Cracking bit of commentary from Maajid Nawaz on the need for reform in Islam

I am Egyptian, in Egypt, you can only have Muslim or Christian on your ID card, as an Ex-Muslim, I have to go around with a "Muslim" ID card when I am in Egypt, not to mention the fact that I would probably face trouble if people knew I am an Ex-Muslim. People in the Egyptian parliament are protesting having religion on ID cards so maybe they'll scrap that off.
I think until Trump proposes an actual way of doing it without being banning the whole race, I think we shouldn't take him seriously.

I am Egyptian, in Egypt, you can only have Muslim or Christian on your ID card, as an Ex-Muslim, I have to go around with a "Muslim" ID card when I am in Egypt, not to mention the fact that I would probably face trouble if people knew I am an Ex-Muslim. People in the Egyptian parliament are protesting having religion on ID cards so maybe they'll scrap that off.
I think until Trump proposes an actual way of doing it without being banning the whole race, I think we shouldn't take him seriously.

Just on the subject of Egypt, while I am not particularly fond of military rule or of the extensive corruption and self-enrichment of the Egyptian military and political classes, it does seem like Sisi genuinely understands the issues of fundamentalist Islam

I was pleasantly surprised when he went to the clerics and academics of Al Azhar University and told them they had to come up with more modern interpretations of Islam, and not hold to outdated, superstitious or violent beliefs.

It also seems like the new Egyptian government has given a lot of scope for much more secular voices to emerge on Egyptian TV channels. Admittedly they are pro-government, but seem to have quite eclectic and diverse views on religion, on Egypt's unique history and character that sets it apart from Arabia, on being allowed to criticise Mohammed's actions from a historical perspective etc.

What's your take on all that?

If you don't welcome this then it's obvious you have no interest in finding a solution

That would be ludicrously inaccurate; you're essentially proposing lie detectors via EEG the interpretation of which is held to be a highly subjective art.

What if an ex-Muslim's heart rate increases because they have bad memories of being beaten by the Saudi religious police when they said similar things?

Also, if you're fine with trampling on some people's freedom to reduce crime, I assume you're up for banning guns right?

Did you set out to make that sound as dystopian as possible? Maybe throw in a 1984 comparison next time?

I don't understand why people use "Middle Eastern countries do it" as a justification for stuff like this. You want to combat barbarism by being barbarians? Terrorism thrives because of hate. I'd be hateful too if people were interrogating me with lie detectors and throwing me out of the country based on my religion. You're just giving ISIS free propaganda. They wouldn't be wrong to start telling people that the West is becoming like Nazi Germany, and persecuting Muslims. (If your suggestions were put in place, I mean)

The fact that moderates like Maajid Nawaz are ostracised by the Muslim community (while extremists like Mo Ansar are labelled "community leaders" is a disgrace. Perhaps almost as disgraceful as the fact that more British Muslims are members of ISIS than members of the Armed Forces.

I agree with you absolutely. I think having a secular, liberal and modern dictator is a much better way towards democracy than a "democratic" theocracy, which is what we were heading towards with Morsy.

It would be nice if there was an honourable way of defeating those who fight dirty, unfortunately that appears to be somewhat of a fantasy, but I do share your sentiment to some degree. Just remember who tossed the first stone.

Actually, the honourable way of defeating those who fight dirty works. We just haven't tried it to any significant degree, yet. For the past few decades, and certainly since 9/11, we've repeatedly tried the sledgehammer, and all it's done is expand terror and created ISIS, as every intelligence expert has stated. Yet, novices and ignoramuses like Trump come along and proclaim that they have all the answers.

If you don't welcome this then it's obvious you have no interest in finding a solution

It is racist and islamophobic to not fully support the most traditional and conservative aspects of Islam.

I shall expect my local Labour Party MP to write an angry twitter comment about this man.

Middle eastern countries put religion on ID cards. So you can ban based on that and disregard any amendments to documents dated after the ban. To take it further they could implement a blade runner type interview system which monitors reactions to different sentences. For example, if someone claims to be non-muslim but hearing a sentence criticising Mohammed or looking at an image of Mohammed causes a spike in heart rate or brain activity in areas linked with anger. They can be rejected on that basis.

I'm only giving you this idea because you pushed for it. It isn't relevant to the topic and my point still stands that there are ways of combating domestic terrorism but they do involve trampling on some people's freedoms. That is unfortunate but necessary.

stfu

This is such a fantastic idea, I think you're really onto something.
But why stop at Muslims?

School shooting carried out by a kid with Aspergers? Ban them all!
A woman shoots lots of people in San Bernadino? Ban them all!
White people commit organised KKK murders against black people? Ban them all!

Sure, you'll end up punishing lots of people who have done nothing wrong, which is unfortunate. But at least you'll be on the safe side, restraining the people you need to.

Better yet, you might as well kick everybody out of the country until you personally are the last remaining person around! No problem if it's someone innocent - after all I'm sure someone of their race/religion/gender/species has committed a few massacres, right?

Although fair enough, kicking everyone out until you're the only one left would be a quite inconvenient, it's much easier just to relocate yourself to a remote uninhabited island and, for your "safety", ban anyone else from coming in. What a great idea, you absolute genius Now please go and put it into practice.

And what is that way? IMO liberals should come up with this plan because they are the ones who take issue with Trump's muslim ban policy. That would be guaranteed to work so if liberals have a problem then they should take the burden of coming up with the alternative plan that ensures zero terrorism and doesn't upset any muslims.

If they can't then we should proceed with the ban.

Except those aren't driven by an ideology except the KKK, which I have no objections to them being forcibly removed from the country.

This Islamophobia from Mr Nawaz, needs to be stopped, hopefully UAF can march against him.

Egypt simply wasn't heading towards a theocracy under Morsi. Whether you like it or not, the majority of people in Egypt supported the constitution and the majority of people had a favourable rating of Morsi before the coup, so the idea that the coup was a popular uprising is nonsensical.

The fact of the matter is that Egypt's only elected President was overthrown in a coup, following which Sisi massacred more than a thousand people. The idea that a dictator can be liberal and a dictator at the same time is balderdash - Sisi is a mass murderer and is suppressing freedom of expression and freedom of the press.
.

I am not saying he isn't a dictator, nor am I saying that he was elected fair and square. All I am saying is that I am glad Morsy is not in power any more and at least we have a secular government.
"Egypt simply wasn't heading towards a theocracy under Morsi" Really? Have a look at the constitution they came up with.
The fact that the best Egypt could come up with was Morsi made me give up on politics and on Egypt in general totally, but now at least we don't a group of religious fanatics running the country and that's a tiny bit better.

Nah that's not enough! We don't know which white people are going to join the KKK and start attacking people and which ones aren't, just like we don't know which Muslims will commit terrorism offences and which ones won't.

We should ban them all to make sure we're definitely getting all the bad ones, and to all the innocent ones just say "unfortunate but necessary... sorry! " You had such a great idea before, don't let this PC nonsense make you abandon it!

A true stroke of genius, I really don't know where you get it


Although most of the people who do these things in the US were actually born in America and are citizens. When we forcibly remove them we've got to think of somewhere to put them, because I doubt any other country will want to take people who could be criminals. It's a tough one... but since none of us as smart as you, I'll let you come up with another brilliant plan on that

Well, firstly, we've got to dramatically alter our foreign policy with respect to the Middle East. No more military interventions in places like Iraq and Libya which have become breeding grounds for ISIS as a result of our interventions. No more torture. No more cosying up to Saudi Arabia above and beyond what is necessary. Force Israel to accept two-state solution.

Secondly, we work with Muslim communities, as we are now, to discount and discredit the views of extremists. We work with liberal and reformist Muslims, such as the numerous Muslim LGBT gruops, to change social attitudes in Muslim communities (this is a bonus, because social attitudes haven't changed much in Christian communities in the United States) We address the cause of social exclusion, alienation and disenfranchisement, which, as terrorism experts have found, are largely driving people from Britain and other Western countries to join ISIS.

It's going to take a long time, but we've seen off graver threats in the past, and some of them, such as 20th Century totalitarianism, have taken a very long time to defeat. It requires patience, and this patience can be achieved with the understanding that a lot of what we've done in the past few decades has been precisely the wrong way to go about things.



Oh dear, you need to go to Logic 101. That doesn't follow at all: proceeding with something that will make things worse is not the way to go if people can't come up with a plan better than the status quo. So, sorry, as numerous others in this thread have pointed out, Trump's plan is guaranteed not to work.

The fact of the matter is that domestic terrorism from right-wing, anti-government extremists is a bigger threat than jihadi terrorism. So is driving a car. So is slipping in a bathtub. The reason you want to implement utterly silly and immoral policy proposals is because you're impatient, because you're overreacting, and because you're letting the media shape your perceptions of risk and threat, just as people get in a panic every time there's a plane crash.