In addition to threats of violence by Islamic fundamentalists, liberal critics of Islam are increasingly abandoned. At best, we are inconvenient afterthoughts, at worst, bigots and hate-mongers.

The intellectual confusion and moral paralysis plaguing the Western Left around the religion of Islam has done much to add credibility to the Western Right. Embodying the now-common approach of elevating politics over principle, the Southern Poverty Law Center has accused the ex-Muslim atheist Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Muslim reformer Maajid Nawaz of “anti-Muslim extremism”.

In the recently issued report Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists, the SPLC claims to have identified 15 “anti-Muslim extremists” who it believes are represented too often in mainstream media.

These “extremists”, the SPLC contends, spread “baseless and damaging lies” in order to demonize all Muslims. The Field Guide aims to arm journalists with information so that they may challenge the “hateful rhetoric and misinformation” of the extremists, or better yet, “deny them a public platform altogether.”

Perhaps in more competent hands, a report such as this may have been a useful guide for journalists with little time to spend on background research.  However, the one produced by SPLC is neither reliable nor factual, and often steers closer to the category of yellow journalism than anything worth serious consideration.

Perhaps in more competent hands, a report such as this may have been a useful guide for journalists with little time to spend on background research. However, the one produced by SPLC is neither reliable nor factual, and often steers closer to the category of yellow journalism than anything worth serious consideration.

Nuance is lost where the religion of peace is concerned, and the SPLC paints its targets with a broad, clumsy brush.  Those profiled range from pundits who believe that radicals have “infiltrated the CIA, FBI, Pentagon, and State Department” to activists who offer compassionate, empathetic, and exceedingly balanced views on the faith. The latter is exemplified by the Muslim reformer Maajid Nawaz, who spent his formative years in the service of an Islamist organization working to re-establish a global caliphate. After disavowing his former associates, he has spent the past decade working to encourage reform and secularization in Muslim countries and communities.

Nearly every charge against him in the report is patently absurd. His act of solidarity with students who wore a benign cartoon of Prophet Muhammad on a t-shirt is a cited as a qualification for his “anti-Muslim extremism”. Nawaz tweeted a picture of the cartoon, declaring that such trifles don’t offend him.

For this conciliatory and progressive gesture, he earned the ire of the Muslim community, condemnation by “liberals”, and death threats by fanatics. It appears that the SPLC now polices acts considered blasphemous as “anti-Muslim extremism”, citing the Islamic religious belief in their indictment.

If mere tweeting of cartoons is tantamount to bigotry, one wonders how they would judge the actions of the actual cartoonists. Perhaps the SPLC list should include the creators of the show South Park for their depictions of Jesus and Mohammed. In the same vein, Andres Serrano’s ‘Piss Christ’ surely also qualifies him as an anti-Christian “extremist”, along with the National Endowment for the Arts that presented him with an award. But I won’t be holding my breath for the latter. In the eyes of some my fellow liberals, blasphemy is bigotry only when Islam is the target.

Nawaz’s entry reads like a gossip blog written by his most paranoid enemies, repeating debunked claims and rumors as factual evidence. In reference to his account of his journey to deradicalization, SPLC ominously contends that “major elements of his story have been disputed by former friends, members of his family, fellow jihadists and journalists”, neglecting to substantiate this damning assessment in any form whatsoever.

Let’s break that down, shall we?

Nawaz is a “reformist” Muslim, that is to say, he wishes to make changes to the way his fellow Muslims practice their faith. Anyone who takes on such a task (especially where Islam is concerned) will find themselves the target of smears and attacks from the religious conservatives.

In Nawaz’s case, the denunciations are by his former allies and associates – many the same conservative, even jihadi(!), persons and groups who he now challenges. What else would anyone in their right mind expect? Is it more likely that former Islamist allies shower him with praise as he fights against the values they hold most dear? It may come as a surprise to SPLC, but those who function as whistleblowers of any stripe are defamed and villainized by the people whom they speak out against.

Such “evidence” should be beneath any publication that fancies itself more reputable than a tabloid, and in any case, disparagement by religious groups should surely count in his favor as a dedicated secularist. For a publication which hopes to be a resource to journalists, the SPLC has failed to do diligence to a basic tenet of ethical journalism: provide sources.

However, even as SPLC gives no citations to justify that particular ad-hominem, it mysteriously gains the ability to read Nawaz’s mind and divine his motives, adding that “the evidence suggests that Nawaz is far more interested in self-promotion and money than in any particular ideological dispute.”

This is par for the course for confused regressive types: deny the individual the autonomy to name their own motivations, ascribe instead those more convenient to the narrative. A terrorist swears that it is his dedication to the religious faith that motivates his violence – regressives frantically search for other answers. Anti-fundamentalists like Nawaz declare a desire for a secular world as the fuel for their activism – regressives grasp at straws for evidence of a more nefarious agenda.

To the politically-motivated, it is of the utmost importance that the “narrative” around the religion of Islam remain undisturbed by critical voices. The good word has already been revealed: The ideology of Islam is, and always will be, entirely peaceful and good. The effect it has on its believers is, and always will be, entirely peaceful and good. When the faithful act in grotesque ways, the blame can only be placed on politics, poverty, or disposition. The mandates of the religion itself are beyond reproach, even by former or current Muslims.

The mandates of the religion itself are beyond reproach, even by former or current Muslims. Both actual violent extremists and reformers present a problem to this narrative: They claim that belief has a relation to the behavior.

Both actual violent extremists and reformers present a problem to this narrative: They claim that belief has a relation to the behavior.

Evidence of Nawaz’s “anti-Muslim extremism” also includes a trip to a strip club he took with friends. Citing the Daily Mail, SPLC mentions (as yet unproven) allegations made by the Muslim owner of the strip-club against Nawaz, who claims that Nawaz repeatedly tried to touch a lapdancer. The dancer herself never came forward.

Even if one were to accept these accusations as true, what bearing do sexual activities, criminal or otherwise, have on “anti-Muslim extremism”? If one is related to the other, I await the SPLC’s denunciation of the actions of Bill Clinton or Anthony Weiner as “anti-Muslim extremism”. Unless of course, mentioning such allegations has nothing to do with any “extremism”, but is merely an underhanded attempt to cast shadows over Nawaz’s character.

In reality, Maajid Nawaz has been one of the most consistently rational, compassionate, and nuanced voices in an atmosphere brimming with hostility and competing  agenda-driven narratives. As an apostate myself, I am grateful he represents Muslims who fight for our right to exist.

Nawaz’s entry may have been the most clearly ludicrous, but other profiles are similarly problematic. SPLC points to valid, factual claims made by those profiled as “evidence” of their extremism as often as it identifies falsehoods. Worse, it pools compassionate, anti-war Muslims with the likes of those who really do want to bomb the Muslim world – enacting terrible harm to the public discourse in the process.

Consistently, the report conflates criticism or dislike of the religion as “hate” against its believers – effectively granting this particular religion a privilege no other ideology maintains. In this sense, the SPLC, considered by many to be a progressive institution, allies itself with the right-wing theocrats of the East. In fact, the only string that really does tie together the supposed “extremists” listed in the SPLC guide is that they are all deeply despised by right-wing conservative Muslims.

Nawaz and Hirsi Ali, in particular, have been targeted by fatwas and threatened with violence for their advocacy by actual extremists – those who do more than merely print opinions SPLC doesn’t like. No doubt that Nawaz and Ali’s inclusion in this list will subject them to more threats than ever before.

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.

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. 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. In the past, the Southern Poverty Law Center has built a reputation among progressives for identifying and monitoring the activities of domestic hate groups. With this report, it has tarnished its reputation and joined the ranks of the hate-mongers it purports to combat.

As critics of Islam are hunted by Muslim fanatics around the world, I hope we will remember the courage and sacrifice of those willing to speak out, and the role played by unscrupulous detractors painting targets on their backs.

Sarah Haider is a co-founder of Ex-Muslims of North America, a community-building organization for ex-Muslims across the non-theist spectrum, and can be reached at @SarahTheHaider.

Previous post

The Burkini-Bikini False Equivalence and Your Disproportionate Outrage

Next post

That meme comparing hijabis to nuns needs to die in a pit of fire

Sarah Haider

Sarah Haider

Sarah is an American writer, speaker, and activist. Born in Pakistan and raised in Texas, Sarah spent her early youth as a practicing Shia Muslim. In her late-teens, she began to read the Quran critically and left religion soon after.

In 2013, she co-founded Ex-Muslims of North America, where she advocates for the acceptance of religious dissent and works to create local support communities for those who have left Islam.

In addition to atheism, Sarah is particularly passionate about civil liberties and women’s rights. You can reach Sarah at [email protected], @SarahTheHaider and read more about EXMNA at

  • Syed Iftekharuddin

    I am a Muslim and i support Donald Trump west NEED one more HITLER

    Jews created Islamophobia for their own advantage for ISRAEL

    Name the few Zionist who spreading FEAR of Muslims and Islam, Pamela
    Geller, ( SAM ) Harris, Bill Maher , David Horowitz , Gad Saad, Dave
    Rubin Report

    Donald Trump and the rise of right wing fascism in the Europe / West AGAINST the Muslims is a product of Islamophobia

    NOW Jews AFRAID of monsters they created anti-Muslim Donald Trump and the rise of right-wing fascism in the Europe / West

    Jesus said to the Jews: “Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing.”

    Is it Islamophobia good or bad for the Muslims?…. GOOD,… i know it is hard to understand,

    Islamophobia is a SHOCK therapy for the Muslims to reform themselves

    Islamophobia will forced Muslims to reform themselves

    Muslims NEED reformation NOT Islam

    I had already seen positive effect of Islamophobia on the Muslims


    Islamophobia is GOOD for the Muslims and BAD for our enemies

    Quran: ” Perhaps you hate a thing and it is good for you; and perhaps
    you love a thing and it is bad for you. And Allah Knows, while you know

    Islamophobia is BAD for our enemies, Islamophobia WILL divide white people and could bring civil war AMONG the white race

    IF civil war AMONG the white race did happened in the future, God have mercy on the Jews

    Even if Donald trump did not became president of America,

    SOON one day another Donald Trump will come to the power and he will be WORSE then this one

    Maybe this Donald Trump is not bad but you have to worry about his evil
    supporters who will be electing another Donald Trump in the future

    Donald Trump and his evil supporters in America and Europe want to make America and Europe PURE white AGAIN

    Jews created mindless white zombies that they cannot control !

    SOON this white zombies will eat Jews alive NOT the Muslims

    Zionists radicalizing white race against the Muslims for their OWN interest for Israel

    But it WILL back-fire

    SOON these radicalized WHITE-MALE will become violent JIHADISTS to save
    the PURITY of WHITE RACE and ( WHITE-POWER ) and Jews will be HIDING
    from them for their own life


    Quran: “But they plan, and Allah plans. And Allah is the best of planners.”

    Please click on my name to read my other comments

    Will terrorism stop?

    As long as EVIL white-race ( evil Christians / evil Jews ) does not
    accept their evil deeds in the middle-east causing terrorism, terrorism

    Please click on my name to read my other comments

    E-vil West gave birth to ISIS……………..

    E-vil white race is responsible for Orlando. Nice and Iraq …………….

    E-vil Christians and e-vil Jews LIED about Saddam Hussain’s WMD and
    invaded Iraq to slaughter Iraqis ,… to destroy Iraq ………….for

    (The sectarian killing and the BIRTH of ISIS) Iraqi Shia Muslims and
    Sunni Muslims were living peacefully for 1400 years until NOW……….

    So why are they killing each other NOW like they NEVER live in peace before?……..

    American and European E-vil Christians and E-vil Jews divided Iraqi Shia
    Muslims and Iraqi Sunni Muslims for their OWN advantage in war with
    Saddam Hussian……….

    (American and European evil Christians and evil Jews) UNITED with
    Iraqi’s Shia Muslims AND Iraqi’s Christians AND Iraqi’s Yezidis AND
    Iraqi Kurds and THEY ALL together started KILLING and RAPING Iraqi’s
    Sunni Muslims and ALL ARABS dictators watched SILENTLY….. the SILENCE
    of Arab’s dictators gave BIRTH to ISIS

    And also EVIL white race did 911 attack intended to get approval from American people to destroy Iraq………for ISRAEL

    The good news is OVER ALL the evil white-race HARMED themselves NOT the Muslims or Islam

    If you use your brain YOU will come to the same conclusion as i do

    For example since 911 Islam is GROWING and Christianity is DYING

    EVIL white people DIG their own grave

    Please click on my name to read my other comments

    • crackerMF

      Wow. Just wow. You are so far gone from reality you can’t even see its chem trails.

      I sure hope you don’t live in the us or own any semi automatic weapons.

    • Arturis Dentalis

      TL;DR. Though really the first two lines are enough for anyone to see you’re deranged.

  • Sean Osborn

    read below for the reason ‘slam is not a religion of peace’….One fact – all Islam ran countries are peaceful places where women and gays feel safe. Hail Allah..

    Fucking dogma – the death of man since…Zoraster?…

    • Riboflavin

      +1 Effing dogma

  • Yaka

    SLPC is a far left batshit crazy SJW Institute which lost its plot long ago. The “hate groups” these days for them are fathers’ rights activists who ask for their fair share from family courts, pepe the cartoon frog and sane people like Nawaz.
    Meanwhile radical jihadis and radical feminazis, gender activists whose end meat comes closer together, who are willing to suppress everyone else’s basic rights get a free pass from this so called SLPC

    • Riboflavin

      Too often fathers rights activists (as opposed to mens rights groups generally) are just apologists for domestic violence who want access and legal freedom to manipulate control and bully no matter what

      • Riboflavin

        Trump is in the effing dogma category

      • hyperzombie

        “fathers rights activists (as opposed to mens rights groups generally) are just apologists for domestic violence”

        Evidence? Control and bully according to whom?

      • Yaka

        And your evidence?

    • Bradley Green

      The SPLC has been spouting worthless drivel for over a decade, maybe longer. People just don’t notice until they decide to attack something you care about. They’re not progressive, just stupid, and have been at the forefront of the PC and social justice movements that are destroying this country, and which are going to put Trump in office.

  • Riboflavin

    Excellent article and more evidence that regressive misguided versions of social justice left are infecting some prestigious organisations.

    Regarding Syed Iftekharuddin’s comment his opinions are emblematic of the tribalism, irrationality and violence that is tearing the middle east apart, and the great need for Muslims to understand they need to reform the religion. Far better to adapt and take the good parts of modernity than to retreat into 7th century warlordism and ignorance. Of course the west has faults because its a human society – but there are good elements of modernity that need to be preserved. Syed assumes if a society isnt perfect in terms of oppression it should be destroyed – but only Muslim theocracy or semi theocracy is acceptable because its very subordinating, discriminating and oppressive but theoretically perfect and can assert so using military force to buttress peoples egos – and all this can be expressed as being eternal.

    Syed’s comment plays bully victim and emphasises fighting infidels, and muslims he doesn’t agree with. Never mind you’ve been fighting each other literally since the Prophet died, because Everything that’s ever bad is the fault of the Jews (who you want to exterminate) and the West. And then there is “99 sects are not islam but only one is true Islam” and all that – but in the good old days when you still had authoritarian leaders (as always) but ones who could fight infidels, take slaves and put down muslim minorities.

    Never mind that Assad and Iran has been and is supporting terrorists (including ISIS and precursers) to divide Sunnis and weaken the opposition against them. Iran is happy to have the sunnis fight it out in the north of Iraq – they have their majority areas in the south and can concentrate on stirring up trouble in Yemen also. Meanwhile on Memri there are translations of Arab TV saying the Druze in Syria should be exterminated. Ahmadi are persecuted in Pakistan. The Kurds are Sunni though and they want their own state across about 7 sunni countries, but they ARE fighting Isis. Every sect and ethnicity exterminate exterminate under autocratic and aggressive tribal desert law encouraged by current religious norms (e.g. obsession with lineage, cousins are not mahram, women should be accompanied everywhere). Its not 7th century now.

    Never mind that the Muslim african slave trade existed prior to the atlantic one, that Muslims (and Africans) were the ones capturing all the slaves (Europeans transported them but did not capture them) or that Muslims established huge plantations of millions of slaves in eastern Africa in the 19th century when the west had banned slavery. Or that slavery persists in Mauritania still.

    Yes the West has done a lot of evil things. No human culture has not at some time. But changes of the last few hundred years offer humanism and technologies (e.g. healthcare that has drastically reduced infant and child mortality worldwide since WW2) that allow us to escape the population trap. Never mind that you have absolutely no shame about behaviours other than failing to dominate other peoples and women and rely on liberal Europeans white guilt, and more so on their regressive leftist, to buttress your lust for dominion and superiority and oppression dressed as “justice”

    Moreover the weakness of this “justice” is evident from the reflexive reaction to criticism with violence or threats of violence. Is part of the real object of worship dominion here???

    Finally the exclusive and theocratic emphasis on revelation, with no room for philosophy or other rational, let alone empirical debate, stymied the scope and progress of Islamic science such that it could never move into an era of continuous development and a profitable research culture. Even the universities were in fact schools were from the 9th Century dependent on one founder, with no ongoing legal status and bound by law to teach Islamically approved subjects. The west underwent great change, under Graeco Roman and then pagan and other civilizational influence. It is changing too. The point is to allow beneficial change, and not rely on dreams of global dominion, suppression of all dissent and unbelief and institutionalised oppression of women, gays, resident infidels, minority sects etc etc.

    • jj_dynomite_1

      Wow, brilliant. I wish I could print out and staple your comment to the heads of all my Social Justice Warrior acquaintances. They’d probably like that act, for after all Islamist beheadings are a Western creation to make Islam look bad.

  • Patrick McLoughlin

    Those profiled range from pundits who believe that radicals have “infiltrated the CIA, FBI, Pentagon, and State Department”

    Weren’t these the exact same fears about communists in the 1950s? Nothing changes, its just another sham enemy manufactured to create fear of “the other”. It will be some other bogus country/group/ideology in 70 years time.

    • glokd

      But let’s stick to the thrust of the article. Nawaz and the vast majority of secular critics have well founded reasons to fear & resist political Islam. A few outliers and Far Right fruits, who have very little influence on the discourse, doesn’t change that.

    • Arturis Dentalis

      There are very real reasons to worry about Islam, especially for ex-Muslims:

    • Wilkins Micawber

      If you read Yuri Besmanov you may see that McCarthy was not far off the mark.

      The Commintern and, later, the KGB ran a decades long programme of subverting Western institutions, from schools and universities, to news, media and entertainment, to churches and synagogues, to mainstream political parties.

      McCarthy’s downfall was one part of that process.

      What we’re seeing in the West today is evidence of just how successful those generations long programmes really were. After the virtual global collapse of communism their “useful idiots”, i.e. Progressives and Globalists, are well placed to continue that work, if for subtly different purposes.

  • glokd

    “It appears that the SPLC now polices acts considered blasphemous as “anti-Muslim extremism”, citing the Islamic religious belief in their indictment.”

    Great analysis.

  • My letter to the SPLC. It happens to coincide with this article.
    You called me yesterday with a thank you for your support call. The caller asked me if I had any comments on SPLC. I was busy and did not say what I actually thought, in part because it was a surprise call, and in part because I am careful about voicing negative opinions without preparation. But I do have such an opinion, and it is very strong.

    The SPLC appears to have been infiltrated by Islamists of an extremist variety. This has caused the SPLC to call people like Hirsi Ali, Maajid Nawaz, and others purveyors of hate. This is absolutely outrageous. Hirsi Ali had to leave Netherlands because of hate. Maajid Nawaz opposes hate.

    Daniel Pipes is another on your list. Mr. Pipes web site tracks Islamist hate the way that the SPLC tracked hate in the south.

    What the SPLC has done is the equivalent of allowing David Duke’s KKK minions to come into its ranks and use the SPLC as a platform for attacking opponents of racism.

    What you are doing is playing into the hands of the radical Islamist fundamentalists. In their world, noone but themselves are allowed to speak. It is their mission to cleanse the world of all opposition. One of the things they seek is to force secular Muslims to choose a side. They seek to have all who call themselves Muslims expelled from the West. (I can document this.) One of the ways they do this is to instigate terrorist attacks. Another way is to strengthen the right wing bigots of the world by undermining the ability of left and center political actors to call them out. What this does is promote violent attacks on non-radical Muslims.

    If anyone should be turning around and calling out the Islamists, it is organizations like SPLC. If anyone should be allying with Daniel Pipes, Hirsi Ali, Maajid Nawaz, etc. it is the SPLC.

    You must expel these creatures from the SPLC or I am just one of many who can never donate to your organization again. I am sorry. But this is why I cannot do so anymore. SPLC has allied itself with monstrosity. This is something I cannot accept.

    Yes, the relationship of the USA foreign policy to jihad is tangled and dark. It remains so, and I see no signs it is improving any time soon. I can educate you on this at length. But the fact remains, that without the core of world-dominating, enslaving, genocidal warfare at the heart of Islam, there would not be such a relationship possible.

  • Kevin

    Maajid and Ayaan on an anti-muslim extremist list…just when I thought I couldn’t be shocked anymore. Not that it matters at all that Ayaan is an atheist, but Maajid is a practicing muslim…do they even know this? These are the people we need to be empowering…whose voices need to be heard the loudest…our best chance at reform and co-existence…why are they being shut down by our own people?!?!? Madness…utter madness…

    • Alex anarchas

      I always thought Maajid was too soft, but respected his efforts. I’m not shocked they’d look at him and Ayaan the way they do though, they’re literally forcing them to show their cards. They wouldn’t like that, as a rule. Evil doesn’t like it when you force it to unmask itself.

  • Shakes_McQueen

    The absolute worst part of this, is how many people/outlets are going to close themselves off to these important voices, and how much easier it’s going to be for their critics to smear them, now that they’ve been given this idiotic label by the SPLC.

    The world is going mad.

  • Mushtaq Bhat

    Debates about religious and ideological beliefs are almost always contested within impervious boundaries of a linguistic domain, oblivious of the surrounding reality of the universe and the undeniable interdependence of its constituent parts on factors lying mostly outside this domain.
    Accordingly the most obvious way for those involved appears to be either the reformation or a status quo tolerance of such beliefs within a functioning social norm, sometimes also called a secular state.

    Those caught in this dimension do not imagine any other frame of reference and consequently the endless amount of rhetoric and often heated linguistic gymnastic that probably involves too much intake of sugar by the brain. Most of it is self-serving. Hardly any debate ever convinces the opponent, but so what, after all I did express my opinion and that is important.

    But why is there really never an agreement?

    Because it deals with cerebral fiction often rationalized biases, that are culturally inherited. Only a few ever escape this determinism.

    Most of the people I grew amongst were Muslims. I was one too, almost a fanatic one at that in my childhood.

    But then I read the real history. Our ancestors were conquered by Muslims and the conquerers imposed their religion on us. In a neighboring kingdom on the other hand, a king got converted by a passing monk and one might say almost by chance to another religion and soon all his subjects embraced it. In both instances there would appear countless scribes, people who often shy from physical work, who wrote big treatises on these religions, based on the writings of similarly partly indolent class of the past.

    In all cases it was mainly to establish authority and what better way than referencing the past? Especially if the authority was questioned, especially in times of social change.

    But we now live in 21st Century. Yes 21st century the age of large Hadron Collider.

    Just imagine that and you want to reform ancient beliefs? Moreover beliefs can not be reformed. Martin Luther did not reform any belief but only took away the authority of a class, the sole mediators between the sinners and the heavenly arbiters, who existed in a historically evolved amalgam of the belief-system of the Semites from the middle east. They had concocted out of their historical legacy _ from the myths of the Sumer and Akkad, the beliefs of the Priests of Egypt and the Indo-European tribes of modern Iran with whose literature (Zarathustra) they probably got acquainted within the course of their journey in exile.

    The Jewish, Christian and Muslim Semitic ancestor Abraham allegedly came from Ur. Nomadic Shepard, who probably traded outside the precincts of the metropolis of the times. The revelations are as good as that of Ikhnaton visited by the sun god or the Greeks visited by Zeus. It was a phenomenon concurrent to the age. Today anybody professing such revelations would land up in an asylum.

    Why reform a belief system, that has been over rolled by the incredible progress of Homo sapiens in knowing the reality of the world and even predicting the existence of a anti-particle from pure mathematical calculation? By understanding in detail our physiology and our skeleton through means of the Darwin’s Theory of Evolution.

    All Judaic based religions, especially Islam have unfortunately made the people of the middle east and those who they conquered with sword and the cries of holy war, fully alienated from their long long history. The Iraqi’s know almost nothing about Sumer, Akkad, Assyria or Babylon. It is all about the tribal feuds of some noble classes of the dessert (the Querishis’s or what have you) _ actually late comers who seem to have usurped their whole history and identity or deprived them of the knowledge of their ancient contributions to modern global civilization. Same with the Egyptians.

    Once they know and understand their real history and pre-history stretching almost from Upper paleolithic to today and the theory of evolution they do not need any authority or reformer to tell them what is right or true or replace their old archaic beliefs with some new ones often subtly serving the consumer oriented mercantile interests of a new class.

    Now you will say, is that at all possible?

    My answer.

    Yes and I am an example.

    I had no one reforming me. I think it absolutely unnecessary to reform anyone!

    Just teach them real history and real biology!

    That will do. Thank you!

  • JP

    But, alas, tis true. Liberal critics of Islam are increasingly abandoned and slandered as bigots and hate-mongers. The examples laid out in this article by Sarah Haider demonstrate the perry, irrational and rather infantile, modus operandi of the new Jacobins on the regressive left: march backwards in lock-step on two left feet to dull beat The One True Politically Correct drummer or off with your head!

    Yes, this kind of intellectual confusion and moral paralysis do plague the left but the m/o goes beyond the religion of Islam as it unwittingly lends credibility to the right. Witness the Fundamentalist SJWs of Political Correctness who eat their own. What bitter irony that it’s done with an ideology that is eerily and ominously the flip-side of fundamentalist religiosity. Welcome to Animal Farm.

  • As an ex-Muslim myself, I must say that the actions of the regressive Left to portray us as anti-Muslim is not only absurd, but comic. I have studied Islam more than any regressive Leftist has, and I can assure you that historically it is no different than any other violent and ideologic movement, replete with assassinations, slavery, and war. How SPLC or the Left wish to whitewash that, I have no idea. But of course they will start character assassinating any Muslim that wishes to question Islam, because the Left has abandoned its core principles of liberalism and enlightenment, and now favors backwardness, authoritarianism, and racism of the lowest expectation. There are millions of ex-Muslims and we are determined to fight the regressive Leftist that keep Muslims backwards and their support of fascism such as that of Assad, Muslim Brotherhood, and Hamas / Hezbollah, with our progressive and enlightened ideas.

  • David Lea

    Not a lot gives me much hope for the future of Islam and the future of Europe, but Maajid and Ayaan are two shining beacons as darkness descends.

  • Jonathan Schearer

    I support Maajid and his work. The SPLC should be condemned in the strongest possible terms for adding him to that list.

  • Egregious nonsense from the SPLC. It is also, as you rightly say, extremely dangerous nonsense. Nawaz has always been staunchly anti-racist (as well as anti-homophobia); I have listened to him time and time again, and he has never advocated hatred against anyone. Rather, he has been in staunch opposition to anyone inciting hatred against another people. How such a man could ever have been labelled an anti-Muslim bigot (when he is a Muslim himself, and repeatedly identifies himself as such) is beyond my humble understanding. This obsession with political correctness, moral relativism and self-righteousness is one of the reasons I became disenchanted with the left-wing altogether, although I hold no animosity towards the many decent, ordinary left-wingers who don’t swallow the establishment madness.

  • govinda56

    thank you Sarah……

  • Igloo

    Majid is working to re-form Islam, but as an Ex-Muslim trying to help his former coreligionists to build a secular religious identity he is always going to struggle to get any kind of credibility.

  • SentaAPW89

    They also call any criticism of Linda Sarsour Islamophobic.