ZAKARIA: So in that sense, the problem is you and Osama bin Laden agree.
HARRIS: Well --
ZAKARIA: Because after all you're saying this is -- his interpretation of Islam is correct.
HARRIS: Well, his -- this is the problem. His interpretation of Islam is very straightforward and honest, and you really have to split hairs and do some interpretative acrobatics in order to get it look -- get it to look non-canonical.
ZAKARIA: But do you really think that the path to reforming Islam is to tell Muslims that their religion is the mother lode of bad ideas, that they should become atheists or symbolic followers or nominal I think was the word you used. These nominal followers.
HARRIS: Right.
ZAKARIA: I mean, do you really think that 1.6 billion devout Muslims are going to go, oh, damn, of course, Sam Harris is right, my religion is crap and I should just abandon it?
HARRIS: No. No. Well, and I slightly misspoke there. I didn't mean nominal followers in the sense that only Muslim atheists could reform the faith. What I meant is followers who don't take these specific dangerous beliefs very seriously and want to interpret jihad as an inner spiritual struggle as opposed to holy war.
ZAKARIA: But do you think you're helping them or you're making it harder for them by, as I said, adopting the Osama bin Laden interpretation?
HARRIS: I'll tell you who's making it harder for them. Liberals who deny the problem. I get e-mails every day from atheists and secularists living in the Muslim world who say I can't --
ZAKARIA: Forget about others.
(CROSSTALK)
HARRIS: No. I'm telling --
ZAKARIA: I do help --
HARRIS: I'm telling you the only metric I have for that is I hear from people living in Pakistan, for instance, who say if a liberal like you can't even speak honestly about the link between ideology and violence, what hope is there for me?
I can't even tell my mother what I believe about God because I would be afraid of my own family or village killing me.
