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).
19 comments:
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.
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.
Read Scott Adams of Dilbert fame:
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/134791529391/risk-management-trump-persuasion-series
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...
Did you read the comments which were indicative of extreme naïveté of 'innocent' Americans?
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.
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
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....
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?
Obama's Tolerable Level of Terrorism
http://www.meforum.org/5684/tolerable-level-of-terrorism
Another smiling Parisian Muslim:
http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/12/french-authorities-identify-third-bataclan-shooter/
Hesperado
Please do another post on Trump's proposed ban on Muslim entry so that we can discuss it
Here is useful info for your AIM:
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/opinion-polls.htm
Censors are active again!
Wow! Will not let me post link about Loretta Sanchez!
Who said 5-20% of you know who are radical you know what.
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
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
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.
Post a Comment