Slashdot Mirror


Facebook Postings Lead To Arrest for Heresy In the West Bank

forand writes "Using screen shots of a customer's Facebook profile, owners of a West Bank internet cafe helped Palestinian intelligence forces capture a man accused of heresy." According to sources quoted in the story, residents of both Gaza and the West Bank face ongoing scrutiny of their online activities; in Gaza, "Internet cafe owners are forced to monitor customers' online activity and alert intelligence officials if they see anything critical of the militant group or that violates Hamas' stern interpretation of Islam."

34 of 496 comments (clear)

  1. Barbarians... by VirginMary · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...is what they are! This shows how dangerously crazy these people are. They are the enemies of freedom like all religious fanatics! Anybody who thinks people should be locked up for life or even murdered because of antireligious religious statements are people that are enemies of western values. The problem is that we have no good way of dealing with these lunatics when large parts of entire societies are thinking like this. It's like the West in the Middle Ages.

    --
    When 1person suffers from a delusion,it is called insanity.When many people suffer from a delusion,it is called religion
    1. Re:Barbarians... by Alwin+Henseler · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem is that we have no good way of dealing with these lunatics when large parts of entire societies are thinking like this.

      Sure there is: separation. If you happen to live in a western democracy, don't let your freedoms slip away. Make sure your democracy stays one (as in eternal vigilance). Don't vote for people who want to remove personal freedoms or democratic rights. If you vote for someone & they do, don't vote for them again. Ever. Period.

      If people in other countries want to subject themselves to religious law, let them. If that makes them 'lose contact' with the rest of the world, and economic consequences puts them back in the middle ages, that's mostly their problem. If they do want to join the rest of us: shape up in the personal freedoms / democratic department first. In the mean while, they can take the freedoms that my ancestors fought for, from my cold, dead hands.

    2. Re:Barbarians... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "... antireligious religious statements are people that are enemies of western values. ..."

      Are you so sure that "western values" are that much better? There are far too many people in "western culture" promoting "western values" who sincerely believe that "western values" dictate an implicit Judeo-Christian underpinning to government and law, and that everyone else deserves to die, or at least be subjugated.

      I think we need to coin the phrase "MODERN values" as something which goes beyond "western", "eastern", "southern" or "northern" values (notice how some of those don't really evoke any specific meaning?). This new phrase would embody the implicit expectation of freedom FROM religion -- more than the current standard freedom OF religion. It's a fallacy that everyone has to choose sides amongst the various bronze-age sky-god belief systems.

    3. Re:Barbarians... by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is not that simple, I am afraid. Religion is but a tool of control here. Get those guys off religion and they will act like before, just basing their crap on "racial supremacy", "manifest destiny" or some other bullshit along this lines.

      We, ourselves, are not free from this. Look at the amount of "kill brown people" posts that topics like this brings up every time on slashdot. The true root of barbarism is an unreflected "We are different, therefore you are inferior". This mechanism exists entirely independent of religion, though I agree that religion mostly does not help.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    4. Re:Barbarians... by molnarcs · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I think "western values" are too loaded, as you say, it often implies Judeo-Christian underpinnings. Question is, can we define universal human values, and if so, what rights and wrongs should we include. Years back I read a book by Emmanuel Levinas. The most difficult book I ever read in my life. He tried to define the very basics of ethics, that is, the desire to do good (the desire to do good is a simple definition of ethics, but it's harder to define the specifics).

      One thing that Levinas defines as universally bad is "causing suffering and humiliation" (unwanted of course, BDSM folks are obvious exceptions). But in this case, this is not enough. One might claim that the offending facebook post caused him undue mental torment. Levinas also has a positive definition of ethics. As I said, "Totality and Infinity" is one of the most difficult books I ever read, so this short summary doesn't do justice for its complexitiy and richness. However, I'll try.

      Basically, he says that we have to have an infinite desire for the Other - which includes the desire for the Other's otherness as well. Sounds redundant, I know, but bear with me for a moment. This desire has two components, one is the desire to know (that is, basic human curiousity) and the other is the desire to preserve the otherness of the Other. An opposing movement is what he calls a totalizing movement. He defines it by the presumption that we can have total knowledge of the Other, that is, we can strip the Other of all it's secrets, achieving a total knowledge of the other (therefore robbing it from it's very otherness: once we believe that our knowledge of the other is Total, the image we have and It becomes the same). At this point he introduces the metaphor of the Face of the Other, and the movement towards the other as communication (we question the other to know more). In fact, he says that this otherness is the very basis of communication - once the Other has no secrets, there isn't much to talk about. Therefore we question the Other to know more (curiousity) but also question the totality of our knowledge at every point, simultaneously possessing the desire to preserve some measure of otherness.

      I know all this seems far fetched, but the point, I believe, is that curiousity is one leg on which ethical behaviour stands on, the other being not only a respect for the otherness of the Other, but even love for this otherness, that feeds back to our own curiosity, keeping the discourse on going. The first step of every authoritarian entity is to deny the possiblity of discourse, to forbid language so to speak, the very means by which otherness can be expressed, approached, and cherished.

      Levinas himself was religious (jew) - but interestingly, according to his own tenets, one can deduce that religions in general are totalizing - they do not allow for an infinite universe. Well, of course I don't know all religions, but let's just say that all religions that pose an entity that possesses a totality of knowledge, an All Knowing God are by nature totalizing. In an infinite universe, such totality is impossible. In fact, the very definition of infinity is something beyond (+1), something that is not part of the totality of any system. The Other's secret that must be preserved as well as approached via discourse.

      Anyway, I'm not sure this all makes sense to anybody, but if you want to read an intellectually challenging book, I highly recommend Totality and Infinity. As far as I know, it's one of the very few attempts to define ethics in absolute terms... most of what we consider "western values" are relativistic, their truth(s) easily traced back to a very specific context, to an ontology.

    5. Re:Barbarians... by Smiths · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Western values?

        haha.

      Like the West in the Middle Ages? Not now?

      I love how apparently the West now has a peaceful culture. The past 500 years of genoicde and slavery apparently dont count ..those 2 countries we're occupying now, you know us peaceful Westerns with the nuclear weapons, who have 700 miltary bases and who spend a trillion dollars on weapons were peaceful...its those muslims...they're the ones trying to take over the world!

      really? Do you actually believe what you're saying? Please a read a world history. Try RM Roberts...read it from cover to cover, get some perspective

    6. Re:Barbarians... by KeensMustard · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Anybody who thinks people should be locked up for life or even murdered because of antireligious religious statements are people that are enemies of western values.

      What western values wold those be then? The values that allow us to invade other countries, killing 10's of thousands, just so rich old men can be richer, and then pass it off a few years later as an unfortunate mistake (haha! oops!) and let's never mentioned that again? Have we advanced beyond barbarism ourselves? What's the difference? And what's the difference between their fanatics and our own secular fanatics - you know, the ones who will not permit anything to be done about climate change because it might cost us money Do you imagine our crimes to be less barbarous, our fanaticism less damaging then theirs?

    7. Re:Barbarians... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The problem with waiting for them to go to war and lose is that even in losing they cause a lot of damage, and in losing they are not all wiped out. Long term, Islam and civilization are mutually exclusive. Currently, civilization is losing.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    8. Re:Barbarians... by SideshowBob · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The accomplishments you speak of aren't attributable to Islam any more than the Renaissance is attributable to Christianity.

  2. Isn't freedom great? by pete6677 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm glad to know that this is the kind of freedom the brave Palestinian fighters are fighting Israel for. To have a Taliban lifestyle imposed on themselves.

    1. Re:Isn't freedom great? by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I am reminded of a passage from the Principia Discordia:

      A SERMON ON ETHICS AND LOVE

      One day Mal-2 asked the messenger spirit Saint Gulik to approach the Goddess and request Her presence for some desperate advice. Shortly afterwards the radio came on by itself, and an ethereal female Voice said YES?

      "O! Eris! Blessed Mother of Man! Queen of Chaos! Daughter of Discord! Concubine of Confusion! O! Exquisite Lady, I beseech You to lift a heavy burden from my heart!"

      WHAT BOTHERS YOU, MAL? YOU DON'T SOUND WELL.

      "I am filled with fear and tormented with terrible visions of pain. Everywhere people are hurting one another, the planet is rampant with injustices, whole societies plunder groups of their own people, mothers imprison sons, children perish while brothers war. O, woe."

      WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH THAT, IF IT IS WHAT YOU WANT TO DO?

      "But nobody Wants it! Everybody hates it."

      OH. WELL, THEN STOP.

      At which moment She turned herself into an aspirin commercial and left The Polyfather stranded alone with his species.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    2. Re:Isn't freedom great? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You actually arguing with someone from Israel over Israeli laws? Does the pit of arrogant ignorance of Slashdotters even *have* a bottom?

      #declare "metrix007" = "complete shithead"

    3. Re:Isn't freedom great? by katz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Way to go shifting the base of the argument. The statement in question read: "Blasphemy is illegal in Israel as well." This is a blatant lie. Find me in the Israeli law code anything banning blasphemy. Everything else you quote--the loyalty oath recognizing Israel as a Jewish state--is wholly irrelevant to this matter. Stick with the subject without resorting to strawmen to try and bolster your argument.

    4. Re:Isn't freedom great? by katz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Please re-read what you wrote:

      Mordechai Vanunu "revealed details of Israel's nuclear weapons program". Now, I don't care /what/ his motive was; the fact is, he was convicted of treason and endangering national security after he revealed confidential, strategic information. There's not much to argue about that.

      Regarding the Ariel boycotters, where in the article does it mention that under Israeli law, what they are doing is illegal (or 'ILLEGAL')? That's a lone Israeli politician Avigdor Lieberman expressing his opinion that the boycotters should be denied Government funding. No mention of 'illegal' there.

      Regarding Emily Henochowicz, that is tragic.

      Anyway, I see your posts here and notice you consistently temper blatant falsehoods with sob stories (however true). I encourage you to please remove emotion from your argument if you want to be taken seriously.

    5. Re:Isn't freedom great? by blackraven14250 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's absurd. There's plenty of journalists who call out Israel in the US, and still have their jobs - particularly when Israel resumed the construction of settlements recently.

  3. Re:Not like cowardly Westerners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I agree.. if western cultures defended freedom with the same vigilance (not the same methods) as hamas, hamas wouldn't exist..

  4. Re:No religious freedom is hard over there... by wizardforce · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I am agnostic, so the religious freedoms don't affect me

    how so? shouldn't you have the right not to be forced to believe whatever religion is the fad? the freedom to worship also means the freedom not to be forced to do so.

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  5. Re:It's not just in the Palestinian territories by glwtta · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sadly, the problem is with islamism (and maybe with islam).

    The problem is with theocratic governments, it doesn't matter in the least what the actual religion is.

    --
    sic transit gloria mundi
  6. Re:It's not just in the Palestinian territories by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not the particular religion that's the issue, it's the development level of the countries. I'm too lazy to elucidate the whole argument right now, but in a nutshell: look at the extreme forms of Christianity practised by some in Africa.

    And yet the development level of Saudi Arabia - one of the strictest practitioners of Sharia in its most extreme, literalist forms - is way above many Latin American countries, for example; and yet the latter do not stone people to death for homosexuality, or amputate hands and feet for theft. Ditto for Iran.

  7. Re:It's not just in the Palestinian territories by bmo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sadly, the problem is with islamism (and maybe with islam).

    No, the problem is with god botherers in general.

    You forgot to include Ireland up there in your list. You can be fined 25,000 euros if you renounce the Sacraments, etc.

    Here in the States, there are people clamoring to bring our country into some sort of religious theocratic throwback to the 12'th century. Some of them even sponsor "prayer breakfasts" for our esteemed legislators.

    Google "Dominionism" and "The Family" (The so-called "Christian" group that incited Uganda to kill gays), Focus on the Family, Christian Coalition, etc.

    Talibanistic fundamentalism is only just below the surface just about everywhere. It only takes a little bit of tipping the table to have it spring full force to the surface.

    --
    BMO

  8. Another example of US myopia by Smiths · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Meanwhile a family was evacuated from his house in Jerusalem where he lived for 30 years to make way for a settler family last week. A peaceful protest was broken up in Bil’in by tear gas and riot police.
    Extremist settlers burned a Jerusalem church
    Settlers spray graffiti on mosque in Nablus,
    run over a man in Qalqiliya,
    attack a teenager in Hebron
    and the IDF assasinates two people in Gaza last week

    but what do we read about that in the US? No, of course not. That would be too much reality for Americans. Instead we get a story about how those Hamas fiends are cracking down on the internet cafes. We get stories about bad the Iranians are to their women. Its as if they only perspective we get is one that shows us that these 'people' have a archaic, violent culture....ignore the 60 year occupation, ignore the two wars that US just launched over there, lets pick apart and find fault in THEIR culture. They're the violent people! Yeah right...

    Theres a great film on You Tube called 'Planet of the Arab', check it out sometime.

    http://mondoweiss.net/

    1. Re:Another example of US myopia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "ignore the two wars that US just launched over there"

      The US is in Iraq & Afghanistan. This atheist blogger incident took place in the West Bank. I feel like you're trying to be misleading when you deliberately confuse these two pieces of information or try to turn into a "West vs Arab" attack comment.

      This isn't some childish game where both parties can erase their crimes by making longer lists of the other side's faults. If person A steals 5 cars, person B doesn't get a free pass to steal 4 cars and yell like a crazy person when they get caught and always trying to deflect attention to person A's crime. Both are guilty of what they have done wrong.

      You seem to have forgotten this. And I feel like you're trying to deceive me.

    2. Re:Another example of US myopia by Smiths · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I am not trying decieve you.

      re-read the comments...90% of them didn't comment on the West Bank..they went off about 'how Islam is dangerous and bad' and 'its not compatible with the West' blah, blah....

      there is memme thats been building in the US, especially in the past year about how threatening Islam is to us! That doesnt stand up to scrunity of History..be in the far past or recent events.

      It only serves to demonize the people we have gone or will go to war with...

      Whether this is how America is going to collectively deal with the hangover from Iraq or whether its purposeful seeds being planted for a war with Iran....I dont know.

      You should consider this whenever you read the news. Before it was the muslims it was Commies, then it was Yellow Peril, then it was remember the Maine and on and on....

      Right now there is a poster in Times Square about Iran and how we shouldnt let them get a nuclear
      weapon. Somebody paid a lot of money for that ad, yet they seemingly arent selling anything. Why? Whats in it for them?

      Not to ramble, but when I see a story about how Hamas is abusing Palestenians, and I see the knee jerk reactions from people. I wonder what would be the reaction if 100X other stories I know happened there, that I read about on mondoweiss.net were more distributed? And how come I never see those stories outside of niche blogs? Why are the only stories the ones that make it to wider public ones that make the muslims seem barbaric?

  9. Re:Not like cowardly Westerners by jpmorgan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the article:

    The media in the Palestinian Authority, as in the Arab world in general, are largely government-controlled, driving dissenting voices to the relative freedom of the Internet. The blogger's arrest showed a willingness on the part of the Palestinian government to clamp down on freedom of speech on the Web as well. He now faces a potential life prison sentence on heresy charges for "insulting the divine essence."

    Many in this conservative Muslim town say that isn't enough, and suggested he should be killed for renouncing Islam. Even family members say he should remain behind bars for life.

    "He should be burned to death," said Abdul-Latif Dahoud, a 35-year-old Qalqiliya resident. The execution should take place in public "to be an example to others," he added.

    Few have come forward to defend him. One was Zainab Rashid, a liberal Palestinian commentator, who wrote in an online opinion piece that Husayin had made the important point that "criticizing religious texts for their (intellectual) weakness can only be combatted by ... oppression, prison and execution." ...

    Gaza's Hamas rulers also stalk Facebook pages for suspected dissenters, said Palestinian rights activist Mustafa Ibrahim. He said Internet cafe owners are forced to monitor customers' online activity and alert intelligence officials if they see anything critical of the militant group or that violates Hamas' stern interpretation of Islam.

    Freedom. I do not think this word means what you think it means.

  10. Re:Not like cowardly Westerners by SuricouRaven · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In this case, it means the freedom to be oppressive and violate the freedom of others, in accordance with their religion.

  11. Re:Not like cowardly Westerners by TheLink · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That "country" is oppressed because that "country" is at war with Israel and these sort of people given more freedoms would be wiping the Israelis out with even greater enthusiasm than wiping out their own heretics.

    If you think they're just going change and be so nice to Jews, Christians and pagans you should take a really close look at the history of Islam.

    If they don't change their popular core beliefs you will always have problems with them:
    http://www.tawfikhamid.com/abcs-test-for-radical-islam/

    --
  12. Re:Not like cowardly Westerners by torako · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's the Palestinian authorities that are acting like lunatics here. The very fact that they have much much bigger troubles like helping their citizens survive under all the pressure means that they shouldn't waste their time prosecuting people for being critical of Islam. It seems like they have their priorities mixed up and that makes it a question of freedom.

  13. Re:Not like cowardly Westerners by t2t10 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If Palestinians want to govern themselves, they have to prove to Israel that they can guarantee Israel's security, and they have to prove to the rest of the world that they can be considered a legitimate government. That's just the facts. They are failing on both accounts.

    And you're right that this being an Islamic government is responsible for people in the West not supporting them, because nearly all Muslim governments are highly intolerant of other religions and intrinsically undemocratic. Why should I want to support governments that want to imprison or kill me for my religious beliefs? I will not put my support behind an Islamic government of any form because such governments have never worked. If they want my political support, these people need to start separating church and state. Frankly, I prefer an occupied Palestine to a Palestine governed by Islamic fundamentalists.

  14. Re:Not like cowardly Westerners by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    if western cultures defended freedom with the same vigilance (not the same methods) as hamas, hamas wouldn't exist..

    And if the queen had balls, she'd be king.

    If "western cultures" "defended" "freedom" with the same "vigilance" as Hamas, then they wouldn't be cultures worth defending.

    It bugs me when people write shit because it sound noble, but don't think about what it means.

    How do you "defend freedom" anyway? Is "by making sure a mosque can be built on private property in Lower Manhattan" anywhere on the list of "defending freedom"?

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  15. Re:Not like cowardly Westerners by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If Palestinians want to govern themselves, they have to prove to Israel that they can guarantee Israel's security, and they have to prove to the rest of the world that they can be considered a legitimate government

    That's exactly what we said about another country, a bit over 200 years ago.

    -- The British Government

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  16. Re:Not like cowardly Westerners by Smiths · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "fighting for liberty"

    I don't know how old you are, but seriously at some point you have to understand the difference between the image and the reality.

    "fighting for liberty"

    thats the image you're taught...the reality is slavery, no sufferage for women, genoicde of native americans.

    Its important to reconize that as its all over history and current events...Image = Operation Iraqi freedom! Reality = see wikileaks

    Image= Our great democratic ally and bastion of freedom in the Middle East..Reality=Israel who has the most UN resolutions against it in the world...and who is ethnically cleansing the native people of the area.

    Seriously, turn off the TV for a few weeks and thing about the world using your own mind instead of just repeating slogans like 'Americans were fighting for liberty ..."

  17. Re:Not like cowardly Westerners by Culture20 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm afraid I can't take you seriously if you think that Hamas is thing restricting freedom from the Palestenians.

    I'm afraid I can't take you seriously if you think that it's a binary issue. Because the Israelis are doing bad things, Hamas must be pure and good?

  18. Re:Not like cowardly Westerners by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In this case, it means the freedom to be oppressive and violate the freedom of others, in accordance with their religion.

    You've fallen into the same classic trap as a lot of conservative thinkers. Tyranny and freedom are opposites. Tyranny of the majority is tyranny. Therefore, they are not free in any meaningful sense of the word.

    More importantly, such tyranny is unsustainable. In a few hundred years, when the Catholic, Jewish, or Buddhist minority population explodes (and this is a likely scenario---minorities tend to have lower income, and people with lower income often produce more offspring), at some magic point, the Muslims will be in the minority. You can safely assume that at this point, the oppressed will turn on their oppressors and pass laws that oppress them in turn. Eventually, equilibrium will be achieved, but can the human race really be expected to have the patience to wait that long while people commit heinous acts of murder in the name of God?

    See, here's the thing. As far as I'm concerned, if you're killing someone for God, you're not reading your scripture correctly. Those rules were not written by God. They were written by man in a time that rightfully should be left in the past. Ask yourself this: if Muslims believe that Jesus was a prophet, how can they ignore his teachings so willingly? The good Samaritan, for example, preaches religious tolerance; the man Jesus chose to uphold as an example of how to live was of a people that his apostles would despise, in part due to religious differences, and who would have despised the man he helped because of similar differences.

    There are many, many more examples of this---so much so that anyone who requires death over differing religious beliefs has blinders on, focusing on a tiny section of their religious text to the exclusion of the majority of it. In short, those who would kill in God's name, by doing so, blaspheme it, and should, by their same standards, be put to death. There's some irony for you.

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  19. Re:Not like cowardly Westerners by Veggiesama · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I agree that this a violation of freedom, but this is a case of religion being subverted for political reasons, not a problem with the religion. Almost every religious group has had its fanatics at one time or another.

    Religion is a political subversion.

    The Quran, in isolation, is not a religion. Same goes for the Sunnah, or the Bible, or other "primary sources." Human language is not a programming language, where one word corresponds to one action. No text of sufficient complexity can be understood in a uniform, objective, everyone-sees-the-same-thing way. Same goes double if the text is ancient, translated, or literary.

    Instead, there are many interpreters--scholars, imams, clerics--who stand in the way and impose their own views, knowingly or unknowingly, on the original texts. Their own views create a new version of the text in their minds and the minds of those who listen to or read them. Simply by citing a certain passage and omitting a less compelling passage, they are creating a new narrative with its own strengths and foibles. Each narrative is built upon previous narratives (it is difficult to read one of these holy books in isolation without somehow being exposed to other believers, teachers, footnotes/annotations, or the media). Despite the differences (minute or extreme) between narratives, each narrative shares a lot in common with one another.

    As opposed to an individual's narrative, the religion can be found in the complex web of relationships between books, theories, and people. Just like no one computer comprises the Internet, the entire network of relationships makes up the religion (and the Internet). And that complex web--the religion--is also a web of political relationships. Those politics are replete with broken promises, exaggerated fears, and insipid bullying--human problems from human politics. It's impossible to exonerate one's own narrative from the sticky web of human politics. You can't stand on the sidelines, because you're in it, no matter how badly you distance yourself from the ugly politics of it all.

    Those fanatics you mention can't be so easily dismissed when they live in your web. Humanist Christians and liberal Muslims, take note: you need to own up to and speak out against your most destructive members. Especially when those members rule countries, lead political parties, and fund extreme acts of violence.