Ben Affleck vs. Sam Harris & Bill Maher on Islam

Playboy

It's very hard to take people like Sam Harris seriously when he pertains to be such an unbiased and logical thinker that champions human rights and fights the evils of superstition when he can have such major cognitive dissonance between his views on Israel and his views on Islam. When an author or writer fails to apply the same standards to two issues then you have to question his bias. What is obvious is he is biased towards Israel and Israel doesn't exactly have good relations with it's Muslim neighbors and in fact likes to propagate a number of lies and smear campaigns against peoples and their religion to further its own colonial project.

Therefore its difficult for people to really listen to any valid point Harris might make as the automatic assumption is that it is biased due to his views on other matters. I just read his blog on the post-mortem of the Bill Maher show and it seems he is painfully trying to paint himself in a certain way. He does make some good points worthy of further discussion but until I see him do a proper critical analysis of Israel, Zionism and Palestine (which he is more than capable of) then I don't really think he deserves a seat at that table. For instance he produced an article recently on the conflict in Gaza and his whole analysis of the situation is absurd in the extreme. When a writer produces such nonsense it is difficult to take him seriously, just like I only need to read one Dan Brown novel to have a good idea of what he is capable of producing in the future. I'm not going to read every Dan Brown novel just to ensure I dont miss out on the possibility that he might have a moment of genius. Harris has only himself to blame for not being taken seriously and being dismissed as a bigot.

jank

Billy86 wrote: »

People leaving for other other countries is not relevant here - American Christian militants don't need to leave their country to join these types of groups, because they have plenty of them in their own country.

Are American Christian militants beheading non believers are putting a video of it up on YouTube?

Billy86 wrote: »

That is not entirely correct though. ISIS for example have an estimated strength of 80-100,000 members, which comes to 0.00625% of the global Muslim population of 1.6bn - tiny as a percentage but still very big as a number. The CAR's Antibalaka movement alone has an estimate 72,000 members and as I mentioned has displaced over 400,000 Muslims in a very short period of time. They are heavily armed, in a country that is largely poverty stricken, and their funds to buy these arms didn't just generate megaically. American Christian wing nuts, terrorists and people of considerable influence have also funded a lot of antagonistic Christian groups that have bordered on, if not outright used, terrorism in other countries such as India and spread strong propaganda against their indigenous religions, like Pat Robertson's opinion of Hinduism as "demonic". Pat Robertson and his like have a MASSIVE following amongst the religious right in America, and have speech like that dies nothing but encourage "taking action.

Has Pat Robertson advocated the killing of Hindus? Can you also substantiate your accusation that they are funded by the American Christian right? As far as I can tell, many of them are ex-military (hence their funding) and are seen as a national force rather than a religious force after the Seleka movement overthrew the government and reportedly were under way in implementing Sharia law in C.A.R. The situation there is more nuanced than would you believe.

Billy86 wrote: »

How often do we hear about the Christian extremist Antibalaka movement in the CAR on the news? Or in India? At least some of the panel shows like Have I Got News For You dry attention to the like of Robertson and the Tea Party (bordering on religious extremism themselves in many instances), but the actual 'hard' news programmes pretty much never bring them up at all, and when they do make sure to differentiate them as not representative of Christianity as a whole, while gleefully doing so for Islamic extremist voices as representative of Muslims as a whole (and failing to distinguish their brand of Islam from any others - again, Sufism, Sunniism, Shi'ism, Wahabbism, etc).

Like I said, when have the Tea Party advocated the murder of others? The Tea party may have a tinge of religiosity about them but to equate them to the Taliban or IS is just absurd, especially when the Tea Part work through the democratic process and don't kill people they disagree with.

Billy86 wrote: »

I am not saying "Christian/Other" terrorists. I am saying Christian terrorists, and terrorists heavily influenced by Christian doctrines. Not sure why you felt the need to separate that again there, as if to create a distance?

McVeigh was raised a Catholic, had attended KKK meetings (a Christian organisation), and while he distanced himself from Catholicism he maintained that he was a Christian. The Turner Diaries was found in his car after the bombing and was known to promote the book and sell copies at gun shows. This book that is central to the Christian Identity movement, and funny enough in it revolutionaries blow up a federal building as part of a war against the government, which is exactly what McVeigh was also trying to do. There is no straw man here. McVeigh was a Christian terrorist but he was almost never referred to as anything of the sort, rather just as Timothy Mcveigh.

Yes, good story. However, as I already mentioned McVeigh was marginalised and enjoyed no support from any of his religious co-horts. Meanwhile Islam runs over 50 countries and there are many extremists in these countries that fund IS. A handful of individuals vs a large minority of the Middle East...it speaks for itself.

Billy86 wrote: »

Eric Rudolph (1996 Olympics bomber, also conducted other bombings) was also heavily influenced by the Christian Identity movement and has stated that his motivation was not racial, but religious as well as anti gay and anti abortion. Despite this the media again tended to distance him from the word Christian.

Yeah, another nut job!

Billy86 wrote: »

Anders Breivik likewise was a Christian and constantly stated as much, but again I don't recall him being called 'Christian terrorist Anders Breivik' often if at all, despite his crimes being intended as a statement against other religions, immigration and multiculturalism.

Maybe you should have opened your eyes a bit more.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14259356
http://www.smh.com.au/world/you-will-all-die-20110723-1hugs.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/23/us-norway-killings-police-idUSTRE76M0SF20110723
http://religiondispatches.org/is-norways-suspected-murderer-anders-breivik-a-christian-terrorist/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/26/anders-breivik-christian-terrorist_n_910379.html

Billy86 wrote: »

If any of these three were Muslim, they would be poster boys for the dangers of Muslim terrorism and the dangers of Islam, and there is simply no denying this. But because they were Christian they were compartmentalised away so as not to tar others with their actions or allow their actions be seen as representative of Christianity. Like I said before, I would genuinely be very interested to see how theblikes of these guys were covered in the media in the Muslim world.

The very fact that you have to go back 20 years to find 3 men of questionable mental states, tag the christian brand on them actually strengthen my points. To reiterate..

These were all isolated incidents that were no way co-ordinated.
They were the acts of men who acted more or less alone.
They had no political backing
They had no religious backing from a group or church.
They were marginalised

Meanwhile in the Muslim world you have

Various Terrorist groups from Hamas, IS, the Taliban and Al-Queda who's general aim is the killing of non Muslims in the name of Allah.
They enjoy various and sometime large support from fellow Muslims and other states.
They are funded through donations or indirectly/directly by other Muslim States.
Human rights where these groups are dominate don't exist. Just check out the woman paradise Afghanistan was before 9/11.
Genocide is a political goal of many of these groups.
In many of these countries the vast majority of people advocate the killing of a convert.

So to compare Christian terrorism with a handful of nut jobs with the systemic problem of Islamic terrorism that plagues the world and especially the middle east is purely a straw man argument. Nothing more nothing less.

Minjor

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

Maher has always been a social libertarian. He always been Jewish too.

He's an athiest from a background of Catholic and Jewish parents.

He makes fun of Judaism along with the other world religions if you've seen his documentary film Religulous. Appears to be pro-Israel though all that being said.

wp_rathead

Minjor wrote: »

He's an athiest from a background of Catholic and Jewish parents.

He makes fun of Judaism along with the other world religions if you've seen his documentary film Religulous. Appears to be pro-Israel though all that being said.

Extremly pro israel. It actually not a bad doc but disliked bit he laughed in the Rabbis face because he was anti-Zionism..
Bit where he interviews the senator who is a creationist is hilarious "Ya don't need to pass an IQ test to be elected"

mug_holder

Minjor wrote: »

He's an athiest from a background of Catholic and Jewish parents.

He makes fun of Judaism along with the other world religions if you've seen his documentary film Religulous. Appears to be pro-Israel though all that being said.

you would not get a job on american tv if you sided with the pallestinians in that conflict

Nodin

Playboy wrote: »

It's very hard to take people like Sam Harris seriously when he pertains to be such an unbiased and logical thinker that champions human rights and fights the evils of superstition when he can have such major cognitive dissonance between his views on Israel and his views on Islam. When an author or writer fails to apply the same standards to two issues then you have to question his bias. What is obvious is he is biased towards Israel and Israel doesn't exactly have good relations with it's Muslim neighbors and in fact likes to propagate a number of lies and smear campaigns against peoples and their religion to further its own colonial project.

Therefore its difficult for people to really listen to any valid point Harris might make as the automatic assumption is that it is biased due to his views on other matters. I just read his blog on the post-mortem of the Bill Maher show and it seems he is painfully trying to paint himself in a certain way. He does make some good points worthy of further discussion but until I see him do a proper critical analysis of Israel, Zionism and Palestine (which he is more than capable of) then I don't really think he deserves a seat at that table. For instance he produced an article recently on the conflict in Gaza and his whole analysis of the situation is absurd in the extreme. When a writer produces such nonsense it is difficult to take him seriously, just like I only need to read one Dan Brown novel to have a good idea of what he is capable of producing in the future. I'm not going to read every Dan Brown novel just to ensure I dont miss out on the possibility that he might have a moment of genius. Harris has only himself to blame for not being taken seriously and being dismissed as a bigot.

Indeed. In my brain hes been retagged from "atheist commentator" to "Glenn beck" type.

Minjor

wprathead wrote: »

Extremly pro israel. It actually not a bad doc but disliked bit he laughed in the Rabbis face because he was anti-Zionism..
Bit where he interviews the senator who is a creationist is hilarious "Ya don't need to pass an IQ test to be elected"

Saw it a few months ago. Actually can't recall that bit specifically, I don't doubt you. The documentary is a good alternative to Richard Dawkins documentaries, because of the comic value while also maintaining a serious element too it.

I enjoy Maher as a comedian, he is often hilarious.

mug_holder wrote: »

you would not get a job on american tv if you sided with the pallestinians in that conflict

This is true. I saw a clip of a Real Time episode where they had Netanyahu on via videolink to do an interview. It made me a bit uncomfortable to be honest.

Akrasia

Here's an excellent blog post written by two ex muslims which refute Reza Aslan's claims recently that Islam is not responsible for the subjugation of women or for the widespread support for the barbaric practise of Female Genital Mutilation.

Most of the points are also relevant to the Maher/Harris/Affleck debate

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/10/05/reza-aslan-is-wrong-about-islam-and-this-is-why/

Wompa1

mug_holder wrote: »

you would not get a job on american tv if you sided with the pallestinians in that conflict

Not true. Jon Stewarts whole stick is Jewish Comedian and he's spoken out against some of the artrocities carried out by them. But to be fair, not as much as he probably should have.

Also, Al Jazeera America and RT do exist you know. Also, PBS are pretty good at not showing any bias.

donaghs

The One Doctor wrote: »

Meh. Dumb actors giving dumb opinions. Big deal.

Everyone needs to understand who Sam Harris actually is before attempting to comment on it. Harris has made many pointed criticism of the affect of Christianity and Religiosity in American life. Inevitable he'd have some concerns about trends in Islam in recent decades.

mug_holder

Wompa1 wrote: »

Not true. Jon Stewarts whole stick is Jewish Comedian and he's spoken out against some of the artrocities carried out by them. But to be fair, not as much as he probably should have.

Also, Al Jazeera America and RT do exist you know. Also, PBS are pretty good at not showing any bias.

was referring to mainstream american tv

Karl Stein

Paul Jay, of the TheRealNews, asks if Bill Maher has the courage to defend his Islamophobic views (end of video).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKbw4dkGQGM

It'd be great to see Maher debate his views on Islam with a person who knows what they're talking about, like Deepa Kumar, instead of seeking cheap applause.

Yarf Yarf

I couldn't see Bill Maher ever having a proper debate with a religious scholar or anyone like that about Islam. I seriously doubt he knows anything about Islam or the the complexities of the Islamic world beyond what he sees on television. Know it alls like him usually actually know very little about what they're trying to condemn. He's just a smart arse.

Never could warm to Maher honestly. A very smug individual and really no better than the right wing sensationalist commentators he makes fun of.

Dave!

In case you need a bit more Sam Harris in your life, here he is in conversation for 3 hrs with Cenk Uygur

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVl3BJoEoAU

My name is URL

Is there any way to put him on ignore?

Dave!

Yeah, a good start would be: when you see a thread with his name in the title, you don't open it.

Diabhal Beag

But that's not always possible in this world of Islamic extremists, is it?

Dave!

Dunno what that refers to ^