Pakistan set to ban more web blasphemy Pakistan announced Friday that it will monitor Yahoo, Google, MSN, Hotmail, YouTube, Amazon, and Bing, and will block links and content that it deems anti-Islamic. "If any particular link with offensive content appears on these websites, the [link] shall be blocked immediately without disturbing the main website," Pakistan …
There hs always been a conflict in Islamic thinking between one of the central tenets of the religion 'There is no God but Allah, and Muhammed is his prophet' , and the clasical Islamic teaching that those of the Jewish and Christian faiths are 'Followers of the Book' and are to be treated at least sympathetically.
However, taking the Michael out of some one else's religious beliefs is not the way to go. There should be room for open discussion, but one can sympathise with the Pakistani respose to the Facebook campaign.
However, from what I have seen and heard, tolerance for those of different faiths, or no faith, is thin on the ground in the average Mosque.
Chris Cosgrove
I don't really care why, frankly. It's pretty clear that usually the smarter and more educated people are, the less they're likely to be xenophobic. Though it isn't usually the brightest sparcs that end up in politics, islamists with their built-in politics/religion entanglement seem to've made an art of it.
I do care about the imperial tendencies of islamists. I might even be tempted to propose to just put a fence around certain areas and leave the insides to sort themselves out. The fact that there'll be a lot of people who are nominally or even devoutly muslim who aren't actually bent on ``righting'' any ``wrong'' by drowning it in blood, acid, or fire is, if we let this fester long enough, more of a collateral damage issue to reduce to avoid politicians getting their panties in a twist than that I'm willing to let the extremist faction use that very fact against ``us''. Which they already do with abandon.
Then again, ``we'' (read: the USA) could've maybe gone and did done a bit less poking that particular heap of fire ants in them thar holey hills. It's far too easy to suppose they didn't do that on purpose.
AC:
"It's pretty clear that usually the smarter and more educated people are, the less they're likely to be xenophobic. Though it isn't usually the brightest sparcs that end up in politics, islamists with their built-in politics/religion entanglement seem to've made an art of it."
I believe this to be true. I once saw a breakdown of the illiteracy rates for the provinces of Pakistan and trust me, it's not good. In fact, it's down right scary. 170 million people in Pakistan with illiteracy rates in some provinces around and over 50%.
That's a lot of people, a hell of a lot of people that can't even read and write.
I noticed a correlation between those lawless regions of Pakistan (Dir, Swat, North Waziristan, the Federally administered tribal areas and NWFP - North West Frontier Provinces), these are the regions where the extremism breeds, these are the areas from where the suicide bombers originate who then head into the cities to blow themselves up. It's these areas which have the highest illiteracy rates.
The Pakistani government recognises that the madrassas are a problem. They're not schools as we think of them, their sole objective is to brainwash the students with the Koran, they don't teach any other subjects.
The government wanted to take on the madrassas a couple of years ago, the madrassas responded "You try and close us down and we'll fight back", and they will. AK47s are extremely popular in Pakistan.
The mainstream Pakistani's are sick to death of the extremists, but when the extremists come into your village, town armed to the teeth with AK47's what can the civilian population do?
They kill fellow muslims, they don't care, if you don't conform to their extremist beliefs then you are a target, regardless if you are muslim or not.
"...but one can sympathise with the Pakistani respose to the Facebook campaign."
That would be the same Pakistan:
- whose government routinely turns a blind eye while some of it's citizens torch their sisters, daughters and mothers for some perceived slight to the family "honour".
- whose government studiously tried to avoid taking any action when a young woman was gang-raped by village elders as a punishment for her brother being caught with a girl from a different family, only buckling after considerable pressure.
- whose political parties regularly instigate supposedly religiously inspired rioting and happily murder political opponents to suit their narrow politics aims.
- that has the death penalty on the books for expressing an opinion on the national religion that runs contrary to the prevailing national bigotry du jour.
- that lobbied hard for the UN to take action against nations whose citizens dissed Big Mo'; attempting, in other words, to curtail freedom of speech in other sovereign nations.
- that routinely allows those of other faiths (or even offshoots of the national faith) and none to be harassed, beaten and murdered, and their places of worship torched, for not getting with the approved programme.
I'd personally struggle to sympathise with Pakistan for anything at all that wasn't a natural disaster - those at the top of the feudal tree have spent decades manipulating and distorting their own so-called faith beyond recognition for nothing better than money and political power.
The facebook 'campaign' and a few web slurs are by some measure the least of Pakistan's problems, and the zealous pursuit of a few hurtful words merely demonstrates how complete the annihilation of common sense has been since Jinnah loosed his vain and ill conceived idea on the world.
If anyone ever needed a reason why religion and government DO NOT MIX, well here is your answer. At least, here in the former colonies, we have, for the most part, gotten rid of that nonsense.
It is about other parts of the world join the 21st century, instead of staying in the Middle Ages. Your time of `enlightenment` is so long over due.
Flames, because that was once the way the religious types dealt with blasphemers and heretics. I have another suggestion of what some `flames` could be used for, but I do not want to `kick a hornet's nest`.
If by 'former colonies' you mean the USA, it's hard to imagine a more God-ridden society. You even put religious slogans on your *money* FFS. Just last week a survey showed that something like 60% of Americans expect Christ to return before 2050. Accepted wisdom in the US is that if you want to get elected to office it doesn't matter what religion you are, as long as you have one. There is zero chance of an athiest getting elected as President.
The UK has a much healthier reaction, perhaps honed by years of violence in NI, of "a plague on all their houses". Look at the general ridicule when Tony Blair got God, even he admitted that British politics "doesn't do God".
Let people believe in any supernatural space fairies they like, but there should be no more legal protection for such beliefs than there is for belief that the earth is round, or the moon is made of green cheese.
While India is turning itself into a 21st Century superpower powered by science and innovation, Pakistan is burying its head in the sand. This sort of thinking (alongside widespread campaigns against Western concepts encompassing everything from rights for women to evolution) is crippling its economic future and giving no hope to its people that they can ever be raised out of genuine horrific poverty.
With the exception of anyone working in Pakistan's nuclear programme, the future doesn't look bright. And for the rest of us, the fact a country with these sort of people making decisions has a nuclear programme doesn't bode well at all.
Even the most censorious governments, including North Korea, appreciate the value of the InterNet ans provide access to it to approved people. This is the reason they permit connections.
If Pakistan decides to e remain in the Stone Age, so be it. Notwithstanding their governments short sightedness, there will always be ways of accessing the prohibited, it's Human Nature.
What sort of treatment would you suppose would help a poor soul who's so dazed and confused that trying to continue involves grasping at religious straw men/books/whatever?
That's exactly what belief is for. Give explanations where none are to be had. Make stuff up--nobody is going to be able to disprove it anyway--, fill the void, and live happily ever after.
What other crutch for the ``mentally impaired'' would you offer? ``Treatment''? Pills? Straitjackets? Electroshocks? What?
The real blasphemy is ignoring or advising against using God's gift of intelligence to us all individually.
The real blasphemy is believing in some words written by some person or persons, instead of believing in what "God" wrote in the world around us, instead of believing in direct observation.
@Fatman: As far as I can tell, over there in the former colonies you've got rid of religion *officially* in government by virtue of the relevant amendment.. That said, it still sounds as though religion has, if anything, a greater influence there than here, where bishops still sit in the House of Lords.
That said, as a religious person myself, albeit not a 'Person of the Book', I do get to experience the generalised contempt that policies and decisions like this tend to elicit from people who don't want to bother distinguishing one set of beliefs from another.
I have to agree with C. P. Cosgrove that it's not helpful to mock a deeply held belief, although I know this is a contentious point with those who think religion must be mocked precisely to disprove that principle. There again, it's a strong principle of mine that my religious rules - such as they are - are my concern, and conversely that other people's aren't.
I have to support the Draw Mohammed campaign, because it's necessary to demonstrate one's freedom from rules that don't apply when - and only when - someone tries to apply them wrongly. But when in Rome, they say - and if the government of Pakistan choose to implement a dubious ban, then it's for Pakistanis to overturn it if they wish.
OK - George W. Bush (USA) is a devout follower of alcohol, cocaine and a fictitious diety. Tony Blair (UK) is a follower of a fictitious diety. John Howard (Australia) is a follower of a fictitious diety. Jospeh Stalin was a follower of a fictitious diety. Adolf Hitler was a follower of a fictitious diety.
And now all these followers of a fictious diety in Pakistan, want to stop anyone having any contrary opinions or access to anything or contacting anyone else that contradicts their opinions.
Sectarian violence only occurs where sects try to rule the roost, through fear, intimidation, shaming and guilt..
Hence practice intolerance of sects.
No silly deities.
No silly followers - or make that no malicious, kniving, manipulative, decietful, warmongering, profiteering followers.
..is that their de-facto government, the Inter-Services-Intelligence Agency (ISI) secretly supplies the "Taleban" with weapons, supplies and intelligence. They are hosting "Taleban" leaders in Pakistan and try to use them to control Afghanistan. ISI is living under the impression that India might overrun Pakistan in a future war and Afghanistan would be an area of retreat and protracted conflict with India in the future for the Pakistanis and their "Taleban" allies.
This relationship was developed during the time of the war against the soviets occupiers.
In reality, western soldiers die because of the nasty double-dealing of the Pakistanis. If you think you know the meaning of "double-cross", think again.
In my opinion, Pakistan would be a great country, if it wasn't for the religion and the extremists.
They give the people, the country a bad name.
I think there's a lot of good in the Islamic religion, but you have to admit that there must be something fundamentally wrong with it when it generates such extremism where people are prepared to kill theirselves to protect the religion. Did Allah, did Mohammed really demand that from its followers?
Just about all Islamic terrorism in the west has strong links back to Pakistan.
Then look at the major terrorism problems around the world, and you'll notice that in most, Islam underpins them. And it goes hand in hand with poverty too.
It's a hugely successful stab at unifying the many tales each clan in the desert told, even if it not so much compiled a coherent story but swept everything on a big heap and called it a book. It's also, as world religions inevitably are, excellent at guiding people to do what the overlords want them to do. If the goal is to survive in the desert among desert clans of thugs and cutthroats, yes, be a muslim. It worked well enough in eleven hundred or so, and it works pretty well now, too. You don't have to be smart, exactly, to lead people. As any captain will know, you can be wrong, but you can't be indecisive. Muslims only require you to be able to recite the entire book letter perfect. It makes for simple justice, too: For every crime there's a limb or body part to be removed. When in doubt? Off with 'is 'ead! and Justice Hath Prevailed. The clan will continue to exist.
But if you want intelectual discourse, human rights, nuanced views? Look elsewhere. Even the also-won't-eat-pig neighbours will do.
Pakistan is so corrupt, right from the top where one of the leaders is known as "Mr. ten percent", because he allegedly takes 10% commission on all government projects down to the people their selves . I witnessed a Police officer taking flowers from a poor street vendor and then refusing to pay, as if the police officer had some God (ok, Allah) given right to take these things. The person he took them from was almost considerably financially worse off than the police officer.
I can't help thinking that if a massive amount of people hadn't gone all out to offend as many Muslims as possible, this reaction would not have taken place. So, facebook "protesters", think before you offend people you've never met before, there can be reactions to your actions and they may well not be those intended.
This is not to do with God being offended, this is to do with the behavior of a predominantly religious government under provocation from a large amount of people from outside their country.
If you take out the religious element you could draw paralells with the way a large amount of Americans behaved when the French vitoed their attempts to go to war at the UN security council. This resulted in French products being defacto banned in large areas of America, because Americans were offended by the actions of the French.
As I have said many times before - offending people who are different from us is not going to help them adopt our ways. Just a little tact and discression on the part of many westerners would help the adoption of democracy and elemination of corruption in their country, instead many poke fun and go all-out to offend them into becoming like us.
If all you can do is respond to jokes, twitting, even the mildest of provocations, with mouth-frothing fury and a veritable flood of death threats, then no, you bloody well won't get no respect. In fact, go back to your hidey hole and stay there. We'll put a fence around it and post guards and signs. ``Dangerous animals.''
Dialogue does not consist of pussy-footing around anything at all possibly, imaginably, impossibly, unimaginably sensitive in any way. Dialogue consists of exchanging views, and learning something from them regardless of whether you actually agree. It is supposed to foster understanding. But that doesn't go one way.
I for one refuse to be held hostage to my willingness to enter into dialogue with other people. If Americans choose to throw a temper tantrum and not buy ``french fries'', then I shrug and suggest they choke on their soggy ``freedom fries'' instead. If islamists choose to give a good impression of acute rabies and bodily assault senior citizens for some cartoons, then I hope their victims, or the police, will shoot them like the pig-dogs they show themselves to be.
Then again, some cartoons are illegal in Blighty too. Who are we to complain? Carry on then.
Surely he's just one of hundreds of prophets.
In fact, bearing in mind the sheer numbers of people called mohammed these days, there's probably hundreds of prophets with the name mohammed too.
And surely, while we're on, how can he be a prohet. A prophet forsees, but the thing he's supposed to have seen is supposed to have existed since time began.
Of course, if religion made any sense, it would be easy to pick to pieces.
I have no religion. I'm happy to draw the 'prophet' - just because it upsets a follower of Islam why should I *not* draw him? Keep your religion to yourselves, and don't threaten me because I choose a different life.
The truth about the 'prophet' was that he was a highway man. A robber. A murderer. Him and his gang used to raid merchant caravans - that's how he got wealthy and established his powerbase in Medina. Oh, and when does the Islamic calander start? With the birth of the 'prophet'? No. The Islamic calander starts when the 'prophet' creates his first army in Medina. So go figure.
Often in the West we bow-down regarding the Crusades etc. Well, the truth about the crusades were that they were in reaction to aggressive Muslim expansion into the West. That's right - many Christian empires were toppled by Islamic warfare (Byzantine, Constantinople). Infact the Muslim armies conquered as far as Spain and even into Southern France before the Crusaders were able to turn them back. Why there are so many Western apologists for this amazes me. And why is Saladin portrayed in so many films as a noble chap. He was a tactician - and is responsible for as many killings as the Western Crusaders.
And the fact that the Muslim folks in the middle east lay claim to all the land there.... Well, who lived there before they did? Accounts of history tell us that the middle east used to be a thriving community of Jews, Christians and Pagans. That is until the 'Prophet' established an army and proceeded to wipe out all unbelievers - and those that would not convert or live as slaves and pay the Islamic tax. And this still goes on today! 2010 and people still kill people because of their beliefs (or lack thereof). Fathers still kill and maim their daughters because of some crappy 'rules' written down by a crazy, deformed (yep - there are accounts of him having a deformed posture) war-monger! It's nuts. Remember not too long ago on the news? In Somalia a group of Muslim chaps buried a teenage girl upto her neck and stoned her to death. Her crime? She'd been raped and her grandmother had persuaded her to go to the local police. They put this down to sex outside of marriage and thus she was sentenced to death. That incident was 2009 I think. What kind of religion breeds people like this?
According to quite a lot of sites on the internet, there have been over 15,000 lethal attacks worldwide by Muslims - and justified by the Koran - since 9/11. There's something wrong with that. Tony Blair famously said in a speech that 'Islam is a religion of peace'. What a dogs turd. He sent our troops to war and is now peace envoy to the middle east!!!
Islam is not a progressive religion. There is no science, no art, no joy within Islam. Do as I say. Or I'll kill you.
I live in turkey and spent years in other middle east countries. I am sorry to say all of them are sliding back to stone age. It is easy to tell by the level of censorship alone and the bans on youtube, yahoo, etc. to know how bad the things are in a country. I am sure that the judges in here will ban the smae sites banned by other Islamic countries like Pakistan, Iran and Syria. After the fundamentalists came to power by money laundered from Germany and have US support, they have successfully overtook many democratic institutions and the high courts are next to go now, with the army then the democracy next. Look for the people's jamahiriya of Turkey in the future. If the leadears in these countries are talking about blasphemy, insults, etc. on islam, I could show much, very much worse comments, insults in their own websites and speeches by the leaders. After such a speech in 1955, hundreds of christians and jews were murdered, burned and raped in Istanbul. My generation, which was the next has defended secularism and democracy at great cost, like executions, burning of writers, torture, summary trials,... but the unrelenting pressure by extremists has taken its toll now and I don't have much hope for the neighboring countries either.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
