Google Assists In Arrest Of Indian Man

An anonymous reader writes "After a Google user posted a profane picture of the Hindu saint Shivaji, Indian authorities contacted Google to ask for his IP address. Google complied. He was arrested and is reported to have been beaten by a lathi and asked to use the same bowl to eat and to use in the toilet. Not surprisingly, Google is a keen to play this down as Yahoo is being hauled over the coals by US Congress for handing over IP addresses and emails to the Chinese Government which resulted in a Chinese democracy activist being jailed." Readers are noting that these are 2 unrelated cases — the latter is several months old.

Comments

Mixup

[hansraj]

The summary mixes up two different stories. The first (techcrunch.com) link points to a story involving a guy posting "obscene" comments about Sonia Gandhi and Mahatma Gandhi, while the later link (techgoss.com) points to the story that appears in the summary (involving Shivaji). Sonia Gandhi is an Italian born Indian politician and the leader of the ruling Congress Party. Shivaji was a ruler of Maratha Empire.

Also, the Shivaji story involves a goof up by the telecom provider Airtel that provided the details of the wrong person (not using the IP in question) whereas in the other story the ISP provided the details of the actual person involved. In both stories Google revealed the IP used by the "culprit".

Shivaji was a warrior not a saint.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

Shivaji was a Hindu king of Maharashtra who fought the (last powerful) Mogul emperor Aurangzeb and gave him run for his money. He is greatly revered by most desi patriots. But no desi calls him a saint!

Saint Shivaji?

[Moridineas]

I hadn't heard Shivaji referred to as a saint before, somewhat interesting usage of the term.

Shivaji is an interesting character. Perhaps best known for killing one of his Mughal enemies with a concealed weapon called a tiger's claw. Also well known as a defender of Hinduism who fought long and hard against the Muslim-ruled Mughal empire.

Re:compliance, not judges

[drinkypoo]

Evil is relative, and Google is a multinational company.

Actually, Evil isn't relative - it's subjective. Totally different. The former implies that there is a single standard of evil which is the same for all people but which varies based upon circumstances. The truth however is that Evil is defined differently for each person.

In other words, it's a stupid, disingenuous slogan, and Google should drop it for that reason alone. But given that Google is originally a US company, founded by Norteamericanos and with a slogan written in English, then I postulate that it can reasonably be measured by the standards of the USA - and one of our basic cultural values is the right to believe (and say!) whatever you want. By that measurement, this action is evil and since you can only be judged by your actions, then Google is evil.

It's quite possible that in China, the government would consider Google "evil" for not helping them to censor their people into submission.

I have a similar issue at home; we have a cat named "Evil Kitty". Actually, where they had her before they first named her that (she has a sister named "Good" who was more friendly in the past) they tried to rename her Tibet, but I thought that was a stupid name for a cat, and she is evil to the mice so it's back to Evil. However, what the people of China believe due to large-scale brainwashing is really not that interesting to the subject of Evil, because of its very subjectivity. The very fact of the cultural brainwashing that instructs the Chinese to do as they are told is Evil by our standards in the Western world, where we value individuality and choice.

Re:India is slowly losing my respect

[hesiod]

8/10: Good troll, but you need more froth around the mouth area.

Here you go

[hansraj]

Google cache of the "offending" image

The pictures are sort of an anti-climax. The caption on Shivaji's picture (LODU) would translate to "dickhead" or "dick" probably. Amazing that this thing even caused rioting in Pune but then I suppose people from Maharashtra (ok maybe not all) seem to be as crazy about Shivaji as muslims are about their prophet!

Re:Wow...

[omnipresentbob]

Wasn't a Google employee who supplied the wrong IP, it was an Airtel employee who gave the wrong name.

Re:Wow...

[Lemmy Caution]

More importantly, he's a symbol of Hindu national resistance to Mogul dominance - and is thus a charged symbol of the tensions between Muslims and Hindu practitioners in India.

It might be somewhat analogous to someone posting an image defacing Abraham Lincoln (or Robert E. Lee) in the US, with a religious element to that gesture. (Of course, it would be protected as free speech here, but it could trigger a fight.)

Why would somebody do this?

[the brown guy]

assuming that the Shivaji referenced in the article is the same one on Wikipedia, he seems like a nice guy.
Here is an excerpt from the wikipedia section on his religious views. Remember he is (portentially) a Hindu saint, but seems to be more of a Hindu king.

Chhatrapati Shivaji was a devout Hindu and he respected all religions within the region. Shivaji had great respect for Warkari saints like Tukaram and Sufi Muslim pir Shaikh Yacub Baba Avaliya of Konkan .[5]. He also visited Mouni Maharaj temple and Samadhi at Patgaon (Bhudargad Taluka near to Gargoti) in Kolhapur district. Shahaji had donated a huge piece of land to Shaha-Sharif Durga of Ahmednagar. Shivaji allowed his subjects freedom of religion and opposed forced conversion. The first thing Shivaji did after a conquest was to promulgate protection of mosques and Muslim tombs. One-third of his army was Muslim, as were many of his commanders: his most trusted general in all his campaigns was Haider Ali Kohari; Darya Sarang was chief of armoury; Ibrahim Khan and Daulat Khan were prominent in the navy; and Siddi Ibrahim was chief of artillery. Shivaji had respect for the Sufi tradition of Islam.[6] Shivaji used to pray at the mausoleum of the great Sufi Muslim saint Baba Sharifuddin. He also visited the abode of another great Sufi saint, Shaikh Yacub of the Konkan, and sought his blessings. He called Hazrat Baba of Ratnagiri bahut thorwale bhau, meaning "great elder brother". Kafi Khan, the Mughal historian and Bernier, a French traveler, spoke highly of his religious policy. He also brought back converts like Netaji Palkar & Bajaji in to Hinduism. He prohibited slavery in his kingdom. Shivaji applied a humane and liberal policy to the women of his state.[6] There are many instances in folklore, which describes Shivaji's respect for women, irrespective of their religion, nationality, or creed. Shivaji's sentiments of inclusivity and tolerance of other religions can be seen in an admonishing letter to Aurangzeb, in which he wrote: "Verily, Islam and Hinduism are terms of contrast. They are used by the true Divine Painter for blending the colours and filling in the outlines. If it is a mosque, the call to prayer is chanted in remembrance of him. If it is a temple, the bells are rung in yearning for him alone."[6][7][8] The point of this long post is that I can't see why anybody would do this? Unless they were trying to increase tensions between hindus and muslims, because I am *assuming* that he is muslim. And as a Sikh from India, I think that the religious issues between Sikhs and Hindus/Muslims aren't as serious as they used to be.....This is just weird. If a Muslim wanted to piss off Hindus, it would make sense to have a controversial picture or w/e of a major hindu god or godess.

Re:Do no evil doesnt stop 'aiding evil do bad thin

[quarterbuck]

The description of the story is really messed up.
The one case where someone insulted Sivaji has nothing to do with Google. It has to do with Airtel, a phone company in India.
The other case is one where someone slandered a politician - The story does not say what the actual insult/slander was, but the cops did not prosecute just for criticizing -- the owner of the discussion group was left alone. There was a much better written story , but the editors picked the wrong one.

Re:Even the Post Title

[Anonmyous Coward]

I have to disagree. 'Black', I think is generally acceptable, but a white person saying 'nigger' isn't. If you're hearing it from them, I'm guessing you're in one of those Hillary-Clinton's-Last-Stand states like West Virginia where they don't usually do lynchings anymore, but darned if they'll vote for one.

As for black people using the term 'nigger' or 'nigga', it's one of two things:

• Multiple generations of people being taught they're inferior until they finally accept it. (Which isn't to say that past family hardships are an excuse for underachievement or to suggest that the current generation of white people 'owes' black American's anything other than the respect and equality under the law not afforded their ancestors, but simply that the horrors of slavery in America went even beyond forced labor and corporal punishment)
• Black culture 'reclaiming' the word under a different connotation, which strips some of the power the word has when used in a derogatory fashion.

As for your family using it, I'm sure they're perfectly nice people who aren't interested in restoring slavery or any such thing, but they're probably like some of my family from Texas: They understand and support equal rights on a legal/moral/theoretical basis, but think things like friendship or/or intermarriage between people of different races is a bit unnerving.