated, it can mutate into something peaceful. It's very difficult to even talk about peace now. They're not interested in peace...There comes a moment when you crush your enemy."[6] She reiterated her position that the problem isn't just a few "rotten apples" in the Islamic community but "I'm saying it's the entire basket." She stated that the majority of Muslims aren't "moderates" and they must radically alter their religion.[105] Max Rodenbeck, writing in The New York Review of Books, notes that Ali's view of Islam has shifted and "mellowed," as she no longer completely rejects Islam. She now narrowly criticizes what she calls "Medina Muslims" who ignore the more inclusive passages of Muhammad's Meccan period, a small minority of Muslims.[106]

About immigration:

Hirsi Ali discussed her view on immigration in Europe,[119] in an OpEd article published in the Los Angeles Times in 2006.[120] Noting that immigrants are over-represented "in all the wrong statistics", she wrote that the European Union's immigration policy contributed to the illegal trade in women and arms, and the exploitation of poor migrants by "cruel employers."

The sudden change of her discourse from radical islamophobia to a somewhat incoherent "reformism" make me thing that she have 0 sincerity. I don't even understand why anyone would be bother giving her credibility, except people who use her as a token muslim.

 

[victreeb3l]

Lol Maajid Nawaz. That dude is a clown so of course he would be invited to Mahers show.

 

[BocoDragon]

You can clearly see where she is coming from:

Yes, she's a ardent critic of Islamic ideology. It's the same as any criticism of religion.

We have room in this free society to criticize ideologies without being accused of hating people.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

Yes, she's a ardent critic of Islamic ideology. It's the same as any criticism of religion.

We have room in this free society to criticize ideologies without being accused of hating people.

Little test:

"In a 2007 article in Islam magazine, Fatima Khalid said that Judaism, the religion, must be defeated and that "we are at war with Judaism. And there's no middle ground in wars."[6] She said, "Judaism, period. Once it's defeated, it can mutate into something peaceful. It's very difficult to even talk about peace now. They're not interested in peace...There comes a moment when you crush your enemy."[6] She reiterated her position that the problem isn't just a few "rotten apples" in the Jewish community but "I'm saying it's the entire basket." She stated that the majority of Jews aren't "moderates" and they must radically alter their religion."

Is this an acceptable criticism of judaism ? I mean, even Hamas don't say that today.

Criticism of religion: the criticism of the tenets and doctrine of a religion, perfectly legitimate.
Bigotry: rejection of a group of people because of their faith.

 

[sephi22]

This thread going about as expected, few posts actually even trying to refute the content of what was said, just a bunch of bloviating about how racist Maher is and straight up pathetic posts calling this guy an uncle tom.

Embarrassing. Proving every point Maher makes about the left when trying to talk about Islamic extremism.

Pretty much. You have people in this thread saying he's hating muslims or hating on identity politics while he's speaking against homophobia, sexism, violence and bigotry in his own community.
Also, "My british muslim friends hate him" is cute since that's the community he's trying to reform. Conservative muslims will hate him. Water is wet.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

It's very simple: the Southern Poverty Law Center has a garbage list

Seriously?

 

[BocoDragon]

Little test:

"In a 2007 article in Islam magazine, Fatima Khalid said that Judaism, the religion, must be defeated and that "we are at war with Judaism. And there's no middle ground in wars."[6] She said, "Judaism, period. Once it's defeated, it can mutate into something peaceful. It's very difficult to even talk about peace now. They're not interested in peace...There comes a moment when you crush your enemy."[6] She reiterated her position that the problem isn't just a few "rotten apples" in the Jewish community but "I'm saying it's the entire basket." She stated that the majority of Jews aren't "moderates" and they must radically alter their religion."

Is this an acceptable criticism of judaism ?

It is if they're talking about "defeating" Judaism as an idea in the public sphere of debate.

If they're actually advocate for hating, deporting, shunning, rounding up, waging war on people, then that's bigotry.

 

[Lime]

I'm so tired of so-called self-identifying liberals/atheists and their bigoted Islamophobia. Not even that, their analysis of something as broad and varied as Islam in its million of cultures and countries is so superficial and frankly stupid, especially when bigoted shitheads like Maher and his ignorant "experts" do not take the geopolitical and historical aspects of the Middle East into account.

*bombs, invades, and destabilizes an entire region for decades*

"Must be the entire religion that's making people into terrorists!!!"

No one should listen to these people because they don't have anything valuable to contribute for our understanding of the world.

 

[televator]

Yes, she's a ardent critic of Islamic ideology. It's the same as any criticism of religion.

We have room in this free society to criticize ideologies without being accused of hating people.

Really? "At war... once it's defeated... there comes a time to crush your enemy."??? As an atheist myself, this doesn't sound like the kind of thing I'd apply anywhere. What does this even mean? What do you do when you're at war with a religion? You legislate the banning of religious practices? Do you bomb them abroad? Ultimately, you're talking about enacting domestic and foreign policies that affect people. So she talks about religion but the effects seem to conclude in spiteful policeis against people.

 

[firehawk12]

Not sure how anything Nawaz said was against Islam?

Great interview - thanks for sharing OP.

I mean his argument, based on that interview anyway, is that white men shouldn't tell him what he is allowed to say about Islam.

 

[MaddenNFL64]

We need more people like Nawaz around. Reforming Islam into a more secular version of itself is one of the greatest challenges of our time.

 

[Chumley]

I'm so tired of so-called self-identifying liberals/atheists and their bigoted Islamophobia. Not even that, their analysis of something as broad and varied as Islam in its million of cultures and countries is so superficial and frankly stupid, especially when bigoted shitheads like Maher and his ignorant "experts" do not take the geopolitical and historical aspects of the Middle East into account.

*bombs, invades, and destabilizes an entire region for decades*

"Must be the entire religion that's making people into terrorists!!!"

No one should listen to these people because they don't have anything valuable to contribute for our understanding of the world.

More misrepresentation. Neither of them ever said the entire religion is making people terrorists. The very guest he had on is a fucking Muslim.

What you're calling superficial is actually exactly what your post is, since it sounds like you didn't even see the clip. In your attempt to come off as thoughtful and compassionate, you just exposed yourself as ignorant.

 

[Game-Biz]

We need more people like Nawaz around. Reforming Islam into a more secular version of itself is one of the greatest challenges of our time.

Yep, agree 100%.

 

[Sarcastic Poster]

In context it's not as bad, but the atheist community has developed some serious anti-women issues. Kinda sad to just play that legitimate point off with a joke.

It's still by orders of magnitude more egalitarian than any faith.

 

[RangerX]

The vast majority of Muslim reformers in Britain can't stand Nawaz because the guy seems like a Sam Harris shill and they say he does fuck all actual work in the community.

 

[BocoDragon]

Seriously?

Yes.

http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...ists-list-includes-scholars-reformist-muslims

National Review is a respected mainstream conservative publication. Agree or not, but I'm not the only one who's said it.

Really? "At war... once it's defeated... there comes a time to crush your enemy."??? As an atheist myself, this doesn't sound like the kind of thing I'd apply anywhere. What does this even mean? What do you do when you're at war with a religion? You legislate the banning of religious practices? Do you bomb them abroad? Ultimately, you're talking about enacting domestic and foreign policies that affect people. So she talks about religion but the effects seem to conclude in spiteful policeis against people.

It's debateable whether that rhetoric is helpful (out of context, it certainly isn't), but the substance of Ayan Hirsi Ali's position is in winning in the marketplace of ideas, not Trump-style legislation against actual Muslim lives.