Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

YouTube Blocked In Pakistan

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the differential-fragility dept.

Censorship 299

kokoko1 submits this snippet from The Telegraph, which reports that Facebook isn't alone — now YouTube, too, is being censored in Pakistan. "The blocking of YouTube comes a day after a Pakistani court blocked Facebook amid a growing row over a competition on the social networking website to design cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad." Update: 05/20 18:58 GMT by T : According to an anonymous reader, Wikipedia and Flickr are out, too.
Update: 05/21 12:11 GMT by KD : And now add Twitter to the blocked list. This post claims that more than 1,000 sites are being blocked in Pakistan.

cancel ×

299 comments

smells like dissent (1, Flamebait)

DeadJesusRodeo (1813846) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283084)

A handy excuse to cut off portals of dissent. Perhaps they’ll deny access to Twitter because of ascii depictions next. Isn’t suppression fun? I bet it’s even more fun with armed drones in your airspace. Wake me, when it all blows up because it will.

Re:smells like dissent (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283216)

If they managed to do an ascii depiction with the character limit, I'd be impressed.

Re:smells like dissent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32283318)

CO>|-

Left to Right:
Turban, head, beard, arms, body, legs.

Re:smells like dissent (1)

kdemetter (965669) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284226)

great , now they will ban slashdot.

Re:smells like dissent (2, Insightful)

History's Coming To (1059484) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284134)

O-
Now if folk's wanted to be offensive they could claim otherwise. I'm not. It's Dave.

Re:smells like dissent (1)

Dishevel (1105119) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284160)

If they managed to do an ascii depiction with the character limit, I'd be impressed.

M u h a m m a d S U C K S 8=====D

Self-limiting (1)

Kell Bengal (711123) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283090)

This is a self-limiting problem. Once they block enough of the internet, people who have become habituated on it will push for change.

Re:Self-limiting (5, Insightful)

cytoman (792326) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283124)

In a poor country with only a fraction of the people being affected by blocking the internet, the critical mass for any push for change is absent.

Re:Self-limiting (2, Funny)

hguorbray (967940) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283406)

and nothing of value was lost...

I'm just sayin'

Re:Self-limiting (1)

Captain Splendid (673276) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283506)

and nothing of value was lost...

I'd love to share your sentiment, but since we're talking about a nuclear power, this is another troubling development.

Re:Self-limiting (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283508)

Exactly, who gives a shit?

Re:Self-limiting (3, Interesting)

Luckyo (1726890) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284018)

The non-overly religious pakistani that WE - the westerners, should very, very much care about. Because they are the only thing that stands between nukes and religious fanatics.

If that isn't a reason enough for anyone living in the West, I don't know what could possibly be one.

Re:Self-limiting (2, Insightful)

v1 (525388) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283150)

ya, just look a China for example. (and good thing for them they have a lot more people)

Re:Self-limiting (1)

Trent Hawkins (1093109) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283558)

It's a shame that their version of Obama will actually be a Muslim communist that will kill the elderly.

Maybe... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32283108)

It's time for some of these fucking people to stand up to their governments and stop being fucking pussies like the Australians..

Re:Maybe... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32283188)

WORD!

Re:Maybe... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32283838)

Fuck you. Plenty of people are standing up but no fucker is listening. Politicians do as the highest bidder desires or whatever serves their self interest the most. Most voters are too fucking brain dead to make informed intelligent votes or can't see past their next mortgage repayment or social security check. Don't sit there and think your country is any different. Haven't you been watching what happens when people really start to push back? You might want to google red shirt protest or Tiananmen square. Are you willing to stand there while your government directs your defence force to shoot you for your "protection"?

Re:Maybe... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32284280)

Um... red shirts have nothing to do with people standing up to a government. The clash in Thailand is between 2 political factions who would not give a second thought to cause disruption and damage if it served their agendas. The red/yellow shirts aren't even real protesters. They are rent-a-mob who get paid to be there.

Muhammad (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32283164)

>-|-O

Muhammad's asshole (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32283532)

=O=

Re:Muhammad's asshole (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32283800)

In the words of Achmed the dead terrorist [youtube.com] , I WILL KILL YOU.

Re:Muhammad (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32284478)

I'm thinking more like:
(_8(|)

(Doh!)

The problem (3, Interesting)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283170)

This is great that people are pushing to force governments to drop their censorship. But it's not going to work, at least, not in the short term. The reason? Pakistan will be able to find at least a few people or companies that will build local versions of social networking sites, search engines, etc. that comply with their censorship requests. It's how capitalism works, only the government is saying "we've made you a captive market if you only play by our rules".

Ultimately censorship will be killed by end to end encryption and onion routing.

Re:The problem (1)

Feyshtey (1523799) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283426)

Ultimately censorship will be killed by end to end encryption and onion routing.

If they can censor the type of information that passes within their borders, what makes you think they cant control the method by which it is transfered?

Re:The problem (2, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283490)

How? Disallow every kind of encrypted traffic and deep inspect everything else? How much of your GDP are you willing to throw at a futile attempt to hold back the ocean with a broom?

Re:The problem (2, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283522)

How much of your GDP are you willing to throw at a futile attempt to hold back the ocean with a broom?

Have you looked at North Korea lately?

Re:The problem (1)

Feyshtey (1523799) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283634)

The technology isnt exactly rocket science. It's very basic network administration.

Do I recognize this packet? Yes? Allowed.
Do I recognize this packet? No? Dropped.

Re:The problem (4, Informative)

krkhan (1071096) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283656)

I am in Pakistan right now and find the whole situation amusing. Perhaps they should block queries to root name servers as well since ICANN are not blocking the queries to zones that can resolve blasphemous domains. Yeah. That would service the Internet *right*!

Re:The problem (1)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283880)

But can they do it without resorting to outsourcing to India? Maybe they can trade Kashmir for a domestic pressure-release valve?

Re:The problem (1)

Thomasje (709120) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284466)

Ultimately censorship will be killed by end to end encryption and onion routing.

I'm sure any government that is serious about censorship will eventually also ban encryption, or at least restrict it to only algorithms that they have a back door to. Such a ban is easy to enforce by forcing ISPs to pass only government-whitelisted protocols and nothing else.

Refreshing (0, Flamebait)

Un pobre guey (593801) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283174)

It is refreshing to learn that the US is not the only country governed by corrupt, ignorant, simple-minded, exploitative religious fanatics. A bit disconcerting, but refreshing nonetheless.

Re:Refreshing (1)

fusiongyro (55524) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283366)

Hey, at least we can still speak our minds.

Re:Refreshing (1)

Un pobre guey (593801) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283460)

Gradually being eroded. Try going to Texas and badmouthing beef in public.

Re:Refreshing (1)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283538)

Try making a valid comparison. Has the State of Texas shuttered any websites condemning beef?

Re:Refreshing (1)

Un pobre guey (593801) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283590)

Such websites would be illegal in Texas, I don't know whether they have or even can shut them down. I see you are claiming that Pakistan's actions are far worse, and I agree that they are. I make the additional point that similar forces are eroding our rights here at home. Our only consolation is that it is much more difficult for them here, but they are gradually changing our laws to treat us just like any other Third World vassals.

Re:Refreshing (2, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283674)

Such websites would be illegal in Texas

Citation needed.

Re:Refreshing (4, Insightful)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283446)

I find that a lot of these foreign developing countries that seem to be oppressive and support censorship are usually pretty much just as bad as any developed nation.

I mean, what with Australia airports checking for porn, US Military blocking the Press with the Wikileaks video, Germany and its whole Anti-Nazi thing. Each country has its quirks, we seem so quick to condemn Pakistan for blocking a web site when we don't even have our own house in order.

BULLSHIT!! MOD THIS SHIT DOWN (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32284388)

The US Military haven't blocked anyone or anything because the wikileaks video. Either you just made it up, or got some bad info. In any case, it's up to you to provide an example to substantiate this wild claim.

Otherwise, I just completely called you out on your bullshit and destroyed you. 1-0.

Re:Refreshing (2, Insightful)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283676)

The more religion/superstition is questioned via the internet, the more provocative negative responses from superstitionists will result.

This is good. Every opportunity to expose foolish nonsense is to be exploited.

Mohammed (4, Insightful)

Vinegar Joe (998110) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283210)

(((:~(>

Filter error: Your comment looks too much like ascii art.

Well duh!

Re:Mohammed (4, Funny)

Rallias Ubernerd (1760460) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283374)

hmm (((:~>>>>>> i fixed it for you

Re:Mohammed (1)

tekrat (242117) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283612)

Pretty good. I think I'll change my sig right now....

Re:Mohammed (1)

Jeng (926980) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283870)

There are many people named Mohammed. It is an extremely common name, if its not labeled as the Prophet Mohamed I don't see how they can complain.
 

Re:Mohammed (1)

chooks (71012) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283946)

I'm waiting for the religious restaurant angle:

  • Jesus Crisps: If they had these 2000 years ago, someone might not have been betrayed!
  • The Mo-hammed: delicious sandwich with extra lean and tasty ham! Try it with a side of Jesus Crisps!

etc...etc...

Muslims in Saudi and other places (2, Interesting)

CSHARP123 (904951) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283238)

Facebook is only banned in Pakistan, not in Saudi Arabia or India (I think second largest muslim population) or Indonesia. Some muslim countries may not care I guess.

Re:Muslims in Saudi and other places (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32283512)

India is a democratic country. I dont think banning will happen like in US or other places. You can expect the same kind of crap as in US like politicians appeasing muslims for the sake of being politically correct and may be votes. But I wouldn't compare India with Saudi and Indonesia.

Re:Muslims in Saudi and other places (1)

Vinegar Joe (998110) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283542)

They have no problem with Goatse.cx either.

Re:Muslims in Saudi and other places (3, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283992)

Pakistan has a problem in that they are more of a democracy, and more liberal politically, thus they allow the radicals who are too radical for other countries. For example, if someone named (randomly) "Osama Bin Ladin" called for vast changes in the Saudi Arabian government based on muslim principles, he might find it needful to flee the country. However, in Pakistan that sort of thing is allowed. They've thus become a magnet for radical types.

Saudi Arabia in many ways has a more secular government, but it is a dictatorship. They don't care so much about Mohammad drawings, but do care about criticisms of the state.

Ban /. (4, Funny)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283256)

O
  / ^ \
  * | -- Mohammad Carrying a bomb
      ^
    / \

Perhaps now, Pakistan will ban /. and we can stop hearing about stupid Pakistani Muslims who get offended of stick drawings.

Re:Ban /. (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283284)

aww crap, stripping characters fubard my drawing .Oh well, you get the point

Re:Ban /. (0, Troll)

e2d2 (115622) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283394)

Thankfully we have that freedom to be an asshole, otherwise we may have to be friendly. And we can't have that, people getting along understanding each other's views and disagreeing in a civil manner. Nah we gotta fist-fuck you with assholish behavior to show you how wrong you are.

Re:Ban /. (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284118)

Well, when people are willing to load themselves up with explosives and kill people for being anything other than ... you know ... INFIDELS ... then yeah, if the worst we do back is a tad assholish then ... so be it.

Re:Ban /. (1)

Dr. Manhattan (29720) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284416)

And we can't have that, people getting along understanding each other's views and disagreeing in a civil manner.

Um, issuing - and carrying out - death threats is not "disagreeing in a civil manner". If they aren't going to play by the rules of civilized discourse, why should we? At least we won't kill anybody. We'll just mock them [youtube.com] .

Re:Ban /. (3, Funny)

Naturalis Philosopho (1160697) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284462)

And we can't have that, people getting along understanding each other's views and disagreeing in a civil manner. Nah we gotta fist-fuck you with assholish behavior to show you how wrong you are.

And let me tell you how glad I am that we can keep our conversation on such a civil level when disagreeing.

Infidel !!! (0, Offtopic)

tekrat (242117) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283414)

I Keeeeel You! Ahhalalalalalaalallalala!

Re:Ban /. (2, Interesting)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283472)


      O
    / ^ \
    * | -- Mohammad Carrying a bomb
      ^
    _/ \_

FTFY.
And if someone is more talented than me and the OP, please add a beard ---> #

Finally someone gets the idea (1)

Rallias Ubernerd (1760460) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283262)

Now all they have left is addictinggames.com and interactive buddy

In related news... (4, Funny)

cytoman (792326) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283334)

[snark]...blocking the internet ultimately resulted in such an increase in work productivity that Pakistan shot to the top of the list of developed countries in record time! [/snark]

Re:In related news... (2, Informative)

Hulleye (126367) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283722)

ISPAK [ispak.com.pk] announced they noticed a decrease in internet traffic by approximately 20-25% [independent.co.uk] after the ban

Re:In related news... (4, Funny)

E IS mC(Square) (721736) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284212)

Seems a lot of farms are drying up on facebook.

They don't even understand the history (1)

Lucas123 (935744) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283352)

These radicals think depictions of Muhammad are disallowed out of respect, but in actuality it has to do with the same principles found in Christianity: Do not make idols for worship. Ergo, none of the profits are supposed to be immortalized through depictions. And, wouldn't you think the prophets themselves would care more about human life than a stupid image of themselves -- especially when people are completely misunderstanding the scriptural context.

Re:They don't even understand the history (2, Interesting)

toriver (11308) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283410)

The funny thing is that "old-timer" Protestants often destroyed or vandalized Catholic paintings and statues precisely for the same reason: They were considered examples of idolatry. Just go to e.g. Malta and see the faceless statues in some of the old churches there.

Re:They don't even understand the history (1)

Bing Tsher E (943915) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283482)

That happened right in the UK. You don't have to go off in any distance to find it.

Re:They don't even understand the history (1)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283548)

The UK is pretty far from the USA.

Re:They don't even understand the history (4, Informative)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283554)

Except that this isn't a principle that started when the religion was founded, the whole anti-depiction thing only started about 2 or 3 hundred years ago. The religion itself is older, and has depictions of Muhammed.

Re:They don't even understand the history (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32283852)

The religion itself is older, and has depictions of Muhammed.

Way to go. Now they are going to build a time machine to go back in time to kill their ancestors for their blasphemous ways.

Shades of the Streisand effect (1)

J'raxis (248192) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283390)

Well, that's sure to make what started as a silly Facebook joke become international news, isn't it.

Why, oh why... (1)

Jawnn (445279) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283436)

... do religious fanatics get so wound up over the behavior of people who do no share their beliefs? Yes, I know that there are some who genuinely believe that they are "called" to convert the infidel or, as the Christians put it, "save" the unbeliever, but where do they get the idea that it makes sense, any kind of sense, to try and force this on others? If you want to believe that the old man in the sky favors Islam, fine. If you believe he smiles on you when you deny yourself meat on Friday (yes, dating myself), fine. Just get on with your superstition and leave the rest of us alone. M'kay? If want to draw a picture of one of your religious figures, it does not affect you at all, unless you look at it, and that act would be your choice, and thus, not my concern. Deal with it.

Re:Why, oh why... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32284188)

You're expecting rational behavior regarding what is an entirely irrational human endeavor? Consider your own rationality when you answer.

flcikr out, wikipedia still working (2, Informative)

Hulleye (126367) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283452)

Just confirming that Flickr is indeed blocked. Trying to access the site gives a "This Site is Restricted" msg. Wikipedia on the other hand seems to be working just fine.

They should block electricity while they're at it (1)

DeafDumbBlind (264205) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283456)

Skip the middle man.

Umm... and where will it end? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283462)

So they want to block every page that could remotely even as much as talk about this? Good effing luck! Cut the international lines, anything short of that won't do it.

Its Him (0, Offtopic)

Rallias Ubernerd (1760460) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283470)

:-### Its him!!! Oh darn. Slashdot dosn't support unicode.

Re:Its Him (1)

Thraxy (1782662) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284078)

I read "Slashdot doesn't support UNICORN" the first time. I was outraged and almost blocked Slashdot!

religion FAIL (4, Insightful)

corbettw (214229) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283476)

How is killing people or even just protesting over a drawing not equating the subject of the drawing to godhood? In other words, these idiots have turned Mohammad into an idol by their actions and words, and so are violating the very law they seek to enforce on others.

That counts as one big FAIL in my book.

Re:religion FAIL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32283574)

"Fail" is not a noun.

Re:religion FAIL (0)

tekrat (242117) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284180)

Fail is not a noun it's an acronym:

Forcefully
Absorb
Illiterate
Lemmings

Which is the basis of all religion.

Re:religion FAIL (5, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283616)

In other words, these idiots have turned Mohammad into an idol by their actions and words, and so are violating the very law they seek to enforce on others.

I am not an expert on the Islamic faith, but I rather suspect they turned their backs on Mohammad when they started blowing up women and children.

Re:religion FAIL (1)

E IS mC(Square) (721736) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284298)

Correction. you forgot "=" sign.

Religion = FAIL

New Internet Meme !!! (0, Troll)

tekrat (242117) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283524)

So, let's start posting pictures of Mohammad (or a guy in a Bear Suit), on EVERY WEB SITE, as well as on our personal blogs, email signatures, tweets, SMS messages, business cards, everything. If we plastered the entire world with images of Mohommad, then the crazy-ass krackers out in the hot desert will either give-up and change their ways, or block everything, go back to living in caves, and not get anywhere near western media.

Either way, we win. They can't blow us all up with their non-working gasoline car-bombs. Or their non-working underwear bombs. There have to be more reasonable people in the world than radicals, otherwise we would have gone extinct long ago. There's more of us than there are of them.

Re:New Internet Meme !!! (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284438)

Did Mohammed wear a turbin? A simple smiley face could be Muhammed. And since Muslims consider Jesus to be a prophet, don't they consider a Christian cross to be blasphemy?

Of course, there are seven billion people on this planet, more than a few of them are short a few marbles.

Re:New Internet Meme !!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32284446)

yea, it is images of Muhammed that are the root cause of the terrorism situation. someone tell the pentagon

cut it all off, here let me help (0, Troll)

frovingslosh (582462) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283566)

Fine, I hope the religious idiots (opps, I mean devoted followers) cut the country off completely. Here, let me help, here is a site that shows images of the prophet without hiding him in a burka, (which should always be done when your women or prophets are too ugly for the rest of the world to see them without bringing down shame on you).

http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&gbv=2&tbs=isch%3A1&sa=1&q=muhammad [google.com]

Perhaps they should block google.com, or maybe even the whole .com tdl.

Good (1, Interesting)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283592)

I wish we could ban backwards countries from the ENTIRE internet. We could use a few less Nigerian scams and terrorist recruitment websites. We should establish a rule that if it's legal in your country to kill a woman for showing her face in public, you're not ready for the internet (or television or radio for that matter). You can give your people the internet when you get them sewers and a secular government first.

Re:Good (1)

CoryD (1813510) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284222)

Yes, because isolating a country due to their negative aspects breeds tolerance in their youth.
Or perhaps the internet, with its ability to expose people to other cultures and view points; allows for people to broaden their thought process beyond the otherwise dictate thought process imposed on them.
Take Iran's huge success lately in broadcasting their opposition against the government. Or the use of BBS and other internet based sites to communicate with each other to plan rallies/protests.
Yes, let's do away with the one universal asset that can be shared with the world to assist, even indirectly; in introducing new thoughts and enlightenment.

Re:Good (2, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284392)

There are reasonable limits to how far you go with that, though. The harsh reality is that some people, and some groups of people, just aren't ready for the internet. And if you're the kind of person who thinks that the proper response to seeing a pornographic picture is to kill the person(s) who posted and host it--you should not be welcome on the internet of the civilized world. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Re:Good (2, Insightful)

ciggieposeur (715798) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284368)

You can give your people the internet when you get them sewers and a secular government first.

We'd have to ban the Internet in the United States if those were the rules.

Re:Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32284404)

I wish we could ban backwards countries from the ENTIRE internet.

I could see that notion apply to a select list of US states as well.

Re:Good (3, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284448)

Actually, even the most backwards U.S. states are starting to look downright liberal compared to Australia these days. Not sure what's going on down under, but they seem to be dipping fast.

Pakistan is a useless geographical entity ... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32283602)

Why the hell are we even bothering about them. Nuke the fucking Islamic retards. Claim the land. Donate it to India. We can outsource whatever needs to be outsourced with a sizable Indian geek population consuming the products back in a much preferable democratic way. Pakistan is like a time bomb waiting to blow off our responsible and democratic nuclear existence. Bastards and betrayers they are. The cold war is over. They're useless.

Obligatory (3, Funny)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283648)

And nothing of value was lost.

The 21st Century blocked in Pakistan (1)

dskoll (99328) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283702)

Also the 20th, 19th, 18th, 17th, 16th and 15th.

They grudgingly permit the 14th.

How about Google? (2, Interesting)

Thraxy (1782662) | more than 4 years ago | (#32283974)

Shouldn't they be blocking Google as well? I mean... 1.990.000 results on Google Images. Isn't that like mass blasphemy or something?

Re:How about Google? (2, Interesting)

nattt (568106) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284136)

That's not blasphemy, that's massphemy!

Of course, there's no real offence going on - not like the kind of offence we feel when people are killed, buildings burned, or little girl's are genital mutilated, or raped then beaten for being raped or stoned, or any of the other atrocities commited by the "religion of peace". It's feigned offence for the political reason of giving their population something to hate because they're so oppressed that they need something to keep their mind off their poor miserable lives.

At least they're not hijacking this time. (1)

Leto-II (1509) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284106)

Last time the Pakistani government told Pakistani ISPs to block YouTube they ended up hijacking their IP prefix [ripe.net] for pretty much the entire Internet.

Just turn it off... (1)

DarthVain (724186) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284124)

Considering it is an Islamic state I will assume porn is also banned as well.

Whats left on there? Just this: http://www.this-page-intentionally-left-blank.org/ [this-page-...-blank.org] ?

Time to just turn the internet off and run a Pakistan LAN.

Dammit, do it quietly! (2, Insightful)

Target Practice (79470) | more than 4 years ago | (#32284386)

I wish they could have been quieter about this. My state senators (Utah) are probably already phoning them to ask how they can get a piece of that sanitized Internet pie.

Not YouTube! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32284548)

Now how will terrorists get their message out!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...