Muslims vs. Taliban vs. Al-Qaeda

Here is a useful chart for the next time you join the mass-media promoted generalization of Muslims.

As you know, I am not religious.  But even I get annoyed with all that hate of Muslims and their supposed relation to terrorism and violence.  I knew a few Muslims myself, and at least those are extremely kind and warm people.  I’ve been in their houses, ate with them, drank with them, talked with them, played with their kids, and seemed to overly enjoy myself.  So cut the stereotypical crap already.

14 thoughts on “Muslims vs. Taliban vs. Al-Qaeda”

    1. that’s a load of crap! :)

      First of all, who told you that it’s a free world? It’s not. And look around for examples.

      Secondly, even if the world was free, that doesn’t mean that the hate is free. Hate is quite an expensive thing. Someone always has to pay for hate. Maybe, of course, that’s because the world is not free. But maybe because the hate is not either.

      Thirdly, even if the world and the hate was free, that doesn’t mean that you are. :)

  1. Free as in freedom of speech,expression, discussion and so on. But as you did state clearly that its all a cascade :) Pseudo-free liberated new world in which you are free to sympathize/love/admire/tolerate/express yourself and… Oh. Whoops. Not always when you are on the other side of the argument. The Taboo zone I’ll call it :)

    1. Hmm … interesting. Freedom of speech depends quite a bit on who you are, where you are, and when you are. If we are talking about now, there are still two more questions to answer. USA, Russia, China, India, Turkey? Who are you? A president? A minister? A journalist? A kid? A nobody?

      Not going too deep into the argument, it appears to me that most people can be divided into two groups: those who can say whatever they want and express whatever they want, but who can’t change anything via their expressions (for example, have a look at any presidential election in any even mildly important country), and those who can change something with their expression, but who don’t have the freedom to express themselves – be that because they are dead, arrested, bribed, or scared.

      Having a freedom is a very expensive thing. One has to fight for it, earn it, maintain it, and protect it. That’s a touch job. Most people that I know will (and are) give their freedoms away easily. Often me included.

      1. You are saying that a president has more freedom to express himself then a nobody? Correct me if I understood you wrong :) ‘Cause really, I think that it’s the government dudes who have less freedom of…well anyone, to freely express themselves, due to many factors. Like censorship, the fact that the electorate might not like what they are saying and money which are always deeply rooted with politics.
        When you are a no one though, yeah its ok to climb the highest building shouting that the president sucks. Especially in the US, there are many freaks who do that :) But taking the religion caricature incident for insance, where a guy illustrated all three major religions in an offensive and funny way. Islamists got their freedom to express themselves (still talking about freedom of expression) and the guy who drew it had to pay some fees or something. Where as the christians on the other hand couldn’t do because…well why Jesus and not Mohamed? The immidiate stereotype which sets of in everyone’s head is “what are you, a nazi or something?”.
        I am not religious myself and really, the question “are muslims cute and nice and peace-through-unity orientated. Or are they the real axis of evil”…its all not important.
        Its all about double-faced so called freedom which is the problem. By saying that we live in a free world, I am saying that its not 1940s dictatorship :)
        sorry for such an amount of text :)

        1. First of all, yes, the president has WAY more freedom to express himself than a nobody. President is a powerful man, no matter which country or company you take. And more power you have, the more freedom you have.

          Secondly, it’s not just about having freedom. It’s about what you can do with that freedom. What’s the point of having a freedom to express yourself, when there is nobody to hear your expression, and where your expression won’t change anything?

          The power in freedom of expression is particular in that your expression might affect the world somehow. Somebody will learn something from your expression, change their mind about something, or do something. That’s why we need to express ourselves, not for the sake of waving air or spoiling the paper.

          That’s how I think the president has more power than a nobody. President is a public figure, with access to (and often the control of) mass media. When president expresses himself, a lot of people hear that, a lot of people think about that, and a lot of people have something to do because of that.

          Whether the president is speaking for himself, his party, or his sponsors – that’s a totally different question.

          As for the “electorate might not like” – that, I think, is too naive. We passed that back when people started living in groups of hundreds. Maybe even earlier. As the saying goes: it’s not important how they voted, but it’s important how you counted.

          1. If you believe in this concept of freedom, why care about the “stereotypical crap” of others? :) So there are a bunch of no ones drooling over the idea of muslimised world and a bunch of other no ones feeling extremely repelled by the idea. Big deal then.

            1. First of all, I tend to oppose violent and hateful stereotypes.

              Secondly, as the chart above illustrates, the violent radical and questionably Muslim community is a minority. Which by itself wouldn’t be a problem according to my view of the world. But a few powerful people are using their freedom of speech and their access to mass media to promote those minorities.

              As long as those minorities are violent and hateful, I am against that. Hence the chart.

              1. I definitely don’t have a problem with you believing in that :) If I did then I would just be the biggest moron. 8)

                My point is that both sides of the argument “like” or “dislike” is stereotypical. Especially when these opinions are based on something like “I am friends with one muslim/arab/christian/ninja and he is cool. Therefore muslims/arabs/christians/ninjas are cool”. That is what I strongly believe in.

  2. i would like to see instead a chart of what proportion of muslims quietly supports (as in “does not object to”) what taliban an al quaeda and other radicals are doing. but that won’t happen of course.
    are islamic governments and societies prosecuting members of radical formations?

Leave a Comment