Saturday, December 05, 2015

Andrew Bostom and Diana West weigh in on the snake "reformer", Maajid Nawaz.

http://www.cathedral-brentwood.org/images-cross/Gr-1534.jpg
Maajid Nawaz wrapping himself around the Tree of Reform in the Garden of Eden.

֍ ֍ ֍ ֍ ֍

Kudos to Bostom and West.  Now where the hell is the rest of the Counter-Jihad?  Why don't Robert Spencer, Pam Geller, Daniel Greenfield, Jamie Glazov, David Horowitz, Debbie Schlussel, Gates of Vienna, Brigitte Gabriel, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Frank Gaffney, et al. -- why don't any of these people say something about a snake who is fooling countless people, lulling them into the complacency of Islamic reform?

Why can't any of those distinguished members of the Counter-Jihad leadership call a spade a spade as clearly and boldly as does Andrew Bostom, when with searing aptness he describes the performance of Maajid Nawaz on Fox News on December 3 (on The Kelly File ) as "disingenuous drivel"?  Or as Diana West does when she refers to Nawaz's "double talk and deception"?

And why hasn't Sam Harris gotten the memo?  Why won't Harris even merely ask Maajid Nawaz elementary questions that would vet him as a supposed reformist partner of the Counter-Jihad?

Bostom notes a recent discussion about Nawaz by Diana West on the Sam Sorbo radio show, then Bostom follows up with important information that Sam Harris could, and should, educate himself about before riding off into the Sunset of the Future of Tolerance with his new partner.

Further Reading:

Does not compute: The Sam Harris/Maajid Nawaz "Conversation" 

How to pass as a "Moderate Muslim" in the Counter-Jihad

My latest posting on the Sam Harris Forum (and take a look at what some guy named "Ubik" (sounds fishily Oriental, does it not...), the one and only response thus far, tries to argue! -- and my response).

22 comments:

Anonymous said...

Why won't Harris even merely ask Maajid Nawaz elementary questions that would vet him as a supposed reformist partner of the Counter-Jihad?

More to the point (perhaps) is why doesn't Mr. Harris simply ask Maajid Nawaz, "Why are you still a Muslim?"

Why, indeed. The disconcerting answer is that Mr. Harris, for all his rationality, has not taken rationality far enough. His intellectual labor on the question of Islam and Muslims and what to do about them is not sufficient to overcome the Problem of the Problem of the Problem as you've described it.

It's like a tall ladder with its upper four rungs missing and the empty side rails just peeking over the top of a wall.

If the Counter-Jihad depends upon the less than rigorous analysis of Mr. Harris and those like him, then the war is going to be longer and far bloodier than it might otherwise be.

Yorick of Snarkinore

P.S. The only intellectually respectable Muslim reformer I want to hear about is one without the prefix “re.” Not a reformer Muslim, but a former Muslim.

Shouldn’t the Counter-Jihad have learned their lesson by now? (What, if anything, has Zudhi Jasser accomplished?)

Yes, Hamlet is the play. I guess I’m just being too obvious. Yorick of Elsinore had infinite jests. Yorick of Snarkinore has impudent jests.

Hesperado said...

A friend in the Counter-Jihad (such as it is) who has read further into the Bromance Novel which Sam Harris and Maajid Nawaz co-wrote (The Future of Tolerance) has located the likely reason why Sam has abdicated his Reason for a deeper reason: At one point Maajid says (to paraphrase): "We can't wage war on all Muslims of the world -- therefore we must find a way to solve this problem through dialogue and reform!" Maajid has cleverly figured out that this subliminal horror of the sheer magnitude of the problem can become a stronger motivation than the love of truth even for someone like Sam (and for so many others). Nothing else explains the willingness of Sam to willfully ignore the transparently disingenuous nonsense of Maajid -- for if Sam were a dimmer bulb, we could locate the problem there.

Egghead said...

The Nawaz comment in question is incredibly disingenuous when you realize that ALL self-identified Muslims in the world ARE waging war (jihad) on non-Muslims with the Muslim versions of 'dialogue' and 'reform' being easily accounted for as various methods of fraud and war strategies perpetrated by Muslims practicing mainstream (aka moderate) Islam.

Egghead said...

Read Scott Adams of Dilbert fame:

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/134791529391/risk-management-trump-persuasion-series

Hesperado said...

Thanks Egghead, for that Dilbert piece. I couldn't make it all the way through, as it is a species of typically befuddled, pleasantly opinionated PC MC (but pretending to be outside-the-box) I find tedious to try to unscramble. I did leave a comment there noting one of his faulty cogs in his contraption...

Egghead said...

Did you read the comments which were indicative of extreme naïveté of 'innocent' Americans?

Egghead said...

https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=230952

Read comments on page 2 by Erbo. Is Erbo referring to you? Specifically, have you written about cutting off diplomatic relations with Muslim majority countries?

Note from Egghead: Hudna is an important concept to understand regarding diplomatic relations with Muslims.

Egghead said...

Maybe Erbo means LC?

http://lamecherry.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2015-12-07T09:58:00-08:00&max-results=7&start=7&by-date=false&m=0

Egghead said...

Note to LC:

The last time you were WRITING about me (I did not read it until the next day), you put me to bed for hours with a pre-migraine - and the time before that I thought that I would have to go to the ER due to extreme heart palpitations. Be clear, your energy at the time of writing (!) made me literally very physically ill.

By the way, the game is layered. Everyone is talking about a female Islamic fighter at the same time that white American ladies have been drafted without even knowing it yet....

Egghead said...

http://lamecherry.blogspot.com/2015/12/the-real-syed-farook.html?m=0

I just cannot shake the feeling that LC's happy picture of lady fighter is a different person than the Chicago 'lady' who looks like a man in a veil. The chins are different with pretty girl having a pointy chin without a cleft, and veiled girl having a wide chin with a cleft.

Also, pretty girl does her hair differently than a swoop that looks like a male way of wearing bangs.

What if a he was flying around as a she?

Egghead said...

Obama's Tolerable Level of Terrorism

http://www.meforum.org/5684/tolerable-level-of-terrorism

Egghead said...

Drumroll, please, for the propaganda of why American Christian girl soldiers will be just 'dandy' in the fight against terror....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3353330/ISIS-afraid-girls-Jihadists-believe-killed-women-won-t-heaven-claim-feared-Kurdish-fighters.html

Egghead said...

Another smiling Parisian Muslim:

http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/12/french-authorities-identify-third-bataclan-shooter/

Nobody said...

Hesperado

Please do another post on Trump's proposed ban on Muslim entry so that we can discuss it

Egghead said...

Here is useful info for your AIM:

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/opinion-polls.htm

Egghead said...

Censors are active again!

Egghead said...

Wow! Will not let me post link about Loretta Sanchez!

Egghead said...

Who said 5-20% of you know who are radical you know what.

Egghead said...

National Review:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428146/more-than-few-islamic-extremists?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_content=5667aeff04d3016bf289ee1e&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter

Egghead said...

Assuming it is true (versus made up), here is - ARGH!!! - source material for your early history of origins of PC MC:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/12/11/how-thomas-jefferson-and-other-founding-fathers-defended-muslim-rights/?tid=hybrid_collaborative_2_na

Egghead said...

Of course, the article completely omits the reality that our 'abolitionist' founding fathers - including Lincoln - also believed and wrote that the USA should repatriate to Africa any 'former' African slaves (then the only - clearly not practicing - Muslims in the USA)....

Because of the general behavior and intellect of the mass of African slaves, the founding fathers feared that blacks would be unable to support themselves as free people and thus turn to violence against whites....

Vikram Chatterjee said...

The reason Spencer, Geller et al, are not going after Nawaz is because they want Sam Harris' deception by Nawaz to go on as long as possible, knowing that when Harris finally realizes how he's been deceived for the past couple of years, he will have to spend a great deal of time explaining how he was deceived by Nawaz & his accomplices (Ali Rizvi, Faisal Saeed Al Mutar & some others).

From the point of view of Geller & Spencer, it will serve as a useful object lesson in taqiyya, tawriyah deception etc. So they are buttoning their lips and basically just letting Harris hang himself.