Slashdot Mirror
Google Blocks 'Innocence of Muslim' Video In Indonesia and India
hypnosec writes "Google has blocked the anti-Islamic video, which was posted on YouTube, in Indonesia as well as India. YouTube has already denied a complete removal of the clip 'Innocence of Muslims' that mocks Islam and Prophet Mohammed. The video has led to protests and violence across the Arab world. The foreign ministry spokesperson of Indonesia and India have confirmed that Google has blocked access to the video. Indonesia has also asked RIM to filter the video on its smartphones."
Apparently freedom of speech applies only when it's convenient. Sounds a lot like the model in China where only specific protests/violence are "allowed". Way to go Google for adopting the China model. Maybe they'll let you back in!
Google complies with the laws of the country it operates in. If they are required by law to remove something, they do it.
Are you suggesting that big companies in general should be exempt from the law and obey it only as they see fit?
http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/
Pass it around, Free Mohammad.
Are they going to block this image from the Onion, entitled "No One Murdered Because Of This Image"? After all everyone tells us that Muslims are no worse than people of other religions, so surely this insult to Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Judaism will have the members of respective religions storming embassies and murdering people all over the place?
If not some people might suspect that Islam really is a more violent and savage religion than the others
87% of Indians are not Muslims, and are not going to care one way or another about this movie. What was the need to block it here? Let them block it in dar ul Islam, which includes Indonesia, Malaysia, Bangladesh & Fuckistan, but does NOT include India.
"Muslim world rising against America" is your shock doctrine for this election, please vote accordingly and against your own interests.
What's that? You want to allow completely free speech to those terrorist pedophile human-trafficking druglord hackers do you?
Sir, would you have a seat, we need to have a little chat.
> What happened to freedom of speech, Google?
Trumped by local laws. Local laws like the DMCA, copyright, etc. Theres no way for a company to fight laws.
> They are no longer the freedom loving and defending company
They cannot fight a state, they can only get out of that state.
> All went downhill after the failured product Google+.
No, all went down the crapper when single states introduced laws to censor the net. Theocracies introducing laws to censor blashpemy is no different than capitalist states having laws censoring filesharing.
Frankly I'm not hugely bothered by it.
Nowhere is freedom of speech absolute, it's limited by the ability of the society to tolerate it. Even in the US advocating violence can get you in trouble along with forms of obscenity. Quite relevantly public nudity, which I'd qualify as a form of speech, will get you arrested in a lot of places, but if society was more comfortable with the idea than that restriction would be removed.
In these countries video they're not used to this level of freedom of speech and their society needs time to adapt. I like pushing the boundaries of free speech in these countries, but sometimes things go viral and push past their ability to deal with it. Given that people are dying as a direct result of this video I can see the justification of some limited censorship (given that it's far beyond what they're allowed to do in their own society).
As to whether it's effective is another matter, censorship can easily be circumvented, but maybe it's enough of a hindrance to stop it from going viral.
I stole this Sig
Jews didn't control much of the world oil, making them filthy rich with little to do to keep their exploding population happy. (The arab "spring" was just a lot of young people with an education and no jobs getting fed up with doing nothing. Even in Libia which could afford to have an enormous essentially un-employed population)
Jews are one of smallest groups in the world, Muslims one of the biggest.
Jews don't hijack aircraft.
There is no mass immigration of jews into atheist countries from Jewish countries and then trying to turn their new homeland into a muslim state. Muslims are fleeing muslim controlled countries, then trying to convert their new country to be run the same way. See Sharia4Beglim and Sharia4Holland. England already has Sharia courts.
Need I go on? Stop comparing the conflict with Islam with nazi germany, the differences are gigantic and the parallells are at right angles to each other.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Don't understand. If anything your remark only supports the point that companies should comply with the law.
Plenty of GI's hate Muslims after personal experience with them.
However, it's unprofessional to voice it, and why voice it when you can act on it instead?
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
I really don't care... Really. This is just the latest excuse someone somewhere tossed out for the reason that muslims are killing people... again.
If it wasnt this video it would be some cartoon. Or maybe a book. Or a newspaper. Maybe just something someone somewhere did or said... or didnt say.
You can't deal with a religion that wants everyone else dead by saying ' i respect your right to religious differences' and pandering to them.
It's just not gonna work.
Someday the world is gonna have to deal with the muslims in a much stronger tone. A good chunk of them don't seem to be compatable with the rest of the people on the planet.
Doesn't look like that's gonna change anytime soon either. In fact it seems to keep getting worse.
The longer you wait to deal with the problem. The worse it will be to deal with too.
I actually like what they are doing here.
Refusing to take it down entirely is good. Blocking it in countries where the authorities want it blocked is also good. Refusing to do that would be a typical USA "we know better than you" move, and that is a big piece of the reason why the US is hated in so many places around the world.
If people within the country don't like what their government is doing, it is their job to solve that problem. If they need help, they can ask for it. Don't force "help" on people who may or may not want it.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
This still not blocked in Pakistan. Google should block it in all the Islamic countries.. India is not Islamic country however after Indonesia it has the 2nd largest Muslim population.
http://askaralikhan.blogspot.com/
it's a tough call
1. there are laws in china that are odious and disgusting in terms of privacy invasion and censorship. such that an american company operating there, by submitting to that law, breaks it's fidelity with the principles of its home country in ways that stink. but google has, in fact, stood up to china in some ways, such as with censorship, and lost market share in china due to that and pissed off the chinese government. go google!
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/06/01/1450204/google-highlights-censored-search-terms-in-china
other western companies, for example, will do business with oppressive regimes in ways that support those oppressive regimes in evil and odious ways:
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/08/31/1434229/finspy-commercial-spyware-abused-by-governments
what a company like this deserves is to be shut down, kicked out, and have their business actively destroyed in righteous indignation of operating from the west while grossly violating important beliefs of the west and in support of evil regimes
2. however, there are also local laws that, while you can find more abstract objections with them, it makes prudent sense to just comply with the local laws to continue doing business there, and also be in a position to effect long term liberty improving change in that country by remaining a force there
such as, for example, with this stupid video: while speech should be free all over the world, it isn't in some places. and going crazy and not cooperating, for example, with germany for not allowing nazi imagery or indonesia for not allowing mohammad imagery, doesn't convince anyone of anything and you just piss off that country and lose market share
so it's better to just comply with local law on this issue. but on other issues, it's better to stick up your middle finger at oppressive governments. each case is different
shrewd governance, of countries or companies, is a matter of finesse
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Given that people are dying as a direct result of this video I can see the justification of some limited censorship
I disagree with the above statement. This is a way to grant power to extremist groups. If societies are 'unprepared' for free speech, as you say, they should have laws about the matter. And in fact they do - there are laws against (religious) slander, even laws protecting a specific religion such as Islam.
I don't think that Google should break the laws in such country in order to make a point - that should be done by activists from inside if they think the law was unjust. So Google should remove the video from the countries where the law requires it. However, it should not cater to extremist groups giving them the power to change things through violence.
That would only bring more violence.
Indosiar (one of the largest TV networks in Indonesia) is running a vicious anti-Hindu series "Sembilan Wali". The Balinese are upset but they aren't beheading anyone.
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
Just because people are outraged that the video exists doesn't mean they've actually seen it.
Yes, that's a valid point. But the decision that a company makes should be whether or not to withdraw from the country or whether or not to pressure the government for a change but not whether or not to break the law. That should be used only in extreme cases (aka Oskar Schindler) but not in issues such as removing a video from your server.
He doesn't "beg for forgiveness at all".
He makes it clear that he (and the Norwegian authorities) "utterly reject" the video, and he calls for a calm response.
It all seems perfectly appropriate to me.
This morning, Sept 17, 2012, I've been watching and listenting to reports of riots and civil unrest all over the World - from mostly international sources.
While the American news sources are focused almost exclusively on the Middle East, their are riots in China, Japan, S. Africa, Western Europe, etc ....
NONE of them are about Islam. They are all about economics.
Deep down it's the same with the MIddle Eastern riots. This piss-ant video was just a the spark or an excuse for the riots.
ANYONE who thinks these riots are really about Islam being "insulted" is horribly provincial and uninformed.
An example of something similar in the States would be the Occupy Wall Street protests. It's really not about Wall Street "greed". It's about young people pissed off about the percveived lack of economic opportunities and jobs that are available to them - exactly the same reason all those young people in the Middle East are rioting. Give'em jobs and they'll be back in their homes.
We have BILLIONS of people trying to get a slice of the ecnomic pie and the pie isn't growing fast enough for us all to have increasing standards of living. Hence, the haves are getting more and the have nots are being left in the dust.
But go ahead, blame the video and Islam because that's what the media is telling you.
And go ahead be a smug that you have a nice life because you were smart enough to get a degree in the right field in the right country and live in the right are.
If this keeps up, YOU will be affected - if not already.
I suspect this is more a humanitarian issue to lessen bloodshed amongst the ignorant, than a political issue. Blame newsclowns for coloring it any other way.Election year.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
Agreed, this is monday morning and I just watched the video here in the u.s.
I've seen video slamming the tenets of just about any major religion and several obscure ones.
No reason Islam can't suck it up just like everyone else.
How many movies cover the Inquisition? The Crusades? Bad Buddhist Kung Fu? Make Hindi Gods into animated villains? Show faithful anywhere to be subversive and evil in the name of good?
Suck it up and quit acting like children and the world will stop treating you like children. Keep it up and get spanked.
Hey, that's not a threat, that's nearly a physical law of the universe.
No one asks you to go along with the flow of the world, but if you stand against it, you stand against the world. You stand the chance of an ant to a steamroller, a drop of water in a volcano, an undercover cop at a rap show.
This is all so unecessary for everyone. A peaceful solution for all can be found at http://www.subgenius.com/ .
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
Wow. That was a little harsh? In case you haven't realized this, there are groups, right here in America, that do that sort of thing too - boycotting books, TV shows, movies, or anything that has content they don't agree with. Why was it necessary for the bigoted slur on Muslims?
Typical Muslim equivocation. Other groups boycotting stores means that it is OK to drag people out of embassies, torture, and murder them. "We are just doing what those Catholics who said 'don't buy the davinci code' did'". I say no it is not the same, if Muslims said "don't watch youtube" then I would not have a problem with it. Its because they react in their traditional manner of killing, rioting, etc.
shhh...
microsoft microsoft microsoft
hush now
apple apple apple
there now, calm down
microsoft apple microsoft apple microsoft apple...
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Citizens do not declare war. States do.
Are you suggesting that, if a bunch of Americans vandalized a foreign embassy on US soil, that shold technically count as a declaration of war on that country by the United States of America?
Score: i, Imaginary
I never said that the embassy guards do not have the authority to retaliate. I'm just contesting the notion that the actions of independent citizens translate as a formal declaration by their nation state. The United States, of course, are free to interpret such an attack as an act of war and declare war on Libya; but to say that Libya have declared war on the United States when the embassy was attacked flies in the face of international laws and conventions.
Score: i, Imaginary
I've not seen the film, but I have seen a lot of right-wing propaganda, and have my own theory. A common sentiment on the right is that the western world and the islamic world are already fighting an undeclared culture war, and there can be only one victor. They are very concerned that those on the left deny this. From the point of view of the right, this is a disaster: There is a war on, and their own generals refuse to fight back or even admit a conflict exists. Thus the production of materials like this, intended to be inflamatory and provoke a violent reaction, and force this simmering culture war into an open conflict which no-one can deny.
I think "direct" does not mean what you think it means.
And they are getting hit by it and hard. You can certainly test untested legislation, but you're ultimately responsible for results of such testing. In this particular case, the legislation has been tested before and Google was forced to comply. They don't want to step on the same rake again.
How many movies cover the Inquisition? The Crusades? Bad Buddhist Kung Fu? Make Hindi Gods into animated villains? Show faithful anywhere to be subversive and evil in the name of good?
I haven't seen The Innocence of Muslims, nor its trailer, but I understand it contains a mocking portrayal of Mohammed himself. Not some historical incident committed by Muslims, but the central holy figure of the religion.
None of the above target the central tenet of the religion in question. Most Christians can look at the Crusades or the Inquisition, and say "that's not my religion".
It's more akin to something like The Last Temptation of Christ (in which Jesus marries Mary Magdalene - perhaps in a dream) or Jerry Springer The Opera -- both of these received widespread protests from Christians. Of course a lot of Christians ignored it, just as a lot of Muslims are ignoring this.
It's worth noting that there is a significant cultural difference at play here. What one culture considers "free speech", other may consider "defamation", "copyright infringement", "inciting of hatred" and many other things.
Consider for example the legislation in place in Germany against denying the Holocaust. Under "universal" free speech umbrella, I should be able to talk about Holocaust not having happened and it being a one big lie. Political and historical realities suggest that such free speech has potential to cause catastrophic damage, and as a result it's illegal in Germany, while legal in, for example, some Nordic countries.
To add to the mess is the current transition from centralised broadcast media to user-generated one. Much of the stuff comes from amateurs with meagre budgets, such as this movie and can be screened worldwide within minutes of being finished. This was an impossibility only a decade ago. We're in a new territory in terms of what is acceptable in different cultures, and as shown with this particular example, free speech can carry significant price paid in blood by those not even related to the speech in question.
There really are no easy solutions here. Internationalism is very difficult to make work because of cultural clashes like these. We simply have to take it one step at a time and hope and work for the best outcome.
Protests, but not violent, murderous ones...
Given that people are dying as a direct result of this video I can see the justification of some limited censorship
People are dying because Darwin's evolution (see the irony here where it applies to people denouncing Darwin?) is being proved. If you are too stupid to benefit the gene pool it's better you're killed off as soon as possible for the benefit of the future human race. There's no better way to prove stupidity than to fight (to the death) over whose God is the most peaceful...
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
There's nothing 'humanitarian' about censorship. And I blame newsclowns for linking speech to violence. This whole thing is designed to apply the pressure of the 'crowd' against free speech rights. It is textbook terrorism by the censors looking for and getting public support for their cause.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
There is a reason why you DO NOT see Christians rioting over the many many many assaults on their religion in the press and the world at large.
Beyond it being against their religious beliefs to do so, it is exactly this argument. They know they believe in an Omnipotent God. They have no need to defend Him. The most you are likely to get from Christians is a somewhat strongly worded letter or a product boycott.
That tells me all I need to know about the "equivalence" between Islam and Christianity.
Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
how many GIs are demanding that other Americans be sent off to risk life and limb to satisfy their lust for blood sacrifices in the name of religion while they stay safe at home?
I would say probably none. But then, I would count the number of Americans in general that believe that as ALSO none.
I WOULD count the number of Americans that falsely believe that some their fellow Americans are crazed religious nutbags that want to slaughter people who theologically disagree with them as AT LEAST one, and probably more as I know that there is a strain of anti-religious (Really, Anti-Christian) fervor that has infected some people in America that has no grounding in reality and is instead held up by anti-religiously bigoted propaganda by people with political and financial hay to make.
Congratulations on buying into the lie, BTW.
Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
You're intentionally missing a forest for the trees. Just because citizens are represented by the state does not mean that state represents all of its citizens. Else, every time a citizen of US kills a citizen of another country, you could argue that it constitutes an act of war by your logic.
That is obviously not the case.
I think that a movie like "Life of Brian" couldn't be made in this day and age. Or it would be made but not shown, what with religious sensitivities flaring up even in more or less normal countries. Think of it: if you screened a new "Life of Brian" (new, because then the excuse of showing it as our cultural heritage doesn't fly), then you'd kind of be obliged to also screen a "part 2" movie spoofing the life of Mohammed, and we all know that that would lead to... Easier to ban any religion bashing, which is what is slowly happening in many European countries.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
You realise, I hope, that The Life Of Brian was the subject of many protests (albeit not violent as far as I know), and was banned in many places?
I hope that when people in these countries search for censored stuff, they get presented with a page that says:
Results hidden from you because angry men with guns pointed at us have made us hide it from you. This is part of their control mechanism over you that lets them maintain their power over you.
The alternative, Results hidden because you may run around like animals murdering people isn't much better.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
And plenty of Muslims loath GIs after America has invaded their sovereign territory and massacred them. It goes both ways.
That film was actually banned in Norway at the time. In was marketed in Sweden as "so funny it's banned in Norway".
Jews are famous for their self-deprecating humor but Catholics too have mercilessly made fun of their own faith. It was a great liberator because it was not always thus. Once, religion was deadly serious and to question let alone make fun off, that is heresy and that gets you killed.
A joke might not seem like much but it forces you to not take things to serious, it was essential in tearing down the ivory towers of religion and force it to become accountable. And this was not something that has stopped. The chaos in the Catholic church now people are talking about its abuses is just part of process. For decade, no, centuries, people knew and did not nothing.
For evil to triumph all that is needed is for good men to do nothing.
The so called moderate muslim, does nothing. This leaves a tiny handful of reformers who are often prosecuted or killed (Pakistan can't even protect its ministers, what hope does a normal civilian have) fighting the extreme elements who have the backing of countless hangers on, protected behind the veil of silence. Moderates might not agree with all the extremists do but you stick up for your own, regardless what.
A very recent case in Holland has a man under arrest for having had sexual encounters with over 200 boys. How did he manage to go undetected with so many victims? Well, people knew, but didn't speak out. The community is a closed one and they keep their troubles to themselves...
There are countless such cases in history and far bigger ones, hidden behind walls of silence and false respect. But humor has created cracks in this facade. In holland, the catholics created the 8 may movement, which basically told the pope to mind his own business. It allowed people to ignore the church doctrine and make up their own minds on birth-control, on politics, on marriage. On everything.
For modern free youth, it is hard to realize just how controlled religious communities are. In certain place, if a young couple is married and has not produced a kid after the first your, the pastor comes by to have a talk.
This control is not nice control, it is to make sure everyone walks the line, no dissenters, no free-thinkers. It is very effective. If you don't question, you don't challenge to status quo and those in charge like that.
Read up on some of the practices of popes, these weren't devout people, they were depraved men who craved power above all else. And they got away with it, because they were beyond question.
But humor, that challenges everything, breaks down the most powerful with a simple line or drawing. Don't believe me?
How tall was Napoleon? He was in reality above average height for french men of that age. It was a cartoon drawing that started the idea that he was a small power crazed war monger. A British cartoon made at a time Napoleon was kicking limey ass.
Spitting Image, a British satire puppet show, ripped politicians and others in power to shreds, and changed politics forever. People remembered the caricature better then the real person.
In my life time, the same joke has been done twice. The pope speaking and having underwear thrown at him as if he was a popstar. Caused mild affront but was considered part of a free society. The same joke was done off the Ayatollah (the previous one) in Germany. It caused a crisis, the comedian had to be protected and politicians fell over themselves to try to a peace Muslims.
It wasn't always allowed to joke about the pope, the christian faith. And the Muslim leaders KNOW what humor lead to and they don't want the same to happen. So anyone who dares to question, make humor, challenge, is silenced. Silenced most of all by moderates who do nothing but silently support the extremists by their inactivity. If you donate to your mosque even when you know the money goes to extremist, turning a blind eye to does, still makes you a supported of these extremists.
Western leaders are at a loss about how to deal with it. In the west, the crumbling of organized religion just seem
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
No, the violence started because some clueless religious fanatics:
1. can't comprehend the idea of free speech
2. would outrage even if they did understand
It's a moebious strip really. The film exists because people exist that would organize mass violence about anything that puts their faith in bad light, which sort of is the film.
I have to side with the fanatics on this one though; there isn't one redeemable thing to the film. Viewing it, even in order to teach people what not to do, could easily be classified as psychological torture.
-- no sig today
You are entitled to free speech, but in most civilised countries, there is a line drawn between free speech, and incitement.
In the United States, the relevant case law is Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969). Under this interpretation of the First Amendment, speech can only be banned if it is intended to incite "imminent lawless action" and is likely to do so. The classic case would be the leader of an angry mob telling them to attack or kill someone. Does the Innocence of Muslims video qualify? Almost certainly not. While Nakoula may well have intended it to rile up the Islamic community in the US and overseas, it did not pose an imminent threat of lawless action. The reactions of hostile third parties cannot be used as a justification to prohibit free speech; as the Supreme Court put it in Brown v. Louisiana (1966), there is "no heckler's veto".
The innocence of muslims has crossed that line by a very long distance indeed, and imho, it's on a par with Westboro Baptist Church turning up to protest at a dead soldiers funeral. [...] The people who created the video should not be able to hide behind the claim of 'free speech'. It isn't free speech, it's hate speech plain and simple.
The WBC protests are also protected free speech in the United States under the First Amendment. You mentioned that you are posting from the UK, so one thing that may be confusing you is that in the US, there is no such legal category as "hate speech". It's all protected by the Constitution. The idea is that if you allowed the government to decide that certain speech was "hate speech" and suppress it, there would be a slippery slope that would inevitably lead to the repression of open and free political discourse.
Just for the record, I want to know this.
You do understand that the world wide Christian response to the move The Last Temptation of Christ, a major motion picture, is nothing, no where, not even close to the world wide Muslim response to a shitty low budget attrocity of an amateur film by a no-budget nobody, right? That the vast majority of radical Christians maybe, maybe considered picketing and a boycot as a valid response?
That the two responses two the two movies are not just orders of magnitude different, but on completely different planes of existance different?
That if a major motion picture studio published the same level of movie about Muhammed that the studio would likely burn?
One story, of one attack? Versus how many hundreds of deaths, and thousands of attacks in the past week?
Hell there were death to america marches when a completely different country published CARTOONS.
dhimma is a form where you are put into a lower class, receive less legal and other rights, are TOLD that you are INFERIOR to the 'master race' (yes, I used that wording on purpose) and your lands and rights could be snapped away at a moment's notice if you displease the rulers or religious folks.
ie, just a notch above slavery.
nice, huh?
btw, they see ALL of us as being in this role sooner or later.
religion of pieces, indeed.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
And we have left wingers saying we need to blow up Wall Street. And no one cares, because lunatic ravings have always been with us and will always be with us; the difference these days is that the lunatics have a bigger megaphone available. The day you see left-wing or right-wing mobs murdering people in the USA is the day I will start being concerned in the USA. In Muslim countries, the mobs are murdering right now.
Yeah, because at no point in history Christianity has killed people because of blasphemy and heresy.</sarcasm>
If any, it only says about their relative grade of maturity as somewhat civilized religions, and the long due need for a renaissance in Islam. Which won't happen if people trying to make it happen get ridiculed over and over.
Actually you'll find most of those Christian "wars" weren't in the name of God or Jesus. The vast majority of them were simply about power and the ones using Christianity as a rallying cry. The same can be said of Buddhism.
Waging wars in Jesus's name is strictly forbidden in scripture. It only takes a brief read through the gospels to see it plainly. When someone claims to be acting in the name of God and their actions are violent, they are called out on it pretty quickly. Christian cultures also tend to be self correcting. While Christians have done some bad things, this is pretty much to be expected because Christians are sinners like everyone else. However, Christians also make good efforts to stop sin, such as abolishing slavery. In this way, Christians self correct. No one claims Christians are perfect, in fact it's a tenet of the religion that they make mistakes. Islam thus far hasn't shown any of these characteristics.
Well could always do:
The following video is intended for mature audiences.
Please select the century your culture has entered: [ 13th ] century.
We need to carpetbomb all these countries with flyers showing every blasphemous depiction of Muhammed anyone can think of, daily, until they realize its been a few centuries since racking up a body count made anyone respect Muhammed.
For great justice.