UPDATE: Hemant Mehta writes in to say, “I focused on those two because they’re well known in atheist circles.”
———–
Sam Harris thinks it’s “unbelievable” that Maajid Nawaz and Ayaan Hirsi Ali made it to the Southern Poverty Law Center’s hit list of “Anti-Muslim Extremists.” He said nothing about me or the other people whom the SPLC included, which is not surprising, since he has quite recently expressed willingness to acquiesce in other contexts to the demonization that the SPLC list exemplifies.
Hemant Mehta of The Friendly Atheist blog ably sums up the outrage over Nawaz and Hirsi Ali being included: “If criticizing religious beliefs makes them extremists, then it won’t be long before other vocal atheists end up on that list too. And make no mistake, that’s what Nawaz and Hirsi Ali are doing. That’s all they’re doing. They’re not anti-Muslim; they work with moderate Muslims. They’re critical of the worst aspects of Islam.”
The problem with being angry about Nawaz and Hirsi Ali being on the SPLC list, but silent about everyone else who is on it, is that what Mehta says about Nawaz and Hirsi Ali can quite accurately said about everyone else on the list. If criticizing religious beliefs makes them “extremists,” then it won’t be long before everyone who dares to utter a critical word about Islam will be on the list — and that is indeed the objective of the list: to stigmatize and marginalize any and all such critics. Mehta protests that Nawaz and Hirsi Ali are “not anti-Muslim; they work with moderate Muslims. They’re critical of the worst aspects of Islam.”
But no one would think that the other 13 were “anti-Muslim” if it hadn’t been for the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and their allied groups insisting that we were all these years, in their avidity to conflate opposition to jihad terror and Sharia oppression with hating a group of people — a tactic designed to discredit opposition to jihad terror and Sharia oppression. Mehta and co. are falling for and validating the same smear tactics hey are decrying when used against their friends. And as for working with moderate Muslims, for 13 years Jihad Watch has contained this invitation: “Any Muslim who renounces violent jihad and dhimmitude is welcome to join in our anti-jihadist efforts.” It is Nawaz (as well as other moderates) who has attacked me, in what appears to have been a cynical attempt to gain support for himself among Muslims; I never attacked him, and would have have been happy to work with him otherwise.
In complaining that Nawaz and Hirsi Ali are merely “criticizing religious beliefs” and are “not anti-Muslim,” Mehta is strongly implying that the others on the SPLC list are doing something beyond “criticizing religious beliefs” and are indeed “anti-Muslim.” On Twitter the last couple of days I’ve seen many people express outrage that Nawaz has been lumped in with the likes of Spencer; but when I ask them what the big difference is between us, or for quotes from me that are actually “bigoted,” they go silent.
Mehta, Harris, Haider and the rest are, by their selective outrage, acquiescing to and legitimizing the SPLC’s demonization of the other people on the list. This is a self-defeating choice for them to have made, for the SPLC has never identified anyone whom it considers to be a legitimate critic of Islam, and never will: the point of lists such as the one they released yesterday is to demonize and silence everyone who dares say something about Islam that is not warmly positive. The turn of Mehta, Harris, and Haider will come for the same treatment. One wonders if, when this happens, there will be anyone left to speak for them who has not already been smeared as “anti-Muslim,” with their tacit approval.
“Atheists Outraged by SPLC Branding Atheist Critics of Radical Islam ‘Anti-Muslim Extremists,'” by Stoyan Zaimov, Christian Post, October 28, 2016:
Sam Harris and several other prominent members of the atheist community have condemned the Southern Poverty Law Center’s recent decision to brand atheist authors critical of radical Islam as “anti-Muslim Extremists.”
Harris, who himself has written books, articles, and made numerous commentaries on the dangers of Islamic extremism, described the SPLC’s move as “unbelievable,” and retweeted several messages by other atheists and supporters who also could not understand why Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Maajid Nawaz have found themselves of the “extremist” list.
As the SPLC notes in its report, Hirsi Ali is a Somali-born activist who says that she suffered female genital mutilation and fled civil war in Africa, but questions key parts of her persecution story, and argues that “she now positions herself as an ex-Muslim champion of women’s rights, her anti-Muslim rhetoric is remarkably toxic.”
SPLC also brands Nawaz as a former radical who uses his experience to “savage Islam,” and also accuses him of fabricating parts of his experience in order to present a negative image of Islam.
Hemant Mehta of The Friendly Atheist blog noted that both Nawz [sic] and Hirsi Ali believe that Islam is “uniquely problematic compared to other religions,” and have encouraged moderate Muslims to help steer the religion in the right direction.
Mehta wrote that the SPLC’s decision to brand the authors as “anti-Muslim Extremists” makes him wonder “why anyone should take the SPLC seriously at this point.”
He added: “If criticizing religious beliefs makes them extremists, then it won’t be long before other vocal atheists end up on that list too. And make no mistake, that’s what Nawaz and Hirsi Ali are doing. That’s all they’re doing. They’re not anti-Muslim; they work with moderate Muslims. They’re critical of the worst aspects of Islam.”
Sarah Haider of Ex-Muslims of North America noted that both Nawaz and Hirsi Ali have been targeted by radicals and threatened with violence for speaking out against real extremists, and warned that the SPLC’s decision will make it even harder for critics to speak out.
“Already, too few are willing to stand up to religious privilege for the sake of human rights. When that privilege belongs to a religion whose followers include some ready to die (and kill) for the honor of their faith, activists face devastating costs,” Haider wrote.
“This report is an example of the careless, reactionary response by the American media (on both the right and the left) to the challenge posed by this religion.”…

Allan says
It would be nice if this new tempest in the tea pot of leftist politics proved fatal to the SPLC and its shifty, money-grubbing extremists.
Jay Boo says
It proves just how shamelessly arrogant the SPLC has been when they try to whip their fellow Lefties in line for not being Left enough on Islam.
Angemon says
Gee, Sam, I haven’t read every single thing you wrote or heard to every single thing you said – it’s a bandwidth issue, you see – so how am I supposed to know whether or not you engaged in anti-muslim bigotry? What if it turns out that you are, actually, a Grand Dragon in the KKK or something like that, and that the conversation I thought to be interesting and stimulating means something else entirely different to you? I’m sorry, Sam, but you are so fully stigmatized that unless I’ve paid enough attention to the kinds of battles you’ve fought to be confident that I know that all of that opprobrium is unwarranted – and I don’t – I just don’t actually know what your stance is…
Custos Custodum says
Very nice – for those readers who have not been following this issue, this is essentially what Harris said in a tortuous attempt to “distance himself” from Robert Spencer while sounding suitably pseudo-intellectual and sophisticated about it.
(Harris even used the word “bandwidth” which apparently is still regarded as hip and cool in some areas of North America.”
Mirren10 says
Brill, Angemon. 🙂
Harris is a 4 star hypocrite.
marsfeld says
I’m not so sure about Harris having uttered any true objection to what Spencer is doing in that Saad podcast that has recently been discussed on this blog.
I recently came across an older podcast of Harris that pretty much uses the very same argument, something like: “Some critics come with a bad reputation, and I haven’t the time to check it out. I’m tarnished myself so associating will become very problematic, as there is the chance I won’t reach any new listeners if I give my enemies the opportunity to even further outcast me by misrepresenting associations to alleged ‘bigots’ and ‘islamophobes'”.
This may be somewhat of a lazy move, but I don’t sense any true negativity from what he had uttered.
He basically says the same about Mark Steyn and Daniel Pipes in the first 25 minutes of this talk with Douglas Murray. I think he is just talking about the problems ANYONE publically engaged in this toxic topic will face.
But listen to it yourself:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAmE1cNB9WI
I would carefully refrain from petty fights and from creating unnecessary division and drama with this camp of atheist/liberal critics. Both camps do very valuable work. That’s just strengthening the islamists and regressives who’d love to see all this kind of truth telling go down the drain.
Angemon says
marsfeld posted:
“I’m not so sure about Harris having uttered any true objection to what Spencer is doing in that Saad podcast that has recently been discussed on this blog.”
Maybe not direct objection to Mr. Spencer’s work but certainly a dissociation from it based on the sketchy that people like Mr. Spencer may have ulterior motives that are less than noble, even if their words and actions differ nothing from his own and he can’t find anything they said or wrote to substantiate that notion.
“This may be somewhat of a lazy move, but I don’t sense any true negativity from what he had uttered.”
Lazy doesn’t even begin to cut it. The dude has like, one job. Would it kill him to educate himself about the people he is denigrating? It’s even more egregious when one sees that he wrote, following his clash with Ben Affleck, “my criticism of Islam is a criticism of beliefs and their consequences but my fellow liberals reflexively view it as an expression of intolerance toward people”.
“I would carefully refrain from petty fights and from creating unnecessary division and drama with this camp of atheist/liberal critics.”
As far as I can tell, people like Mr. Spencer or Mrs. Geller never burned any bridges with the likes of Sam Harris or Bill Maher. If they decide to pull their heads out of the clouds (or their ass, in Harris’ case) and realize that the people they have no problems burning and discarding as bigots, genuine (as opposed to them being falsely accused) “islamophobes” or having a hidden agenda are no more bigots, “islamophobes” or following a hidden agenda than they are, I suspect a simple apology and a genuine attempt of outreach will work wonders.
Angemon says
Where it reads “the sketchy that people” it should read ” the sketchy notion that people”
Jay Boo says
Rational Thought
It is wonderful in theory.
The problem with any ideology including “Rational Thought” is the bottom feeders of society will use it to excuse and ‘rationalize’ their self-serving goals at the expense of all others. Even their defense of fellow Atheists and Leftists shows that hypocritical commenters like Sam Harris are more concerned about appearing as (objective) against all religions than risk being perceived as anti-Islam religion.
Ted Tyler says
I disagree. My take is that Harris (and Dawkins and Hitchens) have no fear of being perceived as anti-islamic. Their view is that: All religions are bad, but Islam is particularly evil.
Custos Custodum says
That may be true of Dawkins and Hitchens, Harris is clearly a little more attached to his progressive “good name.”
JIMJFOX says
Absolutely. Nothing angers me more than bloody idiot extremist christians accusing atheists
of being leftist enablers of Islam- when atheists have the most to fear from Islam.
NOBODY detests Islam more than atheists- or, possibly Jews.
Ted Tyler says
Jim, So what is the difference between a Christian and a Muslim?
The Christian is taught to “Love your neighbor” – but will make an exception for Atheists. The Muslim is taught to “kill all non-Muslims” – particularly Atheists.
Mirren10 says
JIMJFOX says
”Nothing angers me more than bloody idiot extremist christians accusing atheists
of being leftist enablers of Islam … ”
Really ? More than mohammedans physically attacking you, and murdering you ?
Rather a daft remark, don’t you think ?
Angemon says
JIMJFOX posted:
“Absolutely. Nothing angers me more than bloody idiot extremist christians accusing atheists
of being leftist enablers of Islam- when atheists have the most to fear from Islam.”
Well, the “bloody idiot extremist christians” are right to some extend. You have atheists selling the myth of “islamophobia”. Mostly in the “Atheism+” movement but atheists nonetheless. Take, for example, the following video, which is a response from an atheist to the alleged “bigotry” muslims in the allegedly face on a daily basis:
tom parry says
I have heard over 30 of sams podcasts and consider him to be on the side of jihad watch news articles.
Westman says
Who, beside, ignorant or kowtow leftists actually consider the SPLC anything more than an outdated relic of the Civil Rights Era? What Southerners have they lately saved from poverty? Now they are undermining the US by aiding a subversive ideology.
The SPLC would launch a lawsuit to reinstate Typhoid Mary as the Chef at McDonald’s.
KenD says
Hey Folks (or maybe even Robert Spencer)
– Can anyone here help me out? I can’t remember the name of the Caliph who fell in the well in Iran, and which Shi’ite prophesy says will come back when the Muslims are persecuted and save them.
Can anyone provide me a link or something which will explain all this to me? I can’t for the life of me find it by using google or anything.
Thanks.
Angemon says
Muhammad al-Mahdi. Hope this article helps:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/211676/now-twelfth-imam-can-come-robert-spencer
KenD says
Thank you so much Angemon!! This will help immensely, I’m sure, with a conversation I’m having with an Iranian apologist.
Have a good day!
Angemon says
No problem, hope it helps 🙂
Westman says
I remember Al-Mahdi by thinking, “at the bottom of the well, he’s all muddy.” This is only the “twelver” Shia belief. The Sunnis think the Mahdi is yet to come.
Then the vision of the Sun going down in a mud puddle and the Mahdi wearing a snorkel all this time tells me it’s all hooey.
Westman says
Erase, wrong thread.
Ciudadano says
My guess is that SPLC is being financed by the Saudis
August West says
What is most notable, to me at least, about this list is that it is very short and contains only 15 names.
49 people were shot in the Orlando Jihadist attack.
Is this organization really unable to find more ppl that speak against Islam?
The list is lame.
Savvy Kafir says
As a left-wing religious skeptic & counter-jihadi, I have to say — this IS completely unfair. From what I’ve seen over the years, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller and other prominent conservative critics of Islam are saying basically the same things that Sam Harris, Pat Condell, Bill Maher, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and other liberal atheist critics of Islam are saying. The same things I say myself, very bluntly.
We’re all in this fight together … more or less. We may not all work very closely, due to ideological differences on other issues. (Most — but not all — conservative counter-jihadis have ignored my requests for assistance in promoting my book, likely due to discomfort regarding my attitude towards Christianity and climate change deniers, etc.) Sometimes it feels more like we’re fighting our own separate wars against Islam. But we definitely should not do or say anything that might damage the public perception of fellow counter-jihadis who are being totally reasonable in their statements about Islam — even if we’re on opposite ends of the political spectrum on certain other issues.
I’ve always promoted Robert Spencer and Jihad Watch, and other conservative writers and activists, to my target audience of liberal readers; and I will continue to do so. Sam Harris’s recent efforts to distance himself from Robert Spencer was really disappointing. I’m still hoping Sam will offer a retraction and an apology. He’s a better, and smarter, person than that.
If we’re all saying the same things regarding this one critically important issue, we need to work together, whenever possible, as much as possible. Or, at the very least, we should not do anything to marginalize other defenders of free societies & the civilized world. And when liberal atheist critics of Islam talk as if conservative counter-jihadis are maybe more deserving of criticism & censure, it does a disservice to the cause. And it’s just plain unfair.
Ian H says
Lists like the one the SPLC has released are not just mistaken, they are dangerous. Jihadis will read that list as being a hit list. I can’t believe SPLC is ignorant of this.
Salome says
Jihadis can read?
pdxnag says
To acknowledge a Muslim’s exclusive loyalty to the Islamic Ummah would be no more offensive or hateful than acknowledging that a French citizen was just that, French. But France is not at war with all things non-French, while the Islamic Ummah has been at war for nearly 1,400 years with all things non-Islamic. I would be as comfortable expelling all Muslim citizens of the Islamic Ummah as I would be expelling all French citizens of France; and certainly not less comfortable.
We should not treat the Islamic claim of exclusive worldwide sovereignty as no sovereignty anywhere. Any Islam-dominated land would make a good drop-off site, from the perspective of the people in any invaded free lands.
Quibbling about the import of the level of piety and fidelity of any “Muslim” toward the Islamic mandatory commands for waging jihad always seems to devolve into impossible sophistry. Hence, demand no less than apostasy.
If you are not anti-jihad here in Mohammad’s declared war then you are pro-jihad. This is clear enough for me.
Mubarak says
“SPLC also brands Nawaz as a former radical who uses his experience to “savage Islam,” and also accuses him of fabricating parts of his experience in order to present a negative image of Islam.”
A religion that transforms its adherents to reciting parrots and mechanical puppets and consequently and ultimately to raging terrorists can only be presented in negative images – preferably in caricatures.
Tom P says
The web filter where I work (a US federal agency) blocks Jihad Watch. The reason given is that JW is an “advocacy group”. The SPLC web site is not blocked though. You’d think the websites of hate groups would warrant blocking more than so-called advocacy groups.
Obviously, I’m not surprised by any of it given the current administration..
Crusades Were Right! says
“Southern Poverty Law Center”
What an apt name!
It is indeed a center which seeks to impose on America poverty-inducing laws (e.g. Sharia law) borrowed, inspired or imported from backward southern anti-civilisations of the world!
Patriotic Americans should form themselves into a “Western Prosperity Law Center”!
Robert_k says
Looks like George Soros has his hands all over the SPLC.
citycat says
Atheist circle?
Nah, or it’s based on the sanctification of “not”
Unless there is a witch hunt on for Atheists.
Atheist is not a word like Christian or Hindu or Jew or Sikh or Zoroastrian or Satanist or Pagan
Atheist is not a religion.
Atheist means belief in there not being God
Or really it means not belief in there being God
A Human being who does not believe there is God is a Human being
Everyone has got to be classified, haven’t they?
For or against, the Islamic way
Freedom challenges Islam
Nature loves variety
Nature don’t repeat
No two Humans are the same
Religion is outmoded
Time to leave the temples and churches, oh ye grasshoppers!
Islam can’t do that
Islam manifests the extreme view of difference, religion wise, as requiring death to the advocate of
“ME MYSELF I” or
“FREE SPIRIT” or
“INDIVIDUALITY”
all of which are needed in this war against the all spreading ever stalking Beast from the East.
tgusa says
Western leftism is a wide ranging conglomeration of diverse yet opposing groups. Leftists believe this diversity that they have patched together makes them stronger. In the leftist world, divided they will stand, or so they think. I have my doubts.
And as could have easily been predicted the leftist groups are beginning to eat each other.
Faster, please!
Mubarak says
Islam is begotten in a lie by a deluded prophet and therefore beyond reformation, and a reformed lie is just worse after the reformation than before.
The well-intentioned nativity – in this respect- of Maajid Nawaz and his protector Sam Harris is regrettable. Lying and deception in all their expressions are the hallmarks of Islam, and Sam Harris’ participation in the seminar that profoundly changed his life “The Ethical Analyst” should have given him the tools to understand that.
Sam Harris’ attempt to get his friends of the list/hook is plain cowardice.
He should have applied for a prominent place on the list instead in identification with them.
Ted Tyler says
This report is absolutely brilliant. https://www.splcenter.org/20161025/field-guide-anti-muslim-extremists#ali It gives you a collection of people who have gotten the story mainly correct. People who are demonized for simply stating what is true – like “Islam is inherently violent”. SPLC does a lot of good stuff – like “White Supremacists are evil” but then it attacks other groups without just cause.
Mubarak says
– SPLC does a lot of good stuff – like “White Supremacists are evil” –
If we qualify supremacism by skin color we are giving away ourselves.
Ted Tyler says
Ok, Finally I see what you are doing. Your mission is simply to create confusion. Although your words contain words similar to mine, the idea expressed by those words has no relationship to the simple idea that I was trying to express namely: SLPC says white supremacists are bad – so that is good. The other possibility is that you simply don’t know what a white supremacist is – but that is highly unlikely.
Mubarak says
No, Ted, I agree that white supremacists are bad, I just wonder if SPLC would agree that Muslim supremacists are just as bad?
Ted Tyler says
Mubarak, glad to hear that you view white supremacists as bad. I put them on the top of my Stupid list. As for SPLC and Muslim Supremacists, that is a good question. Since we know that SPLC is opposed to anti-jihadists, I would guess that they would have jihad sympathies.
Johan Elzinga says
While Ayaan Hirshi Ali was still living in the Netherlands she caused quite a stir as a politician, and was very candid in her remarks about the Islam. I would however never call her comments about the Islam toxic – to my own knowledge, no one has ever been able to catch her on any exaggeration or any lie. All she did was state the facts – the hideous facts about islam and the way islam suppresses women and non believers. I would call her brave and intelligent, and I am very happy and very proud that she now holds a fellowship at Harvard and continues her fight (with words and facts) against the rampagings in our societies by the islam.
Ted Tyler says
Ayaan Hirshi Ali is one of those people who dare to tell the truth about Islam. That makes her a very dangerous person to the stealth jihadists. Her quiet manner may actually be more effective than the more energetic approach of Pam Geller or Brigitte Gabriel.
August West says
The fact that atheists claim to be surprised to be on this list indicates a poor understanding of blasphemy under sharia.
It also shows a poor understanding of the composition of Dar al Harb.
In the same way that German leaders.want to see a German Islam, perhaps the athiests.in question should adopt a.sharia compliant form of atheism?
Ted Tyler says
Yes, unfortunately, most atheists, as well as most people, do not understand that Blasphemy and Slander are somewhat different in the Islamic world. In the USA, we think of slander as saying bad things about a person that is not true. In the Islamic world, slander is saying anything that they don’t like – true or not.
martti_s says
Without having added these “controversioal” names to its hit list, who would ever have heard about Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) or Mark Potok? This organisation is very gifted in finding financing for its functions. Publishing a hate list such as this most certainly is a way to reind CIAR and their associates that petrodollars are welcome and words are for sale.