Pakistan's Internet censorship

[sparklingway]

Peoples enough is enough............ lets start anti-christianism blog in the name of Freedom of speech. Find the weaknesses of christians

Lets fight each other and disgrace the religion of each other in the name of Freedom of speech. Lets be all sick for a change and swear each other in the name of Freedom.

Must be a fun........ what say?

Allow me to create that blog and i am willing to face the consequences

Lets just grow up now - Lets defame/disgrace each other's religion in the name of Freedom (with all respect to my dear Christian friends here)

The reply to a hate group is never to initiate a counter hate group. How many of the members of the group concerned are Christians? How many are Jews? Has anybody attempted to create a demographic of the religious views (if stated publicly outside privacy settings). A cursory look indeed reveals many right wing Christians but this does not mean that one has to offend others. Besides, many members are irreligious as well.

Hate groups are hard to deal with rationally as well. Ignorance is the way possible in my opinion. Just ignore them.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

what Mullah Omar --in a symbollic sense -- said makes sense.

but you dont destroy ancient relics and statues like that. Why not be a proper statesman and explain WHY it may be more feasible and appreciated if they first invest in humanitarian missions.

incidentally, such projects are undertaken by agencies like UNESCO. UNESCO job is not to feed poor people or invest in infrastructure; therefore there is some flaw to the reasoning

in principle, yes it does have some merit....but what good is it to destroy something that cannot be replaced

 

[sparklingway]

Sparkling masla ye nahi ke they created a picture of Prophet. Yeh choti baat thee......... but they created a picture of Prophet with bomb in his turbon..... second picture you see where Prophet Muhammad S.A.W is showed like a Dog. (Obviously they don't even know how he looks and thats just an imagination).

Yesterday i saw a most wicked picture i could ever imagine and if i find it again i will PM you. (They showed the word Allah written in Arabic and the last word "Hey" turned into Penis and then the water coming out of it (stimulation) and underneath is an imaginative picture of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) showed like a dog and somebody else is behind him i can't remember the whole scene now). Astaghfirullah

That was also on Facebook

I am not in any way condoning their acts. That would be outrageous. I condemn any acts of hatred towards any other group. What I was trying to stay is that let haters be haters. You cannot police the entire world. There will most definitely exist hate groups all over the world.

Weren't there members posting disgraceful comments about Hindu gods yesterday? Haven't you ever heard people in Pakistan making fun of any other religion? This is what is the problem with people across the world. In their own religious or ideological views, they get so indoctrinated that they become extremely intolerant of others and find pissing off others their duty and some sort of achievement.

Just let them do what they want to do. Don't ban social networking in our country. Its outrageous. Reactions from people are equally outrageous.

Don't add fuel to the fire. Let them do what they want to do. Just create a rational defense group where people do not post hate material against members of the opposing group, rather post material about tolerance, rationality and the necessity of not hating the sentiments of any other religious group.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

I try to stay away from religious issues or rhetoric but I'd like to remind people that symbolism has been important to Shii'te culture since its initial days. Even with increasingly harsh restrictions on this liberal nature in Iran, portraits of the Prophet and other religious figures are common throughout Iran and many Imambarghas. .

is it true? As far as I know, they only have depictions of Ayatollah Khomenei and the 12 Imams.

Never heard of any depictions of an-Nabay SAWS

 

[T-Faz]

What bullocks and utter BS. The worst example of defending a cowardly, fascist and totalitarian act of utter hatred against any other religion.

I do not understand where your little burst of aggression came from and why you consider it to be a act of hatred against another religion.

Firstly the Buddhas of Bamyan were not being utilized as a place of worship by buddhists and neither were they a central point of buddhism. In our country too there are a lot of buddhist statues but they are only tourist attractions and nothing else. Destroying a tourist attraction which has its roots in a religion that is not prevalent within the country anymore is not exactly an act of religious hatred.

Similarly the reasoning provided is very sound and speaks for itself. What is the point of maintaining some statues when in reality people are dying of hunger and poverty in the country.

Just because some people have an affiliation with a statue does not mean it holds grand importance for all. In my opinion, it his country, he can damn well please to do what he wants. Every country has its share of destruction, at least these guys provide a good reasoning and have the audacity to actually do what they say.

I am in no way condoning their actions but it makes sense because these people are after all of a certain thinking that limits their grasp on things.

 

[Hyde]

I am not in any way condoning their acts. That would be outrageous. I condemn any acts of hatred towards any other group. What I was trying to stay is that let haters be haters. You cannot police the entire world. There will most definitely exist hate groups all over the world.

Weren't there members posting disgraceful comments about Hindu gods yesterday? Haven't you ever heard people in Pakistan making fun of any other religion? This is what is the problem with people across the world. In their own religious or ideological views, they get so indoctrinated that they become extremely intolerant of others and find pissing off others their duty and some sort of achievement.

Just let them do what they want to do. Don't ban social networking in our country. Its outrageous. Reactions from people are equally outrageous.

Don't add fuel to the fire. Let them do what they want to do. Just create a rational defense group where people do not post hate material against members of the opposing group, rather post material about tolerance, rationality and the necessity of not hating the sentiments of any other religious group.

i partially agree with you sparklingway and i have been repeatedly saying that Ignoring is the best answer to them. We can only take two steps

1) Ignore them
2) Ask the leadership to sue the cartoonist in international court for "phsycological damage" to 1.5 billion Muslims.

If nothing happens - Kutton ka kaam hai bhonkna - let them bark

 

[sparklingway]

is it true? As far as I know, they only have depictions of Ayatollah Khomenei and the 12 Imams.

Never heard of any depictions of an-Nabay SAWS

It is entirely true. You can read about it widely on the Interweb.

I'll post some text from an art collection page (so as not to post the link with the pictures)

Islam's prophet Muhammad ibn Abd Allah. Representations of the Prophet are well known from early on, but are not very common. While some Muslims hold beliefs that it is against Islam to make images of the Prophet, others have more relaxed attitudes, and among Shia Muslims, such pictures are common, and much liked.

According to Iranian informants interviewed by Ingvild Flaskerud, such portraits should not be considered "real" portraits of the prophet Muhammad. The artists make these images on the basis of conventional ideas of the character of those personages depicted, in the same way it has been done with Biblical figures in European art.

The text below the image is the shahada or Profession of faith: "There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is His messenger."

Original: Purchased in Qum 1999 by Ingvild Flaskerud.


As in the previous picture, the Prophet holds the Quran in his left hand, while with his right hand index finger, he points upwards. The one finger symbolises or reminds the viewer of the basic Islamic tenet of the one God. Below the picture is the shahada, as in the previous picture, while the medallions in the upper corners contain the words "Allah" (to the right) and "Muhammad" (to the left).

These portraits remind one of Zoroastrian (or Parsi) depictions of the prophet Zarathushtra, compare for instance with this image from The Life of Holy Zarathustra (The Prophet of the Parsees) by Framroz Rustomjee, Bombay 1961, and image from Introducing Zoroastrianism; With 52 Weekly Sermons by Maneck B. Pithawalla, Bombay 1961.

Original: Small images, Ingvild Flaskerud, Qum 1999.


This picture represents the prophet Muhammad in the middle, with his veiled daughter Fatima on his left hand side, his cousin and son in law on his right hand side, and his two grandsons, Ali's og Fatima's sons, Hasan (in green) and Husayn (in red). "The holy family" or "the Holy Five" has a high position among all Muslims, but particularly among Shia Muslims. Their names are written on the rosette to the left: starting from the top and reading clockwise: "Allah, Muhammad, Fatima, Husain, Hasan, Ali". The text in the middle is not readable. Behind Muhammad stands an angel, probably Djibril (Gabriel) with the Koran in his hands. According to Muslim belief, the angel Djibril was the one who brought the first revelation to Muhammad. In this picture, like in many other representations of Ali, he holds in his hands one of his characteristics, the double pointed sword Dhu 'l-Faqar.

Original: Small images, Ingvild Flaskerud, Qum 1999.

As you can see the writer states buying them in Qum, Iran. Infact depictions and paintings could be found during the Ottoman Era and the Mughal Era as well.

But as I said earlier, Iran has become stricter over this issue now but paintings can be bought throughout Iran and Lebanon, albeit they are increasingly uncommon. It's not uncommon for old burial places to have walls with the paintings and depictions either.

For an article on the depiction throughout history and preserved in museums today, follow the link below.

In Art Museums, Portraits Illuminate A Religious Taboo - washingtonpost.com

 

[sparklingway]

Facebook Fiasco: What Would Muhammad (PBUH) Do?
​

Posted on May 19, 2010

Adil Najam

This is a painful post to write.

Ideally I would have preferred not to have had to write this post. But I have over 300 messages in my in-box of people fussing over the so-called “Draw Muhammad Day” page on the social networking site Facebook and now the Lahore High Court’s decision calling for a ban on Facebook has forced the issue. And that is what pains me.

I hope that Facebook administration will remove the page. Not because of any “banning” movement and not because of the Lahore High Court. Just because the page and the idea behind the page is inflammatory and offensive. Regardless of what your belief or religion might be, to throw out offensive and hateful vitriolic for the simple and primary purpose of hurting someone else’s feelings - when you know that (a) those feelings will be hurt and (b) when hurting those feelings is really the only purpose of doing what you are doing - is inhuman, cruel, and clearly offensive. If Facebook does not recognize that, then it knows nothing either about “social” or about “networking” and certainly not about “community.”

But at one level, that matters little now. Whether Facebook removes the offensive page or not. The page and its creators have already fulfilled their purpose, met their goals. And it is we ourselves who have helped them do so. And that is what pains me.

I have not visited the offensive page in question and do not intend to. I had also not intended to help publicizing that offensive page, but by having to write this post that is exactly what I am doing. And that pains me. I am offended by the idea that page purports and the goals it seeks to achieve. So, why should I dignify it by a visit? Why should I publicize it? Why should I give it the attention it was created to seek. Yet, all of us (now me included, which is why writing this is uncomfortable) are doing exactly that.And that is what pains me.

Many of the emails I have received give me the link to that page and invite me to visit it so that ‘I can see for myself how offensive it is.’ I do not need to do that. Yet, that is exactly what we have been doing. We have been acting exactly as the creators of that page intended us to. Acting as the promoters and publicists of that page. And now having turned it into an international legal matter giving the attention seekers behind the page the exact thing they wanted: Attention.

But we have done more than that. With the Lahore High Court decision we have allowed the PTA and authorities another precedent and excuse to aggressively “manage” the internet; something that can and will be misused in the future.

I have not been receiving emails from the proponents of that page. The only ones who seem to be noticing us is us Muslims (and for some reason Pakistani Muslims more than any other). If we too had ignored the offensive page - as it deserves to be ignored - it would have gone the exact same way to oblivion as thousands of other sophomoric attempts at cheap attention seeking on the Internet. Instead we have now turned it into an international incident and given it far more limelight than it ever deserved.

Let’s think about it, what did the creators of the offensive page want to do when they set it up? First, they sought attention, and hits, and notoriety in a world where attention is too easily confused with fame. Second, they wanted to ridicule Muslims by the reaction they excepted from this. If you think of it, irrespective of whether Facebook removes the site or keeps it, the organizers of the page have achieved their goal. Well beyond what they expected. Now every other Islamophobic nutcase will get new ideas about how to have his little 10 minutes of fame spewing bigotry and hatred against Muslims.

But more importantly, they simply could not have done this without us. The only people who have turned this from nothingness into a huge issue is us. I am sure that those who set up the page are jumping up and down and thanking us for making their page such a huge success! And that is what pains me.

I am also pained by the sacrilege of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) that this entire drama signifies. As pained as anyone else, and as pained as I would have been at the sacrilege of any other Prophet or religion. But unlike for many others, that pain is neither reduced nor resolved by protesting against Facebook. For me, the antidote to that pain is in the teaching of the Prophet (PBUH) themselves. What would the Prophert Muhammad (PBUH) have done in such a situation.

The one thing I am absolutely positive of, is that the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) would not have done what we are doing now: making an international public spectacle of ourselves. Most likely he would have just walked away and ignored (as he did those who threw garbage on him), he might have negotiated with Facebook on the basis of their own stated rules (the Hudabia model), he might have reasoned with detractors (the sermon on the mound model). Nearly certainly Muhammad (PBUH) would have handled it with grace, with composure, and maybe even with a touch of good humor. Most importantly, the Prophet (PBUH) would have kept focusing on his own actions and proving his point with his own deeds rather than with slogans, banners and naara-baazi.

 

[Shamsher]

nice job Pak but it should be banned forever in Pak

 

[asq]

Chappal Chor;

yaar do you think banning will really solve the problem? It is like being an ostrich with his head in sand thinking that the threat is over because it cant see it.

We must differanciate between jerks and decent folks. and show it to the world the differance. Dude.

 

[khanz]

nice job Pak but it should be banned forever in Pak

no it shouldn't don't force your overboard censorship on everyone don't like it don't go to facebook but don't ruin it for everyone did u even read the article sparkling posted ? it explains everything pretty well

 

[raleigh22]

Firstly the Buddhas of Bamyan were not being utilized as a place of worship by buddhists and neither were they a central point of buddhism.

Just because some people have an affiliation with a statue does not mean it holds grand importance for all. In my opinion, it his country, he can damn well please to do what he wants.

That sounds amazingly like the VHP/RSS/Shiv Sena/BJP's reasoning when it comes to the demolition of the Babri Masjid.

 

[T-Faz]

That sounds amazingly like the VHP/RSS/Shiv Sena/BJP's reasoning when it comes to the demolition of the Babri Masjid.

So you are comparing a barbaric regime such as the taliban to some of your own opposition parties who committed a heinous crime whereby many people lost their loves.

Remind me how many people lost their lives during the destruction of these statues, I cannot think of any. Similarly do not pick up a few sentences to distort what I have to say. I did not like what happened to the statues but the reason put forward is very realistic.

On the other hand, your own BJP leaders with their friends, openly ordered the killing of innocents and destroyed a mosque that was actually being utilized. LK Advani who has been suspected of ordering the actual demolition went on to great heights in his political career.

I was only referring to Mullah Omar and his statements that merit some attention because his quotes are highly intriguing from an intellectual point of view. Had he been an educated man, he might have been very different.

Write a little more than dropping a few irritating lines that do not make much sense. Also what I said is very true in the world that we live in, people can do what they want and get away with it, destroying a staue is not equal to ordering the killing of people from a religious group, or an act of war.

Also I am referring to Mullah Omar in this context i.e the Buddha statues alone and not for anything else, so do not use certain sentences of my comment to distort what I have to say and provide an uneven comparison.

 

[raleigh22]

So you are comparing a barbaric regime such as the taliban to some of your own opposition parties who committed a heinous crime whereby many people lost their loves.

I am comparing the destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas to the destruction of the Babri masjid. Both were sacred to someone and there was no justification for destroying either.

Remind me how many people lost their lives during the destruction of these statues, I cannot think of any.

Now you are extending the issue to deaths of persons, while I was talking about the limited issue of destruction of the religious monuments. Do you mean to say that if no people died after the Babri Masjid was demolished, then the act would be justifiable?

On the other hand, your own BJP leaders with their friends, openly ordered the killing of innocents and destroyed a mosque that was actually being utilized. LK Advani who has been suspected of ordering the actual demolition went on to great heights in his political career.

If you knew anything about the Babri Masjid, you would know that it was not being used since the 1940s and it had been locked since. Get your facts right.
On the killings of persons, most deaths in the subsequent riots took place in Bombay, thousands of kilometres away from Ayodhya. The deaths occurred in the Muslim backlash due to anger about the demolition and then subsequent Hindu retaliation led by the Shiv Sena.
Ayodhya or the surrounding areas saw few killings.

Destroying a staue is not equal to ordering the killing of people from a religious group, or an act of war.

I compared destroying a sacred Buddhist statue to the destruction of a sacred Masjid. I think both acts are equally condemnable.

 

[DesiGuy]

BTW, that's what we (the sensibles) suggested and did, but then not everyone in Pakistan (nor india) is Benjamin Franklin.

But i have a question, what went wrong when McDonalds did that burger thing with some Goddess of yours and you all went gung-ho over it..remember..???

and Did they banned those burgers?


just because something bad is posted on face book, does not mean ban face book in the nation.