SPLC idiocy: labels Maajid Nawaz & Ayaan Hirsi Ali Anti-muslim Extremists

[Admiral Yi]

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/10/maajid-nawaz-splc-anti-muslim-extremist/505685/

An article I found helpful in evaluating the charge against Nawaz.

[grumbler]

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/10/maajid-nawaz-splc-anti-muslim-extremist/505685/

An article I found helpful in evaluating the charge against Nawaz.

Thanks for that.  It does seem like very weak sauce indeed (going to a strip club makes one an "anti-Muslim extremist" now), but the SPLC needs the press, so this is a good thing for them, I guess.

[Hamilcar]

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/10/maajid-nawaz-splc-anti-muslim-extremist/505685/

An article I found helpful in evaluating the charge against Nawaz.

Thanks for that.  It does seem like very weak sauce indeed (going to a strip club makes one an "anti-Muslim extremist" now), but the SPLC needs the press, so this is a good thing for them, I guess.

Ditto, thanks for the link. The problem is that calling someone an "extremist" does get you attention, so there's incentive to call more and more people "extremist" (or racist, homophobe, islamophobe, sexist etc), devaluing the charge with each frivolous use. Harsh words are like antibiotics, the more you use them, the less they work in the future.

Personally, I now immediately discount terms like racist, sexist etc and form my own opinion using further data later on.... if I care sufficiently.

[CountDeMoney]

Extremism in the defense of anti-Islamism is no vice.

[CountDeMoney]

but the SPLC needs the press, so this is a good thing for them, I guess.

Meh, pretty sure they're got their hands full with enough creepy ass crackers as it is.

[mongers]

Rightly or wrongly this guy is regarded by some as a government stooge, I guess that might have influenced the report writer/pigeon-holer.

[Valmy]

Is it really the business of the SPLC to define theological views? Do they also label certain Christian groups heretical? Seems a bit out of their purview.

[CountDeMoney]

Is it really the business of the SPLC to define theological views? Do they also label certain Christian groups heretical? Seems a bit out of their purview.

They're not defining theological views.

[Valmy]

Is it really the business of the SPLC to define theological views? Do they also label certain Christian groups heretical? Seems a bit out of their purview.

They're not defining theological views.

Sure. They are saying which Muslims are true Muslims and which Muslims are in actuality anti to true Islam. That seems like a matter best left to theologians. I mean how else can a Muslim be labelled 'anti-Muslim' unless you have some kind of theological definition of a true Muslim?

[CountDeMoney]

Is it really the business of the SPLC to define theological views? Do they also label certain Christian groups heretical? Seems a bit out of their purview.

They're not defining theological views.

Sure. They are saying which Muslims are true Muslims and which Muslims are in actuality anti to true Islam. That seems like a matter best left to theologians.

No, they aren't saying that at all. 

[Valmy]

No, they aren't saying that at all. 

Either they are saying that or this Maajid Nawaz guy is lying when says he is a 'reform Muslim'. One of the two must be true, because they both cannot be.

[CountDeMoney]

No, they aren't saying that at all. 

Either they are saying that or this Maajid Nawaz guy is lying when says he is a 'reform Muslim'. One of the two must be true, because they both cannot be.

No, they are not either saying that or saying he is lying.

[Admiral Yi]

Either they are saying that or this Maajid Nawaz guy is lying when says he is a 'reform Muslim'. One of the two must be true, because they both cannot be.

"I am a reform Muslim" was a statement made in rebuttal to the accusation that he is anti-Muslim.  SPLC is not saying whether he is a true Muslim or not.

[Valmy]

No, they aren't saying that at all. 

Either they are saying that or this Maajid Nawaz guy is lying when says he is a 'reform Muslim'. One of the two must be true, because they both cannot be.

No, they are not either saying that or saying he is lying.

So he was not labelled anti-Muslim then? So the entire article was a lie? Interesting.

"I am a reform Muslim" was a statement made in rebuttal to the accusation that he is anti-Muslim.  SPLC is not saying whether he is a true Muslim or not.

Yes they are. They said what he believed was anti-Muslim. Ergo his version of being a Muslim was anti-Islam, and thus opposed to what they consider true Islam. They are making a 100% theological judgement.

[grumbler]

No, they aren't saying that at all. 

Either they are saying that or this Maajid Nawaz guy is lying when says he is a 'reform Muslim'. One of the two must be true, because they both cannot be.

No, they are not either saying that or saying he is lying.

Yeah, I don't know Valmy came to the conclusion that one cannot be a devout Muslim and an extreme anti-Muslim at the same time.  Islam and Islam have nothing to do with each other.  You can oppose Islam without being against Islam.