Pakistan Bans Facebook Over "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day"

[Russian_Assassin]

Ah, religion. I could rant about it but I don't want to get thrown off the topic. Maybe another time. I will say however that it is ridiculous for religion to get mixed with the government and to block the cultural progress of the people in those countries. Ok, youtube isn't cultural progress, but if they block 2 sites they may as well end up blocking the internet!

I also remember reading somewhere that while we were still busy burning witches and waging holy wars, the people in the middle east were more advanced (scientifically and culturally) and were laughing at us. Nowadays however while "the rest" of the world moved on and created stable and 'free' societies, the middle east downgraded to a less advanced kind of society, one ruled mostly by RELIGION and all the crap it brings with it (like everyone's favorite bashing figure, el terroristas!). Ironic isn't it? IT ISN'T! because that's not what irony is!

Ok, I know that my points are flawed in some ways, but I just wanted to say my opinion on this matter.

 

[imp-caretaker]

I just say think before drawing .. seriously

 

[Superbeast]

The case of Theo van Gogh is, in my opinion, the main reason why this movement should be allowed to continue uncensored. A man who was killed (I believe the terminology was 'slaughtered like a lamb') for trying to highlight social and moral injustices in regions practising Islam.

Yeah, and the people who killed him should (were they? I don't know) be on trial for murder, like any other criminal.

Sure, drawing Mohammed is tasteless, but it's the only way that we can make the violent element take notice. If enough people rise up against the fear of extremism, then we can overpower it, and perhaps stop people like Van Gogh from being singled out and executed again.

Take notice of what?

That the West intentionally riles up Muslims?

How was drawing a load of offensive images, 6 years after Theo Van Gogh and 5 after the Norwegian Cartoons (iirc) "standing up against extremism"? If it was a statement against extremism, it would have been made then. Not now.

Hell, the best statement against extremism was on 8/9th July in London, when everybody went back to work and travelled on public transport, and went on the news saying "No. We will not be threatened or intimidated. We survived the blitz, this is nothing. They can try, but they won't succeed".

That sends a far better message than insulting the entirety of Muslims, and affirming to moderates that the West is disrespectful of Islam, and that the extremists may have a bit of a point after all. That is all this "freedom of speech" campaign has done. Sure, you had a right to do it - but do you really think it is going to have been effective at countering extremism?

The detractors in this thread fail to realise that freedom of speech gives us the right to criticise others- not necessarily out of spite, but so that we can voice an opinion, and address social ills. The moment we make concessions (Saying, for example, that Islam is exempt from criticism), that right gets destroyed.

No one is saying Islam should be exempt from criticism, nor that freedom of speech doesn't give you the right to criticise.

The point is, why criticise Islam as a whole (1/6 of the world's population) because of what a minority of that religion believes and acts upon? How was anything about this day targeted at extremism, as opposed to Islam as a whole?

Also, just because you have the right to be an arse to someone, doesn't mean you should express that right.

 

[chaos order]

Ah, religion. I could rant about it but I don't want to get thrown off the topic. Maybe another time. I will say however that it is ridiculous for religion to get mixed with the government and to block the cultural progress of the people in those countries. Ok, youtube isn't cultural progress, but if they block 2 sites they may as well end up blocking the internet!

I also remember reading somewhere that while we were still busy burning witches and waging holy wars, the people in the middle east were more advanced (scientifically and culturally) and were laughing at us. Nowadays however while "the rest" of the world moved on and created stable and 'free' societies, the middle east downgraded to a less advanced kind of society, one ruled mostly by RELIGION and all the crap it brings with it (like everyone's favorite bashing figure, el terroristas!). Ironic isn't it? IT ISN'T! because that's not what irony is!

Ok, I know that my points are flawed in some ways, but I just wanted to say my opinion on this matter.

the reason as to why the islamic sector of the world didnt pick up with the west was because more and more radicals getting more and more power. ITs not the religion it self that is to blame but rather radicals who interpret the religion in a way to justify their actions. islam encourages education( ill probably get flamed for this ) in that it encourages those who follow the religion to learn more about the world. many people take their understanding of the muslim faith based on the media, which is a little biased(especially fox).

 

[Superbeast]

There's still a difference between respecting the person who's made a choice you don't agree with and respecting the choice they have made.

But being disrespectful towards that choice is being disrespectful to the person for having made that choice. The two are very intrinsically linked.

I want to know for what reason I'm supposed to respect someones choice of what fantasy character they've "chosen" to worship. I don't respect stupidity in other forms, so why should I here?

Religious people are not idiots. They're simply misguided.

You just said it was stupidity, implying that they are indeed idiots. But what makes it misguided? Your opinion. Why is your opinion more valid than theirs?

 

[Russian_Assassin]

the reason as to why the islamic sector of the world didnt pick up with the west was because more and more radicals getting more and more power. ITs not the religion it self that is to blame but rather radicals who interpret the religion in a way to justify their actions. islam encourages education( ill probably get flamed for this ) in that it encourages those who follow the religion to learn more about the world. many people take their understanding of the muslim faith based on the media, which is a little biased(especially fox).

I was expecting an angry response to my post, glad you proved me wrong Well, I find religion a silly thing to use as a scapegoat for your actions. I don't think those countries, or to be more precise the radicals, can change their way of thinking easily, just as we can't change ours. Humans really are annoying animals (and lazy, procrastinating idiots, who waste time on forums instead of studying! Oh wait, that's just me...).

 

[chaos order]

the reason as to why the islamic sector of the world didnt pick up with the west was because more and more radicals getting more and more power. ITs not the religion it self that is to blame but rather radicals who interpret the religion in a way to justify their actions. islam encourages education( ill probably get flamed for this ) in that it encourages those who follow the religion to learn more about the world. many people take their understanding of the muslim faith based on the media, which is a little biased(especially fox).

I was expecting an angry response to my post, glad you proved me wrong Well, I find religion a silly thing to use as a scapegoat for your actions. I don't think those countries, or to be more precise the radicals, can change their way of thinking easily, just as we can't change ours. Humans really are annoying animals (and lazy, procrastinating idiots, who waste time on forums instead of studying! Oh wait, that's just me...).

well then its you quarrel with radicals who change islam to suit their needs rather than muslims in general (btw i agree humans are lazy, and i also should be studying but im on the forum too!)

 

[JaredXE]

I'll take a risk of being banned here and call you ignorant. You hide behind "Freedom of Speech" to be religiously ignorant.

South Park is just designed to piss people off and amuse people who small minds who are easily amused.

'Hide Behind'? No, I just put forward that Freedom of Speech is more important(and useful) than religion is. You call me religiously ignorant, well you're wrong. I'm religiously intolerant. There's a difference. And obviously if you can't see the social commentary that South Park has given over the years, and just believe that the show is only intended to piss people off, then you must be the person with a 'small mind'. It's plain to see that to you, religion is sacrosanct to the point that a person's right to criticise and say what they want, 'Hiding' behind Freedom of Speech as you put it, is less important than unprovable mythology. That we should abridge ourselves to spare the feelings of others so insecure in their own faith that any instance of mockery is cause for rioting and death threats.

Do muslims have the right to be annoyed and voice their opinions? Hell yes, but then thay also have the ABILITY, the CHOICE to ignore whatever it is that is offending them and just simply not pay attention to what OTHER PEOPLE DO that in no way affects them unless they want it to. Them being offended does not afford them the right to NOT be offended. I can go out on the streets and call out the Pope as a "hateful, spiteful Nazi who hides child molestors and claims that he is infallable", and while true, that's going to offend some catholics.......so?

Remember kids, Freedom of Religion means freedom to worship whatever you want, but since it IS a choice on your part, you have to take the consequences of your choices.

 

[facaldo]

I had been banned from Facebook and my account had been disabled a night before Facebook was banned in Pakistan. Before all this happened, I visited the blasphemous page ?Draw Muhammad Day? and the content on the page hurt me badly.

Once again a certain group of westerners called it the ?freedom of expression? and went on to show extremism ? something they always verbally disassociate themselves from.

As a response to this lunacy, I thought it best to find out how they respond to others? right of freedom of expression ? I created an Adolf Hitler page right away and it read, ?To all those who think they can ridicule Islam in the name of freedom of expression and yet punish those who speak of the genius of Hitler?.

The comment on the wall read, ?Let?s hit them where it hurts them the most?. Further I added some photos of the Fuhrer, Nazi Party and the Italian Footballer Paolo Di Canio who was banned and fined by FIFA two years ago for performing the ?controversial? Roman Salute which according to him gave him a sense of belonging to his people.

Within an hour tens of people joined the Hitler page which was named ?H | T L E R?. The very next time I tried to log in I found out that my profile had been disabled for ?violation of Facebook Regulations?.

 

[chaos order]

I'll take a risk of being banned here and call you ignorant. You hide behind "Freedom of Speech" to be religiously ignorant.

South Park is just designed to piss people off and amuse people who small minds who are easily amused.

'Hide Behind'? No, I just put forward that Freedom of Speech is more important(and useful) than religion is. You call me religiously ignorant, well you're wrong. I'm religiously intolerant. There's a difference. And obviously if you can't see the social commentary that South Park has given over the years, and just believe that the show is only intended to piss people off, then you must be the person with a 'small mind'. It's plain to see that to you, religion is sacrosanct to the point that a person's right to criticise and say what they want, 'Hiding' behind Freedom of Speech as you put it, is less important than unprovable mythology. That we should abridge ourselves to spare the feelings of others so insecure in their own faith that any instance of mockery is cause for rioting and death threats.

Do muslims have the right to be annoyed and voice their opinions? Hell yes, but then thay also have the ABILITY, the CHOICE to ignore whatever it is that is offending them and just simply not pay attention to what OTHER PEOPLE DO that in no way affects them unless they want it to. Them being offended does not afford them the right to NOT be offended. I can go out on the streets and call out the Pope as a "hateful, spiteful Nazi who hides child molestors and claims that he is infallable", and while true, that's going to offend some catholics.......so?

Remember kids, Freedom of Religion means freedom to worship whatever you want, but since it IS a choice on your part, you have to take the consequences of your choices.

you make it sound like choosing a religion is a bad thing, in that if you choose a religion your going to be ridiculed for it. i find alot of people who say religion is bad focus only on the negative aspects of it, and yes im not gonna deny that there have been radical people who use religion as a weapon to bring people to their cause, but today there are much more moderate religious people than there are fundamentals who have done a great many tbhings to further society.

 

[facaldo]

Hi Saad,

After reviewing your situation, we have determined that your violated our Statement of Rights and Responsibilities. One of Facebook?s main priorities is the comfort and safety of our users.

We do not tolerate hate speech. Targeting people based on their race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, or disease is a serious violation of our standards and has resulted in the permanent loss of your account.

We will not be able to reactivate your account for any reason. This decision is final.

Kimmie
User Operations,
Facebook

 

[facaldo]

Now how is it that Hitler is termed as the most evil person in the history of mankind while those that bomb Muslims, commit heinous crimes in their countries, ridicule their Prophet and Quran and as a result hurt the sentiments of 1.2 billion Muslims are hailed as heroes? And I wonder why the victims of Holocaust are more important than victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Despite the protest of a large number of Muslims, Facebook has not removed the blasphemous page from the website.

According the statement issued by Facebook their policy is to withhold such content in countries where it is controversial. The statement specifically says that we do not remove Nazi content from Facebook because it is illegal only in a few countries. As two-faced statements go, this one takes the prize. Perhaps before issuing the statement the Facebook did not realise that words like ?Adolf Hitler?, ?Sieg Heil? and ?Nazi? are not allowed to be used on Facebook to create new pages.

And if all this and the removal of Hitler page and the permanent deactivation of my profile isn?t enough, here is a testament to Facebook?s vile hypocrisy. The statement issued by Facebook on 20 May says, ?We strongly believe that Facebook users have the freedom to express their opinions, and we don?t typically take down content, groups or pages that speak out against countries, religions, political entities, or ideas.?

While, in another instance, Facebook replied me in entirely different way. Excerpt and screenshot is given above.

 

[facaldo]

Now these two conflicting statements speak volumes about the discrimination by the Facebook. It simply means that Facebook through its official statement to global media wants the world to believe that they are the torchbearers of freedom of expression and allow everyone to speak their minds out. On the other hand the face that individuals like me get to see is a much horrible one. It talks about hate and intolerance and all forms of so-called equality and unshakable resolve. While Facebook is portraying itself as the silent and innocent onlooker for the entire world, I wonder what gives them the right to remove a major chunk of my life from the web.

I don?t think Facebook should come up with any clarification statements for the Muslim world over what happened. It is clearer than crystal that as long as we are labelled as extremists, we are not going to enjoy the equal rights in this world. And those that are trying to play God love to label us that. While reporting the Facebook ban in Pakistan in different articles, guardian.co.uk mentions the brutality of Pakistan Army in Swat while Yahoo thinks it?s necessary to unveil Al-Qaida?s plans of attacks on Danish and Dutch football teams. It is a blatant attempt to criticize Pakistan for placing the ban, link the country to extremism and terrorism and thereby justifying this sacrilegious act of Facebook users.

 

[facaldo]

This post is produced to examine the equality of ?Freedom of Expression? for multiple group of religions in the world, and how one organization sees it. ProPakistani doesn?t support hatred content against any religion, race or any other specific group of people based on any ideology.

 

[JaredXE]

you make it sound like choosing a religion is a bad thing, in that if you choose a religion your going to be ridiculed for it. i find alot of people who say religion is bad focus only on the negative aspects of it, and yes im not gonna deny that there have been radical people who use religion as a weapon to bring people to their cause, but today there are much more moderate religious people than there are fundamentals who have done a great many tbhings to further society.

The problem is the inherent attitude difference between moderates and extremists. A moderate, by definition and nature, is a more composed and thoughtful person who balances between extremes. An extremist however is so damned fervent and sure that they are right, that they go to any lengths to ensure that their way is the dominant way.

Which of those two seems to be the ones that are in charge? And this is not about Islam either. Extremists of every religion work to ensure that they can influence the world around them so that their path comes out on top. Which is why theological governments tend to be in the extreme, because only the extremists have that drive to empower their religion. NO theocracy I have heard of allowed multiple faiths to co-exist in any way that another religion could co-opt the populace. The closest would be the ancient Egyptians that would maybe allow their conquered slaves to hold onto their religious beliefs, but the general populace still had to follow one faith.

Basically, it comes down to the public face of religions, and the acts of extremists tend to destroy any good that a certain faith has done.

 

[chaos order]

you make it sound like choosing a religion is a bad thing, in that if you choose a religion your going to be ridiculed for it. i find alot of people who say religion is bad focus only on the negative aspects of it, and yes im not gonna deny that there have been radical people who use religion as a weapon to bring people to their cause, but today there are much more moderate religious people than there are fundamentals who have done a great many tbhings to further society.

The problem is the inherent attitude difference between moderates and extremists. A moderate, by definition and nature, is a more composed and thoughtful person who balances between extremes. An extremist however is so damned fervent and sure that they are right, that they go to any lengths to ensure that their way is the dominant way.

Which of those two seems to be the ones that are in charge? And this is not about Islam either. Extremists of every religion work to ensure that they can influence the world around them so that their path comes out on top. Which is why theological governments tend to be in the extreme, because only the extremists have that drive to empower their religion. NO theocracy I have heard of allowed multiple faiths to co-exist in any way that another religion could co-opt the populace. The closest would be the ancient Egyptians that would maybe allow their conquered slaves to hold onto their religious beliefs, but the general populace still had to follow one faith.

Basically, it comes down to the public face of religions, and the acts of extremists tend to destroy any good that a certain faith has done.

actually the muslim empire allowed everyone to keep their faiths especially jews and christians they just had to pay a tax. and that tax was implemented so that they would have to take part in the zakat which is one of the 5 pillars of islam in which one has to give a small portion of their earnings to charity. On another note i agree the modern theological governments dont work because of their extremists tendencies and i agree the religion should not be a part of government, i just dont like how this page is just blatantly insulting muslims in general rather than actually insulting the extremists

 

[Polock]

I'll take a risk of being banned here and call you ignorant. You hide behind "Freedom of Speech" to be religiously ignorant.

South Park is just designed to piss people off and amuse people who small minds who are easily amused.

'Hide Behind'? No, I just put forward that Freedom of Speech is more important(and useful) than religion is. You call me religiously ignorant, well you're wrong. I'm religiously intolerant. There's a difference. And obviously if you can't see the social commentary that South Park has given over the years, and just believe that the show is only intended to piss people off, then you must be the person with a 'small mind'. It's plain to see that to you, religion is sacrosanct to the point that a person's right to criticise and say what they want, 'Hiding' behind Freedom of Speech as you put it, is less important than unprovable mythology. That we should abridge ourselves to spare the feelings of others so insecure in their own faith that any instance of mockery is cause for rioting and death threats.

Do muslims have the right to be annoyed and voice their opinions? Hell yes, but then thay also have the ABILITY, the CHOICE to ignore whatever it is that is offending them and just simply not pay attention to what OTHER PEOPLE DO that in no way affects them unless they want it to. Them being offended does not afford them the right to NOT be offended. I can go out on the streets and call out the Pope as a "hateful, spiteful Nazi who hides child molestors and claims that he is infallable", and while true, that's going to offend some catholics.......so?

Remember kids, Freedom of Religion means freedom to worship whatever you want, but since it IS a choice on your part, you have to take the consequences of your choices.

Yeah but see what your not understanding here is the "culture" devide. I'm assuming your American, like me. You are used to real-life trolls and internet trolls and know that its probably best to just ignore what pisses you off because it will always be there and etc etc.

To those who are Muslim or any other religion in a different part of the world; they grow up in a totally different world and taught totally different things. Religion is a huge part of their lives, and it may seem silly to you, but to them its incredibly important. You can't just toss them aside either, they are human beings like you and me, and to turn away from anybody simply because of religious affliation is also silly.

To quote you, yes Muslim's have the CHOICE and ABILITY to ignore these things, and I'm sure some do, but when their faith is so intwined in their day to day lives its a lot less "LOL MUSLIMS ARE SUCH TROLL BAIT" and more, seriously? Offensive.

 

[Phoenixlight]

Well the scientoligists did complain a lot. And threatened to sue. Again.

I really hate scientologists

 

[Zihua]

Now how is it that Hitler is termed as the most evil person in the history of mankind while those that bomb Muslims, commit heinous crimes in their countries, ridicule their Prophet and Quran and as a result hurt the sentiments of 1.2 billion Muslims are hailed as heroes?

Did he just compare US/UK/European soldiers to Nazis? Without being suspended for it?

Listen moron, nobody in the west will be upset that your Facebook page was banned because of your nazi sympathies. You are a zealot.

 

[GamingAwesome1]

I don't understand why people are so bothered by the fact that drawing Mohammed is bad in the Islam religion.

When in your daily life would you ever be actually hindered by the inability to draw him.

Just leave them be and respect their beliefs.