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!

Bangladesh Blocks Facebook Over Muhammad Cartoons

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the try-syndication dept.

Censorship 562

lbalbalba writes with a BBC story about Bangladesh following Pakistan in censoring Facebook. "Bangladesh has blocked access to Facebook after satirical images of the prophet Muhammad and the country's leaders were uploaded. One man has been arrested and charged with 'spreading malice and insulting the country's leaders' with the images. Officials said the ban was temporary and access to the site would be restored once the images were removed. It comes after Pakistan invoked a similar ban over 'blasphemous content.' ... Thousands of people joined anti-Facebook protests in Bangladesh on Friday demanding the site be blocked over the contest. A telecomm regulator there said, "Facebook will be re-opened once we erase the pages that contain the obnoxious images." And how do they propose to do that?

cancel ×

562 comments

Here's a better idea (5, Insightful)

earthforce_1 (454968) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401024)

Let's totally unplug all backwards theocracies from the internet.

Re:Here's a better idea (5, Funny)

santax (1541065) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401098)

But but but... I like to be able to contact my American and European friends you empathy lacking clod!

Re:Here's a better idea (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401186)

Ever notice how close the word empathy is to pathetic?

Re:Here's a better idea (2, Informative)

Bugamn (1769722) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401274)

Are you a college student [slashdot.org] ?

Re:Here's a better idea (4, Informative)

snowgirl (978879) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401308)

Ever notice how close the word empathy is to pathetic?

It's like they share a common root. Like passage and impasse.

Re:Here's a better idea (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401118)

That's a bad idea as internet access has a serious western influence on these countries, for better or for worse.

Re:Here's a better idea (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401266)

That's a bad idea as internet access has a serious western influence on these countries, for better or for worse.

Every time I see a story like this it makes me want to find the part of my state with the highest Islamic population and then decorate the streets so they cannot walk ten feet without seeing a cartoon making fun of Mohammed. It would be a way to say "welcome to the ridicule and derision Christians and Jews and others are expected to put up with." Psychologists call this "systematic desensitization" when it's used for phobias and other irational fears. In the case of Islam everyone would be better off for it. It would absolutely not be an attack against Islam. It would merely establish parity between Islam and all other major religions.

It's time for Islam to learn what Christianity learned hundreds of years ago. Not everyone is going to adhere to your religion and fighting crusades, jihads, or holding inquisitions won't change that and is not the correct solution. All that does is convince every non-adherant that you're really a bunch of barbarians who use force because you don't actually believe in your faith or the power of its message. If your goal is to spread your religion, this is extremely counter-productive and will produce unyielding resistance to it. Realistically, every time an Islamic terrorist makes something go "ka-boom" do you think the rest of us say "wow, that Islam sure has some great points, I better convert today!" or do you think we say "yup, what a bunch of primitive savages." It does not help that the more moderate Islamic leaders rarely or never condemn the murderous actions of their extremist brethren. It's as though they are afraid to, or they agree with the extremists, and either case means that the extremist minority gets to dictate the entire course of Islam. Again, that's not a selling point if you want to win converts.

For all religious people, Islamic or not, here's a novel concept: practice your religion as you see fit to the extent that you don't coerce others against their will. If others do things that you consider blasphemous, say a quiet prayer for them in your own privacy wishing that they come to understand things as you do. If they don't, consider it the will of an all-knowing and all-powerful God and leave those people the hell alone. If they do, celebrate that your prayers had an effect. I know that has the serious drawback of not giving you an excuse to force others to behave as you think they should, but you can get over that.

Re:Here's a better idea (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401558)

Christians and Jews

What? If you do something they don't like in the wrong part of the US or Jerusalem expect a lynch mob to be chasing you.

Re:Here's a better idea (5, Informative)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401636)

There have only been three racial lynchings in the US since 1968 and what, one gay lynching?

So really don't expect a lynching in the US ever.

Lynchings are more common in the Palestinian Authority with hate crimes on homosexuals and "collaborators" than Israel. In Jerusalem the danger is rock throwing groups for violators of the sabbath.

Re:Here's a better idea (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401794)

If they weren't terrorists before, if you ridicule them you are certainly going to push them in that direction. What is the result if you ridicule the kid in school who wears the funny hat?

Re:Here's a better idea (5, Insightful)

Pharmboy (216950) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401830)

here's a novel concept: practice your religion as you see fit to the extent that you don't coerce others against their will.

That would hold true for all religions. Fortunately, about 90% of Christians and 100% of Jews in America don't care what religion you are and consider their relationship with their god to be a personal matter. The other 10% are just annoying as hell, but are not likely to stone you or blow themselves up. Muslim, however, seem to be a different thing altogether.

If you think something is a sin, (alcohol, for instance) why can't Muslims simply choose to not drink alcohol and leave everyone else alone? The answer, of course, is that it appears the majority thinks everyone must become Muslim. Parts of the Koran specifically say to convert or kill infidels, although other parts say to respect other's beliefs and leave them alone. While most would likely prefer to convert the infidels with words, and only a minority with force, the problem is that they feel they must convert us at all. The idea of "live and let live" just isn't in their vocabulary.

It is going to take something big to see change or a large amount of time, and frankly, I don't think the rest of the world is going to be patient enough to allow a large amount of time.

Re:Here's a better idea (3, Insightful)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401758)

That's a bad idea as internet access has a serious western influence on these countries, for better or for worse.

Not if they're going to block anything that might offend their backward beliefs. And it's not a "western" influence that the internet brings, but an influence that is dangerous for any society, East or West, that seeks to maintain control over the population. At least until corporations have locked down the last dingy corner of the Internet, which might be sooner than you think.

But let's face it: backward religious beliefs that exploit human desire for meaning are poisoning societies everywhere. Not that mysticism or faith in the supernatural are themselves poisonous, but the minute such beliefs become organized, they are co-opted by people who would pervert them for political purposes.

Pictures of Mohamed? The leaders of Bangladesh are happy enough to use the Internet to fuel their explosion in high-tech industries and end-user support facilities, but they believe they can keep out anything that's "offensive" to their culture. Little do they know that they're way too late. I'm willing to bet that the first thing a Bangladeshi teenager does when first encountering the Internet is to look up pictures of Mohamed. Right after they look up 2 girls, 1 cup and Hentai.

Re:Here's a better idea (1)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401140)

Why? I think it would do more to hurt their cause if we let them linger. The more the civilized world sees them being trolled by simple drawings, the more ammo they give us to ridicule them and laugh at their infantile, Donald Duck-esque temper tantrums. Muslim immigrants, particularly those in Western countries, are biting the hands that feed them.

Additionally, I get a chuckle from seeing so many Muslim groups on Facebook, a company started and headed by a Jewish man(and an evil one at that).

Re:Here's a better idea (3, Insightful)

matunos (1587263) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401296)

No need. They are unplugging themselves.

that would doom an entire people to ignorance (0)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401312)

Let's totally unplug all backwards theocracies from the internet.

So, when most of the US population believes God and magic exist, but not global warming...does that mean the rest of us who are aren't insane and stupid should be doomed along with them?

While nations have a right to sovereignty- the internet is a powerful source for intellectual enlightenment. Shut off the tap, and you'll only help the ignorant masses.

North Korea is a perfect example. They're so isolated that virtually nobody from North Korea has the slightest clue what the world is like. Worse, they've been brainwashed for generations to hate the rest of the world. War with them is pretty much a given, and it's going to be a fight to the last man, woman, and child.

Re:that would doom an entire people to ignorance (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401336)

So, when most of the US population believes God and magic exist, but not global warming...does that mean the rest of us who are aren't insane and stupid should be doomed along with them?

Nice try at the package-dealing there, but "global warming" is a religion, too.

Re:that would doom an entire people to ignorance (3, Funny)

masmullin (1479239) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401424)

"global warming" is a religion, too.

I pray to global warming so that my mommy and daddy dont get a divorce.

Re:that would doom an entire people to ignorance (1)

LandDolphin (1202876) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401586)

global warming was behind the couch the whole time

Re:that would doom an entire people to ignorance (5, Informative)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401792)

Nice try at the package-dealing there, but "global warming" is a religion, too.

Considering last year was the warmest year since temperatures have been recorded, I'd say that if "global warming" is a religion, then it has a better record of prophecy than any other major religion on Earth.

Re:that would doom an entire people to ignorance (2, Insightful)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401806)

So, when most of the US population believes God and magic exist

It's not belief in God and magic that's the problem.

It's religion, which, when you come right down to it, has less to do with God and Magic than it does with power and control.

Re:Here's a better idea (4, Funny)

masmullin (1479239) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401412)

I find your lack of faith.... disturbing!

Re:Here's a better idea (3, Insightful)

xZgf6xHx2uhoAj9D (1160707) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401518)

So we punish the citizens for the crimes of their corrupt leaders? Better would be to subvert their leaders and try to give them proper access anyway.

Re:Here's a better idea (1)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401572)

Let's totally unplug all backwards theocracies from the internet.

Or we could ignore them and their foolishness.

even better idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401778)

everyone just put a cartoon up and they can have no internet at all.

Re:Here's a better idea (2, Insightful)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401854)

Mockery is the best response to religion. Let them unplug themselves.

Ignorance (1)

Titan1080 (1328519) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401026)

Is bliss.

Re:Ignorance (1)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401592)

It's the damn scientists [slashdot.org] who are at fault - if they'd only learn to see things from other people's perspective, this would be a perfect world.

Win-Win situation... (5, Funny)

Tackhead (54550) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401042)

"Facebook will be re-opened once we erase the pages that contain the obnoxious images." And how do they propose to do that?

Either a billion people too immature to handle cartoons are kept off the Internet forever, or every Facebook server on the planet is vaporized in a hail of fast neutrons.

Call me cynical, but either way, the world ends up a better place.

Re:Win-Win situation... (1)

shoehornjob (1632387) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401158)

Personally I rather like the second option. It seems that privacy aint the only thing that's dead /satanic laugh. More internets for me (the tubes just got a bit wider;-)

Re:Win-Win situation... (0, Troll)

schmidt349 (690948) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401216)

Wow, you really are in love with how much better you think you are than everyone else, aren't you? From what I can glean from your Slashdot history you [slashdot.org] seem [slashdot.org] to [slashdot.org] belong [slashdot.org] pretty firmly with those billion people immature people. I do too, but I'm man enough to admit that.

That other article on Slashdot about people lacking empathy these days seems more credible every time I read a comments thread. Go on mods, start your "-1 I don't like you." Seems to be the going rate around here.

Re:Win-Win situation... (2, Funny)

Lord_of_the_nerf (895604) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401366)

...or every Facebook server on the planet is vaporized in a hail of fast neutrons.

*Ahem* and when that happens, how do you propose I like things and stalk my classmates? I'm not going back to the Stone Age of actually liking things and using Classmates.com

WOW!!! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401052)

They have electricity in Bangladesh???

Idiots (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401056)

These sick fucks seem completely obsessed with him and his drawings. Isn't the point of this ban to prevent people from idolizing Muhammad?

Re:Idiots (5, Insightful)

Vinegar Joe (998110) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401078)

The point of the ban is to try and force non-muslims to accept Muslim rules.

Re:Idiots (5, Interesting)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401270)

The point of the ban is to try and force non-muslims to accept Muslim rules.

An interesting thought experiment would be to imagine that Muslims must take an oath to renounce Islam(not having to choose another religion, just renouncing Islam) upon immigration to generic, prosperous Western countries. How many would give up a safe and comfortable lifestyle and a good education, for themselves and their families, for the sake of religious self-righteousness?

Another principle-related thought experiment: Would the number of abortions increase if men were not obligated to pay child support?

Re:Idiots (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401474)

Another principle-related thought experiment: Would the number of abortions increase if men were not obligated to pay child support?

Without a doubt the number of out-of-wedlock pregnancies would decrease. Abortion is a rather inefficient form of birth control when compared to any alternative but without a doubt it is used for this purpose.

I've always thought it would be interesting if a state had the balls to try an idea. The idea would be to allow men to file a document with the state government stating that they have no intention of having children and any pregnancies involving their DNA is against their express will. Then exempt all men who file this document from ever paying any child support except on a purely voluntary basis. Make it very easy for women to look up whether a man has filed such a document, like with an online database indexed by name and address or telephone number. Make it a crime for a man to lie about whether he has filed such a document. That way a woman who does not wish to take birth control or who expressly wants to have children can choose not to sleep with these men if she wants financial support for any children. That way men are protected from an 18-21 year committment on the basis of a woman lying about whether she has swallowed a pill. That way children are protected by being less likely to be raised by an irresponsible single mother with all the well-documented detrimental effects this produces.

I propose that this would not result in many children growing up in poverty. Instead, it would result in fewer unwanted pregnancies. It may result in less casual sex for men who are not married and do not wish to become fathers, but that may not be such a bad thing. It also compensates for the biological fact that women have far more control over whether a pregnancy occurs and then whether it is brought to term than men do and for the medical fact that women have about a dozen non-surgical forms of birth control available while men have one. Whoever has more control and more options should bear more responsibility. That's fair if you see women as the equals of men. It's unfair if you see women as inferior, helpless beings who are unable to make sound decisions based on risk and consequence who therefore need to forcibly take a man's money to pay for their lifestyle choices.

Naturally with the system as it stands today, no one cares about the unfairness to men that a pregnant woman can choose to get an abortion and terminate her pregnancy against the wishes of the would-be father. That's considered A-OK. Likewise no one cares that in the reverse case, a woman can bring a pregnancy to term even if the father wishes her to have an abortion and the father still has to pay. That's also A-OK. The message is pretty clear: men don't matter, they just exist to provide a wallet and a bank account so women can do whatever the hell they want. What we get for that are bastard children, broken homes, and divorce/custody courts that actively discriminate against fathers. We also get ridiculously absurd laws like the one on California where a man who dates a single mother can be made to pay child support for her children even if he proves beyond all doubt that he is not the father. Just try passing a law that puts such an unfair obligation on women and you will be tarred and feathered. It's time for this madness and this double standard to stop.

Re:Idiots (2, Interesting)

icebrain (944107) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401832)

I don't think the "I signed a piece of paper" solution will do much good. Here's what I suggest:

Two independent DNA tests disproving paternity are absolute cause to end child support payments and refund any money paid. No more getting stuck paying for a kid you didn't provide DNA for.

Child support payments are no longer a check to be used for anything. The money goes on a debit card and all expenditures are recorded and audited. Spending on things not for the kids earns very harsh penalties. Payment amounts are to be adjusted every year and must provide a reasonable estimate of costs and be adjusted for the payer's income.

Remarriage triggers new assessment of child support payments, and payments are only to be made if the new marriage cannot fully support the children.

Custody of children is no longer to be automatically biased towards the mother. The court shall give a true and honest assessment of both parents' abilities and use that as a major factor in awarding custody.

Re:Idiots (4, Informative)

TimSSG (1068536) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401484)

You do realize that renouncing being a Muslims means death. Muslims are commanded to kill any adult renouncing of the religion. Tim S.

Re:Idiots (1)

Merls the Sneaky (1031058) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401672)

But the country that had that law would not have any muslims, therefore the death threat for leaving becomes moot.

Re:Idiots (1)

colinrichardday (768814) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401554)

In the US at least, requiring such an oath would violate the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.

Re:Idiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401674)

Not if it's done in Customs, at the airport, or otherwise before arrival in the USA. Courts have repeatedly held that rights such as habeas corpus and protection from unjustified search and seizure do not apply when passing through checkpoints.

So ... just get them to publicly renounce Islam as a prerequisite for a US Visa or before boarding a flight. If they survive, the USA will welcome them with open arms.

You must be a bigot if you think this is right. (0, Flamebait)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401756)

The point of the ban is to try and force non-muslims to accept Muslim rules.

An interesting thought experiment would be to imagine that Muslims must take an oath to renounce Islam(not having to choose another religion, just renouncing Islam) upon immigration to generic, prosperous Western countries. How many would give up a safe and comfortable lifestyle and a good education, for themselves and their families, for the sake of religious self-righteousness?

Another principle-related thought experiment: Would the number of abortions increase if men were not obligated to pay child support?

Your myopic cultural bigotry does not contribute to the cause of improving the image of Americans, and it does not accomplish any military, political, diplomatic or strategic objectives. To ask anybody to give up their religion is like asking a man to move to a new society where he has to dress as a woman, or expecting gay people to renounce homosexuality. And the fact that you believe it's all about money shows your narrow thinking. Not every culture is organized around money, thats western culture.

And just because a culture isn't organized around greed, selfishness and making money it doesn't make it bad. So they wont give up their religion, so what? No other immigrant has been asked to give up their religion. Basically you are going to tell them to sign away their soul for citizenship? Why not just make it law that all immigrants must be atheists?

I'm going to assume you are trolling, because nobody but a bigot could really think those ideas are good.

Re:Idiots (2, Informative)

JamesP (688957) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401350)

And that's the Religion of peace and understanding, everybody...

Re:Idiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401272)

I don't think you understand how Islam works; let me help you out. You see, Islam is the religion of peace. In order to protect that peace, opponents of Islam must be brutally murdered. I hope that clears everything up.

Re:Idiots (1)

thatskinnyguy (1129515) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401842)

Muhammad is not an idol or a god figure. As is said "There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is His prophet."

Frosty post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401066)

Mhaaaaaaaaa

I want (4, Funny)

Gonoff (88518) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401102)

everything on the internet that does not agree with my religion removed from the internet.

Who will I start with...

Re:Another analogy (1)

miknix (1047580) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401844)

I am Microsoft apologist, Microsoft Windows is my religion and The Great Blue Screen of Death is my God.

Writing Micro$oft with a dollar symbol is childish and makes it look like Microsoft produces software for the objective of making money $$, which is not true.

I for one, demand all dollar symbols removed from Micro$oft in all the Internets due to conflict with my strong beliefs.

erasure (1)

fyoder (857358) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401112)

A telecomm regulator there said "Facebook will be re-opened once we erase the pages that contain the obnoxious images." And how do they propose to do that?

If they have a great wall type firewall that everything goes through, they could filter the facebook traffic and replace the offending images with ones that had text reading "A fatwah is declared upon the creators of this disgraceful contest".

Re:erasure (1)

bersl2 (689221) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401160)

A telecomm regulator there said "Facebook will be re-opened once we erase the pages that contain the obnoxious images." And how do they propose to do that?

If they have a great wall type firewall that everything goes through, they could filter the facebook traffic and replace the offending images with ones that had text reading "A fatwah is declared upon the creators of this disgraceful contest".

Good luck finding the original creators, unless just any scapegoat will do.

Also: BEHEAD THOSE WHO INSULT FREE SPEECH

Re:erasure (1)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401608)

Also: BEHEAD THOSE WHO INSULT FREE SPEECH

Sorry, but that's ironically impossible.

I, for one, completely agree with Pakistan. (5, Funny)

Narcocide (102829) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401154)

Wow for the first time ever the religious extremists in Pakistan and I completely agree - someone has simply got do delete Facebook.

Re:I, for one, completely agree with Pakistan. (3, Funny)

Lord_of_the_nerf (895604) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401316)

I think they're primarily concerned that Facebook has been shopping their prophet's details out to spammers.

I, for one, completely agree. (0, Redundant)

Narcocide (102829) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401174)

Seriously. For once, Pakistan is right. Someone needs to delete Facebook.

Re:I, for one, completely agree. (1)

badboy_tw2002 (524611) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401280)

I liked your first version better, it was more specific. B+ for the first, C- on the second for repetition.

Re:I, for one, completely agree. (1)

Narcocide (102829) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401324)

Yea, stupid I know. there was posting lag and I thought it was actually the first post getting auto-filtered or something.

Re:I, for one, completely agree. (1)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401494)

Do you live in Pakistan?

Re:I, for one, completely agree. (1)

Narcocide (102829) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401710)

negative

Re:I, for one, completely agree. (1)

Narcocide (102829) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401728)

Would I have gotten an A- if I hadn't typed "do" instead of "to?"

This is the new age of the internet. (3, Interesting)

pizzach (1011925) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401244)

People don't want all of the content that is on it. It's not just a group of techies, but people from all walks of life. If they thing that images of Muhammad are as bad a child porn, who is to stop them from blocking it? This isn't the old Internet. We aren't living in the wild west anymore. Not everyone's sense of ethics line up.

Re:This is the new age of the internet. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401306)

Then why don't we just kill the infidels?

Re:This is the new age of the internet. (3, Interesting)

stonewolf (234392) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401730)

Naw.... I saw my first posting by a dumb ass moslem screaming about how we are all going to be killed in the great jihad blah blah blahdy blah blah back on usenet when the Internet was young and you could still have an arapnet domain.

This crap has been happening for centuries. Every time some poor bastard realizes that those fast moving lights in the sky were put there by us and that not one of their countries could do the same thing or when they saw the steam powered steel ships come into harbor and they realized that not one of their countries could... You get the picture. Contact with the west destroyed their image of themselves as a great culture so they have to kill us all.

Sad sick puppies.

Stonewolf

Re:This is the new age of the internet. (1)

russotto (537200) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401856)

People don't want all of the content that is on it. It's not just a group of techies, but people from all walks of life. If they thing that images of Muhammad are as bad a child porn, who is to stop them from blocking it?

We are. Well, not we personally, but techies. The people who come up with anonymous proxies, steganography, encrypted connections, and all the rest. Of course, there's black-hat techies working for The Man trying to undo all that.

This isn't the old Internet. We aren't living in the wild west anymore. Not everyone's sense of ethics line up.

Well, guess what. This ain't one of those situations where we can just agree to disagree and all get along. Someone's "sense of ethics" has to hold sway, and that of the other side has to be violated. I know which side I want to be one... do you?

interesting (1)

bihar (1822694) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401246)

these countries are strange big time

what you say (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401384)

you post skills suck big time

Immature (1)

Palmsie (1550787) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401292)

No one should touch Facebook. If you can't handle a few pictures on the Intertubes, don't log onto Facebook (there, you win). If you can, you should have the right to go do that (everyone else wins). What a backwards place they are. I don't see protests about Raptor Jesus from Christian extremists. I say Facebook should leave it up like they do all groups.

Response to the ban in Bangladesh (5, Informative)

Orome (159034) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401298)

What is nice to see is that there has been a protest against the ban by students and professors

http://bdnews24.com/details.php?id=162813&cid=2

Unfortunately, this probably doesn't make for as exciting news as yet-another-theocracy-bans-facebook. A search on Google News for "bangladesh facebook" doesn't even throw up this link, and I haven't yet seen any mention of these sensible, logical voices on BBC,CNN etc.

Re:Response to the ban in Bangladesh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401520)

So you're saying a single student protest is just as big a story as an entire country banning facebook?

Re:Response to the ban in Bangladesh (1)

Orome (159034) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401676)

Certainly not. But if an organization like CNN or BBC ran the story, it would give those sensible people more publicity, and it would help the Western world realize that there are moderate voices in the country. Otherwise all we end up with are snarky comments like "they should just start burkha-book".

Re:Response to the ban in Bangladesh (1)

santax (1541065) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401534)

Thanks for the link. Puts things back into perspective.

It's wrong to apply banning in 99% of cases. (3, Insightful)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401704)

Banning burkas is wrong. Banning websites is wrong. Banning ideas, books, clothing, all of this is wrong. I don't think banning does anything other than irritate and piss people off who might have been peaceable before. If you know a group of people like to wear burkas and you ban it, you just pissed them off and it makes them feel like you just banned THEM. The same can be said if you have millions of people who smoke weed legally and suddenly it's banned. It's the same as if this website were banned.

It's wrong because it fans the flames of hatred against US policy for no real gain politically, culturally, diplomatically, militarily. This accomplishes what?

Start their own (2, Funny)

Dyinobal (1427207) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401406)

They should start their own social networking site called Burkabook and be done with it.

Re:Start their own (2, Informative)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401442)

The burka is not part of Bangladeshi culture. Islam can be fairly critiqued on terms that apply to most of the Muslim world, but choosing a custom that is really particular only to Afghanistan and some surrounding areas and making it the symbol of the entire faith just makes one look uneducated.

Re:Start their own (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401472)

> The burka is not part of Bangladeshi culture. Islam can be fairly critiqued on terms that apply to most of the Muslim world, but choosing a custom that is really
> particular only to Afghanistan and some surrounding areas and making it the symbol of the entire faith just makes one look uneducated.

They wear burkas in London, dude.

Re:Start their own (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401654)

And besides, calling someone out on an obviously joking comment is a douchey thing to do, go back to your bridge!

Re:Start their own (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401750)

Dude, I would mod you up into infinity if I could. I'm going to queue this one until I have mod points - I promise.

Incoming (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401416)

Slashdotters frothing at the mouth over the stupidity of religion.

Stupidity is not only found in religion.

Re:Incoming (1)

spanky the monk (1499161) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401460)

Yep, Facebook too.

Great news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401426)

If countries like this keep dropping out, Facebook will be the only spam free social network around. Heck I might even make an account there.

Bangladesh and Pakistan not in the modern world (1)

gweihir (88907) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401438)

Not a surprise either. States that have a state religion are firmly rooted in the age of ignorance and oppression. Calling them primitives would be too kind.

Re:Bangladesh and Pakistan not in the modern world (2, Funny)

masmullin (1479239) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401526)

Calling them primitives would be too kind

can we call them integrals?

What about Utah? (1, Interesting)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401652)

Not a surprise either. States that have a state religion are firmly rooted in the age of ignorance and oppression. Calling them primitives would be too kind.

Are you saying that Utah a Mormon controlled state is currently being run by uncouth primitives? I think you are ignorant and religiously intolerant for passing judgement on cultures you know little to nothing about. Yes there are aspects of Muslim culture which are backwards and primitive, but there are just as many aspects of American culture which are backward and primitive.

Do you think our greed is good bigger is better sexist racist homophobic culture is any better? Are we better because we destroy peoples lives for money while they do it for honor, respect or something they value more than money? The action is wrong based on the fact that innocent people are harmed or is it only wrong because it's not done to increase profits?

I agree that we have a responsibility to evolve and help develop other cultures but we should not assume that our culture is "better", or that we know everything and cannot learn from other cultures. We can learn a lot from these cultures just as these cultures can learn from us and the problem we have as a society in the west is that we refuse to learn from other cultures but we demand other cultures learn from us.

On top of this we import the worst of our culture along with the best. So they'll get all the polluting Corporate personhood profit is everything mafia style political culture along with free speech and thats it? Look at China, they kept the worst of their traditional backwardness and merely added the worst of our culture on top of it and now they have the worth of both worlds. What they are doing right is they did end torture so thats a positive step but their culture in terms of their form of capitalism is even more destructive than ours.

No culture is superior unless you have a quantitive measurement not based on economic growth but based on the happiness of the individuals living under that culture.

Re:What about Utah? (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401772)

Utah does not have a state religion, at least to my knowledge - do you have a citation?

The far better case for you argument is England.

Re:Bangladesh and Pakistan not in the modern world (1)

Winckle (870180) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401684)

"In God We Trust"

As a proud American I find this outrageous. (5, Insightful)

CompassIIDX (1522813) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401458)

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to contact the FBI about some naked cartoon images that might not be of legal age.

Re:As a proud American I find this outrageous. (1)

Merls the Sneaky (1031058) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401740)

I see you subscribe to the Australian politician point of view that depiction is the same as actual child sexual abuse material. Maybe you should report them to the AFP as well so the Great Firewall of Australia can censor the site.

Remember kiddies thought crime is still crime.

Keep doing it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401468)

This only goes to show that such cartoons should be heavily promoted on every site on the internet. Let them ban the internet to protect themselves. Better yet, let them officially declare war and actively try to suppress the creators of the content. Every culture has gone through Dark Ages periods, and it's about time the Islamic world grew out of theirs.

Flambait: No punani burka lovin'? (1)

tyrione (134248) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401486)

Seriously, the three Abrahamic religions are all Persian created fairy tales that keeps getting newer revisions and being called The Word of Some Desert God.

They all suffer not just from being plagiarized myths/fables but a deep lack of Punani power in their Impotent Tree.

Re:Flambait: No punani burka lovin'? (2, Funny)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401574)

...getting newer revisions and being called The Word of Some Desert God.

Similar to Apple's development strategy.

This is religious intolerance. (0, Flamebait)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401590)

As much as I support free speech and the right of individuals to make fun of Christ, Muhammad, this isnt about the free speech issue. I'm certain that if Muslims made fun of Christians tightly held cultural and religious beliefs there would be outrage from Christians. We all know that Christians have banned more books, censored more ideas than any other religious institution yet we expect Islam to be held to a higher standard?

If we made a website declaring Jesus Christ was a homosexual, wouldn't this anger Christians in this country and don't you think that certain individuals would want the website banned? So lets not be hypocrites here, the majority of Americans support censorship for cultural reasons just like the majority of any other country. Only we want to ban violence, extreme sexuality and other stuff which we consider taboo.

In all honesty any website should be able to post anything as I support free expression. I just find it hypocritical that people can switch from being for free speech in one instance but then when it's free speech that can apply to America suddenly we have to crack down and censor.

Are we for censorship or not?

Re:This is religious intolerance. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401634)

I'm certain that if Muslims made fun of Christians tightly held cultural and religious beliefs there would be outrage from Christians.

You really need to read some newspapers from the Middle East. Seriously.

Re:This is religious intolerance. (1)

noidentity (188756) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401796)

It's not censorship when we do it; it's making things better. It's only censorship when someone else wants to ban something we consider OK. Get with the program, man.

Re:This is religious intolerance. (5, Insightful)

victorhooi (830021) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401798)

heya,

Well, actually no...haha...you're completely wrong.

As a Christian, I can tell you people make fun of us all the time. Heck, they've been doing it for around, what, 2000 years? And the Jews have probably suffered a lot longer. Thing is, every religion gets made fun of

I mean, seriously, has your head been under a sand. What do you think Raptor Jesus is? (http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Raptor_Jesus) Or say, the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Or how about all those bestselling books alleging Jesus was gay, or he had a family with kids, or some other ridiculous nonsense....

I actually find some of these funny, and a little comical (well, the FSM I think is actually clever/ironic, the Raptor Jesus meme is just a bit insipid/childish, but hey, it's the 4chan crowd, they're mostly 12-year olds kids).

You can either act like tantrum-throwing little kids, like some Muslims here are, or you can grow up and act like an adult, and shrug it off. It's not personal, they just don't believe the same things as you. And for a Christian, it just means they miss you on having God's awesome grace - so you should just pray for them, and be loving to them.

It's things like these that make Muslims look like backward primitives...*cue somebody declaring a fatwah against me*

Cheers,
Victor

Re:This is religious intolerance. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401834)

Elton John said Jesus was gay, and I don't recall anyone banning Elton John from the USA. I also don't recall the US government getting involved at all in the matter. If individuals want to be outraged, all the more power to them. What you described has already happened (you don't think there are anti-christian websites out there?) and there hasn't been a fuss. No one got killed over it. No one asked him to never say that again.

Your example is bad.

Sick of all this censorship (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401602)

I say we all voice our opinions on this new platform where everyone can easily say (publish) anything on the web for all to see.

http://www.jotpress.com

Yet another proof by demonstration... (3, Insightful)

stonewolf (234392) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401640)

that islam is having a very hard time dealing with the 16th century. I hate to image what will happen if it/they what ever, it actually comes into contact with the 21st century. Oh, yeah... that was what happened in 9/11/2001 and just a while ago in Times Square.

The question is which happens first? Either 1) these so called islamic "civizations" learn to accept basic concepts like "human rights" or 2) they finally become a real danger. By real danger I mean they actually set off a nuke in a western city, release a ton of nerve gas, set off a dirty bomb, start the black death 2.0, or do a bunch of little things that just really piss us off. Like say, killing the South Park guys.

If 1 happens first, then cool. Everyone gets to live. But if 2 happens, what then? Do we keep trying to bottle them up and worrying about whether it is safe to have lunch in the park today? Or, do we just start killing them? I think that is going to be a major test of *our* so called civilization.

My bet is that our great great grandchildren will be ashamed of what we do. But, I'm also betting that there are going to be very very few great great grandchildren who are raised as moslems.

IMHO, the belief in absolute truth is the greatest enemy of humanity. The belief in absolute truth is absolute evil.

Stonewolf

you don't like it, don't look (1)

swschrad (312009) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401646)

the "blockers" can go right ahead. that's their right.

the blasphemers can go right ahead, that's their right.

don't know about everybody else, but my God is strong enough to enforce His own laws, and doesn't need piddly little sinners running around playing tin-star sheriff.

if they don't think THEIR God is that strong, then son, you is chasing the wrong star.

And how do they propose to do that? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401666)

Is NOT the question. The question is why should we restrict our speech just because they are insecure in their religious beliefs? F-em

BLah blah blah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32401782)

Nice to see other countries are still out there trying and succeeding at being bigger douche bags than the US.

Death to America!

funny muhammad pics? (2, Interesting)

portnux (630256) | more than 4 years ago | (#32401846)

Where are these, so I can "like" them?
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...