Pakistan's Internet censorship

[T-Faz]

I think it is a law and order problem which Pakistan itself should tackle. The violent protests do not hurt anyone except for ordinary Pakistanis themselves. Instead of pandering to these extremists, the government should instead encourage the moderate voice.

I think this violent reaction is the problem. You will just end up looking like the kid who throws a tantrum every time someone does something you don't like.

I think these incidents of cartoon drawing receive support because people see it as a sign of defiance against the radicals. Pakistanis are well versed with this emotion every time there is a military standoff with India.
I doubt it would have received any attention if not for all the threats of violent retribution some of which were carried out.

These kinds of problems can be tackled but they always cause the damage that was intended through strikes and protests, you should know that even in your country, it would be very difficult to control any protests that do end up causing harm, either to the surrounding or to themselves. I can point examples but that would lead to us going back to taking pot shots all day at each other.

As for attention to this particular page, that happened long before Pakistan even got to know of it. It was banned today with information on this ban becoming known only in the last 24 hours. The page itself was being talked about since last week or more.

Let us be honest here, many people who are attracted by this are not attracted to it because of free speech but the offense it will cause and the subsequent reaction.

Well we cannot do anything about it except for what is already being done. I was warned of a media campaign against Muslims in the offing some time ago from a good source. The main point of all this was to get the reaction they want for political purpose.

This is part of a big game that only got interesting more recently.

 

[T-Faz]

I am sorry about that. I just got carried away with that comment. I will edit my post..

sorry once again..

Apology accepted, It happens.

 

[Xeric]

I disagree..

That's why I said xeric has a problem of halo perception.. I don't mean anything personal when I say that.

I am not an anti muslim first of all, no where in my post I said that. I have been repeating only one thing, that instead of bannig the whole website, someone should have taken facebook to the court and get the issue resolved.

Where is this Pakistan and Hindustan and muslim came in between?

Xeric gave me an example of McD, I kept the argument beyond our nationality. No where I claimed that had it been in India, we would handled it in a better manner..

I was not the one to drag Shiv sena in the picture, neither I dragged Pakistan. My discussion has been very general.. Please be advised and read from the starting.
To be honest Shiv sena is a failed party and I feel ashmed that it exist in India. What's wrong in that?

Yup, it's working. Keep breathing, yes breath,breath....guud.

 

[scrumpy]

Nobody has issued any threat against FB during this episode (except a few super-mullahs whom i dont know of)

Don't you think this is all linked to the Danish cartoon incident for which significant amounts of blood was spilt? Those themselves were drawn as an act of defiance against threats of violence from radical muslims. Are you telling me that this facebook page is not linked to those episodes.

Two, McDonalds or Burger King i dont even remember it issued an apology which in this case was not even discussed.

This was an ad from a company wanting to sell more burgers which unwittingly ended up offending Hindus. Unlike the news paper, their intention was to sell their product, not defend freedom of speech or acts of defiance. It was all settled amicably. I don't recall reading anything about riots back in India because of something which happened in Spain.

Three, when that Cavalli dude made the pic of some God of yours on that bikini, again an apology was issued but still many were quite enraged and 'stupid' kind of responses were seen.

I doubt any of them were threats of physical violence.

Four, there's a different between repetitive bastardness (the case study of Drawings) and a mistake now and then (the Burger Kingy and the bikini thingy)!

Yes, because it started out as an act of defiance, of standing up against threats. Wouldn't you if someone threatened you ?

 

[T-Faz]

I disagree..

That's why I said xeric has a problem of halo perception.. I don't mean anything personal when I say that.

I am not an anti muslim first of all, no where in my post I said that. I have been repeating only one thing, that instead of bannig the whole website, someone should have taken facebook to the court and get the issue resolved.

Where is this Pakistan and Hindustan and muslim came in between?

Xeric gave me an example of McD, I kept the argument beyond our nationality. No where I claimed that had it been in India, we would handled it in a better manner..

I was not the one to drag Shiv sena in the picture, neither I dragged Pakistan. My discussion has been very general.. Please be advised and read from the starting.
To be honest Shiv sena is a failed party and I feel ashmed that it exist in India. What's wrong in that?


Latter part of your post does make sense. And I take that..

It is common occurrence that one point can bring in a whole range of subjects that do not concern the original point of discussion. If someone else does something, does not mean that you have to act in the similar manner. Alas it is human nature that to counter something you will raise an issue that offends the person you are in a conversation with.

Now its just a matter of adding fuel to fire and expect a lot of insults to fly around. If you can ignore it, you must but if you want to, you can dive in head first.

But as long as you know the correct way, you would not have to do anything other than advice.

 

[scrumpy]

BTW, I believe all religion should be open to critique.

If you have faith in whatever you believe, you will simply ignore such actions. When people have doubts, they start getting into a froth about protecting their faith from the harmful affects of ideas.

 

[Jackdaws]

I for one am all for freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Anthropologically, I am a Hindu but am not a religious guy by any stretch of imagination. But the cartoons about Prophet Muhammad actually even offend me - not in the religious sense but because they are downright racist. You can argue that German/Nazi caricatures of Jews too were merely utilization of freedom of speech and expression like this one -

Caricatures from "Der Stuermer": 1928-1932

But would Facebook allow Neo Nazis to host a "Draw a Jew" day? Rights come with responsibilities. You may have the right to offend me - but why would you want to use it unless you just want to provoke me?

 

[Xeric]

Don't you think this is all linked to the Danish cartoon incident for which significant amounts of blood was spilt? Those themselves were drawn as an act of defiance against threats of violence from radical muslims. Are you telling me that this facebook page is not linked to those episodes.

Who said that this was delinked from that incident? Assumptions, perhaps?

And yes you got that right; "Those themselves were drawn as an act of defiance against threats of violence from radical muslims."
So you suggest it is ok to do more bad in order to oppose something that was bad at the first place, right?

So by your definition 'act of defiance' by 'radical' Muslims by blowing themselves up and threatening the West should also be legit?

This was an ad from a company wanting to sell more burgers which unwittingly ended up offending Hindus. Unlike the news paper, their intention was to sell their product, not defend freedom of speech or acts of defiance. It was all settled amicably. I don't recall reading anything about riots back in India because of something which happened in Spain.

That was a mistake and this one's something deliberate. i hope you understand the thick line there..??

I doubt any of them were threats of physical violence.

So you are still stuck at the 'threats of physical violence', though i dont favor banning but then it no way counts as a fatal threat. And yes, we'll see how civil your people would remain if someone would deliberately do something to the hindu faith!

Yes, because it started out as an act of defiance, of standing up against threats. Wouldn't you if someone threatened you ?

Ok, right.

So then why say the some 'acts of defiance' by Muslims bad?

You are suggesting tit for tat, right?



Inshort, dont oscillate, harness your intuitions and stick to one point.

 

[scrumpy]

I for one am all for freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Anthropologically, I am a Hindu but am not a religious guy by any stretch of imagination. But the cartoons about Prophet Muhammad actually even offend me - not in the religious sense but because they are downright racist. You can argue that German/Nazi caricatures of Jews too were merely utilization of freedom of speech and expression like this one -

Caricatures from "Der Stuermer": 1928-1932

But would Facebook allow Neo Nazis to host a "Draw a Jew" day? Rights come with responsibilities. You may have the right to offend me - but why would you want to use it unless you just want to provoke me?

I think thats a great way to respond to the facebook group. Create one with the title mentioned above along with the content from the post. Ofcourse, you should also refuse to do it with the reasoning that such acts are offensive to people hence against our principles.

Gandhigiri... Attack the person's conscience.

 

[Jackdaws]

I think thats a great way to respond to the facebook group. Create one with the title mentioned above along with the content from the post. Ofcourse, you should also refuse to do it with the reasoning that such acts are offensive to people hence against our principles.

Gandhigiri... Attack the person's conscience.

You shall then know my identity and I can't allow that

 

[scrumpy]

Who said that this was delinked from that incident? Assumptions, perhaps?

And yes you got that right; "Those themselves were drawn as an act of defiance against threats of violence from radical muslims."
So you suggest it is ok to do more bad in order to oppose something that was bad at the first place, right?

So by your definition 'act of defiance' by 'radical' Muslims by blowing themselves up and threatening the West should also be legit?



That was a mistake and this one's something deliberate. i hope you understand the thick line there..??


So you are still stuck at the 'threats of physical violence', though i dont favor banning but then it no way counts as a fatal threat. And yes, we'll see how civil your people would remain if someone would deliberately do something to the hindu faith!



Ok, right.

So then why say the some 'acts of defiance' by Muslims bad?

You are suggesting tit for tat, right?



Inshort, dont oscillate, harness your intuitions and stick to one point.

I don't think any one is bothered by threats to blow themselves up as long as they do it without hurting anyone else. In this case, there was violence involved. Whatever sympathies Muslims may have had from right minded people vanished with those incidents.

An act of drawing a cartoon in no way compares to the act physical threats, riots or killing people. You could twist my words all that you want. But you know in the end what is right and what is wrong.

 

[Xeric]

I don't think any one is bothered by threats to blow themselves up as long as they do it without hurting anyone else. In this case, there was violence involved. Whatever sympathies Muslims may have had from right minded people vanished with those incidents.

An act of drawing a cartoon in no way compares to the act physical threats, riots or killing people. You could twist my words all that you want. But you know in the end what is right and what is wrong.

Well, we dont side with those who formed part of the (violent) act. Even now, you dont see anyone on this thread or else where asking for a violent stand, it is just your imagination that comes back every now and then and haunts you, so quit it.

Now as for some other remarks here by people; well if someone decides not to respect something (his religion), someone (even his father), someplace (country) etc, it's nobody's fault. It is his problem and he can go to hell, but then preaching and advocating the shyt it all over with the plea of liberalism and freedom, is not the way.

If someone insults someones father, hue and cry might be raised, but then some super-freedom-of-speech may say, hey look i damn care, i dont even like my dad, who cares about the 'ol man, one should do whatever he wants to and that includes calling names or making sketches of a father! But then the question is, does this imply that we should let it be that way, on the sole pretext of freedom of speech? Who draws the line here?


One cannot tell anyone to disrespect someone, and similarly one also cant force someone to respect someone, but then we as humans do have some sense left in us and we know the difference between the good, the bad and the ugly, dont we?

i can always advice you to be polite (read respect) someone, but wouldnt it be odd (read wrong) if i ask you to insult or disgrace someone, something or somebody?

Come on, guy we know what's wrong and what's right, or perhaps we have gone so immune and insane that we have lost the perception of black and white?

That's only what we are trying to do here on PDF, nothing less, nothing more, or by now a hell lot of us here might have been banned.

Atleast try to see the platform, not every place is for spitting.

 

[Luftwaffe]

scrumpy i care less about you, other members don't take it offensive it is an example to explain what scrumpy is trying to tell:

So if you shout and verbally abuse your mom/dad its ok since you've not touch beaten them than its alright since its not a threat so in the end you stand right to abuse others verbally and vice versa as long as you don't touch/beat them...

Ha wonderful I can imagine your level...that explains.

 

[Jackdaws]

scrumpy i care less about you, other members don't take it offensive it is an example to explain what scrumpy is trying to tell:

So if you shout and verbally abuse your mom/dad its ok since you've not touch beaten them than its alright since its not a threat so in the end you stand right to abuse others verbally and vice versa as long as you don't touch/beat them...

Ha wonderful I can imagine your level...that explains.

Exactly. You can do something that would offend them and hurt them - like smoke 3 decks of smokes a day. But hey, they are your lungs - so you are well within your rights to offend them. But if you verbally abuse them - then yea, sure you are using your right to freedom of speech but is it a judicious use of your rights?

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Come on guys, all of you.

Lets think this through in an honest and straight-forward way. When those first caricatures and cartoons of our Holy Prophet (SAWS) were depicted in 2006, whole world could clearly see how unacceptable it was to Muslims WORLDWIDE -- everywhere from Tunisia to Egypt to Saudi Arabia to Syria to Lebanon to Turkey to Iran to Pakistan to Indonesia and the world over. The levels of anger varied --- some Muslims shook their head in disgust, some went out in the street peacefully, some resorted to unfortunate destructive behaviour (including here in Pakistan). It obviously triggered a lot of offense and anger.

Now given the fact that SO many people were offended, does it not make sense for the media (corporate, mind you) and private/public individuals to NOT broach this subject; and NOT engage in this behaviour, knowing the repercussions.

Freedom of speech is a great thing; and in 97.5% cases, I think it is a human right. Yes I can see that some people especially in Western countries get defensive, as mass influx of immigrants and globalization takes place - that they feel threatened by having to adhere to the ''values'' of other people. It has nothing to do with that. All Muslims ask is some basic respect, especially at a time where the Muslim world needs to be assured that there is no so-called ''clash'' between Islam and the West (I personally don't buy into that bullshit).

In many European countries, especially Germany, it is a FELONY --- I CAN GO TO JAIL -- if I deny holocaust. I am educated enough to know that it did indeed took place and there was mass extermination of a certain religious group. It seems almost that there is little initiative in such countries to condemn blashemy against a peaceful religion like Islam.


I come from a school of thought that condemns both sides. If ''they'' claim that Islam is a violent religion -- we MUSLIMS aren't really helping our case by allowing some misguided Muslims to issue violent fatwas against cartoonists, and calling for hatred and violence against others! Many Muslims died in anti-cartoon riots and protests worldwide in 2006 (I was in Lahore at the time and witnessed a lot of the chaos). That is also a shame, and real ridiculous.

Best thing you can do is report the group as ''racism'' and hope that facebook staff will remove it. Boycott, hold discussions, do all that stuff. It's better than resorting to violence.

Other side must learn to respect the feelings, as Prophet Mohammad (SAWS) is the last Messenger of God and is a very Holy and Important Inspirational Figure for us.