Comments (19)
Share this article
Print this page
Email a friend
- RSS
- Today's Paper
- Subscribe
- beta 2.0
High: 25°C
Low: 9°C
Alerts
Facebook fiasco
Denying that the Holocaust took place is actually illegal in many parts of Europe. If they pride themselves on the...
The writer is a columnist and TV and radio anchor (fasi.zaka@tribune.com.pk)
Denying that the Holocaust took place is actually illegal in many parts of Europe. If they pride themselves on the freedom of speech why curtail it in this particular instance and criminalise it? With the problems Muslims have with Facebook these days, it’s quite important to understand this. For starters, neo-Nazis and anti-Semitic groups used free speech as a mask to disguise their hatred by questioning historical accuracy of the Holocaust taking place at all, in effect claiming a conspiracy of historical fabrication by Jews for their own benefit.
On the surface, what may seem like an academic position (Holocaust denial) is often simply the cloak of those who preach hate. In this respect, Holocaust denial and the effort to draw cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) are quite similar. Those who seek the right to express their freedom of expression in the west to draw pictures of the Prophet (pbuh) make it look like an innocuous assertion of right; they claim no inherent hostility to Islam. However, what really happens is that it becomes an excuse for Islamophobes and racists to ply their trade. The resulting cartoons are not your typical Tom and Jerry variety, but bile and antagonism. The Danish Jyllands-Posten cartoons are a well-known example, as are now the “Draw Mohammed (pbuh) Day” ones.
Muslim articulation of this argument has been very poor and inconsistent. The manner of the Muslim disagreement has proven the assertion that Muslims are unthinking and inherently violent. If that was some Islamophobe’s aim since the very beginning, then he or she has achieved it. Why do I say this? The campaign against Facebook in Pakistan is based entirely on incorrect facts that can easily be disproved. In their emotional turmoil over the religious affront they have believed what they wish was true, rather than what is.
The Islamic lawyer’s movement that instigated the ban on the social networking site claimed there were more than 45 million Pakistani users of the website. That is blatantly untrue, that’s more than double the number of people with internet access in Pakistan.
Second, they say they wanted to send a message to the owners of the website. But for what? It was not an officially sanctioned contest, but user generated. Of course, they did manage to send a message because of the publicity this generated, but again some things need to made clearer.
Blasphemy is criminalised in Pakistan, as it is in many other countries. We have jurisdiction here, so a ban is legal (though not correct, as I shall argue later), but we do not have control over other countries. The real issue? Hate speech is actually constitutionally protected in the US. While forms of hate speech are illegal in parts of Europe and Canada, America’s laws are different.
This means it’s correct to say the blasphemous pages are illegal in Pakistan, but incorrect to say they are illegal in America where Facebook is incorporated. That being said, Facebook has a “terms of use” policy where, if it wants, it can make such cartoons a violation of membership. To put it into context, Facebook also has hate speech groups against Jews, Christians and other populations in the social network. If things are to change, then they cannot change for only Muslims.
Arguing only from a Muslim point of view is futile; it will need to incorporate larger principles that encompass everyone. Muslim perspective arguments will fail, even when change has been affected it is because of fear of violence which does the Muslim reputation more harm than good.
Respect for religions goes every way, even if it is a religion one does not believe in. Pakistan has declared Ahmedis non-Muslims, it is a fundamental freedom of right not to believe in their religion. Yet, Facebook is also populated with communities from Pakistan that argue for their destruction, hatred and ridicule for their beliefs. But no Islamic lawyer’s movement would agree that those pages should be banned too. The argument then by Muslims for respect for religions is easily countered as opportunistic, undermining the effort to get the world to understand why depicting the Prophet (pbuh) is so hurtful.
(To be continued)
Published in the Express Tribune, June 1st, 2010.
Reader Comments (19)
Latest News
Gilani chairs CCI meeting in Islamabad
CCI meeting is being attended by the chief ministers of Punjab, Sindh and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa.
Arrest warrant for Maldives ex-president: his party
A criminal court in the Maldives has issued an arrest order for former president Mohamed Nasheed.
Pakistan al Qaeda chief killed by US drone: Officials
Badr Mansoor, who reputedly sent fighters to Afghanistan and ran a training camp in North Waziristan, killed.
Don’t rest Tendulkar, says Gavaskar
'India should not rest record-chasing Sachin Tendulkar as part of rotation policy in ongoing tri-series in Australia.'
US still lacks Guantanamo transfer safeguards: Lawmakers
Detainees have been transferred to countries such as Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Yemen, Spain and Denmark.
Recent Slideshows
More in Opinion
Red is the colour of grief
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, redistributed or derived from.
Unless otherwise stated, all content is copyrighted © 2012 The Express Tribune News Network.
Technical feedback? webmaster@tribune.com.pk
with respect to your first paragraph, holocaust revisionism is different than outright denial but most of the revisionists are also put under the denial category (in Europe)
and many pages glorifying hitler are taken down on facebook, the same could’ve been done in this caseRecommend
Well saidRecommend
“Facebook also has hate speech groups against Jews, Christians and other populations in the social network.”
Try searching Holocaust denial on facebook you’ll know the truth.Recommend
Dee, Abid
The point is to get the world to create an understanding that the two are equivalent strategies to create hate speech. right now the world thinks the mulims are upset about nothing, especially when they themselves see no harm in it because they also have posters and paintings in their homes of their prophets.Recommend
Another point could be that while the moderators of Facebook and such could very well be genuinely interested in working against hatred and discrimination, they simply do not share our perspective since they belong to different cultures. They do not share our viewpoints with regard to such issues and hence cannot realistically be expected to immediately quantify that which we see as offensive as such.Recommend
“Facebook has removed two Holocaust denial groups claiming they violated Facebook’s Terms of Service by promoting hate. The two groups in question, “Holocaust is a Holohoax” and “Based on the facts…there was no Holocaust,” were removed from the site because messages from members posted on the group’s Walls were found to be promoting hate speech.”
Ref : http://www.pcworld.com/article/164765/facebook_boots_holocaust_denial_groups.html
How can anyone justify this? What kind of LOVE and universal BROTHERHOOD flying on the PEACE DOVE’s back is Facebook authorities seeing in “Everybody draw Muhammad Day” page???Recommend
@cervet cahn
Thats the point, its established that holocaust denial is a form of hate, while the consensus on drawing the prophet (pbuh) is still evolving. No one will automatically understand you, just as it took time to establish holocaust denial as a form of hate, and even that is not complete because it is still legal in america in general.Recommend
@cervet cahn
i just read the article you posted, sad to say cervet cahn you are a hypocrite who probably only googled the article but still havent read it yourself. the article mentions two sites that were taken off, but complains many more are still on. why do muslims lie so much just to prove a point and then easily are exposed?
from YOUR article:
Despite Facebook’s decision to eliminate two Holocaust denial groups, numerous others remain on Facebook. These groups have names like “Holocaust: A Series of Lies,” “Holocaust is a Myth,” “the holocaust that the Jewish believe in is very big lie,” “Holocaust denial & Anti-Zionism,” three different groups named “F–K Israel And Their Holocaust Bulls–t,” and “1,000,000 for the TRUTH about the Holocaust.Recommend
This tells, we need to know more especially about Islam and then claim it!Recommend
Some small pages like Dr. Zaid Hamid’s one have been deleted without any notice and any statement, which are obviously not as unaccepted as “Draw Day”.
what i got from your column is that we Muslims have to do all the things according to the rules and we should follow the rules and rules and rules and manners and this and that…
never seen any of your column yet on the Muslims being killed issues..Recommend
**@Muhammad Ali**
yes, Muslims need to obey laws, laws, laws, rules, rules, rules, or stop claiming one is from a true religion, because people of true and moral religions shoul follow laws, laws, laws, rules, rules, rules to set an example, or people will think that they are no better than the people they claim to hate.Recommend
@ asif
you may be right brother, but what you are saying i have already replied to that in my last statement , follow the rules that’s what show that we are Muslims but , criticizing a small act like ban of Facebook in columns and saying nothing agaist there huge huge un-ethical acts and blunders . like Israelite on journalists, thats what our people wants to do, including fasi as above and sorry to say u. too.Recommend
cheers!! too short thugh?
where’s the wit?Recommend
Fasi does not sound too convincing here. How can I agree when I have known pages being banned outright by facebook management of holocaust denial. And when it comes to Islam they have no policy as such. How is that?Recommend
Nice piece Fasi but it leads to a question in my mind. I would appreciate if you answer this.
Ahmadis are declared non-Muslims in Pakistan because they don’t believe that Prophethood ends at Muhammad (pbuh). It is a law and part of the consitution, which was democratically done though some may argue that it was done under pressure by Z.A. Bhutto but still it is a law. (having said that I would say it doesn’t snatch their right to practice what they believe). Similarly, the lawyers wanted FB to be banned in Pakistan because it goes against the law and constitution of Pakistan. They didn’t demand worldwide ban on FB. They just exercised their democratic right. Is it wrong?Recommend
@Shahid Khan: I don’t understand what you mean when you use the word ‘democratic right’ in this context. the islamic lawyers movement have the right to protest – THAT is their democratic right. They don’t have a right to have that automatically translated into LAW. Was a referendum taken on the issue? Why don’t Ahmedis have the democratic right to call themselves Muslims and their places of worship mosques? Why is that CRIMINALISED? And why do I not have a right to call them Muslims, etc? You don’t seem to understand that these democratic rights – to free speech, for example – are by defintion INALIENABLE. You cannot deprive some citizens of that right while letting others have it. You also don’t understand that unless there are checks and balances that protect minorities, crude democracy translates into brute majoritarian rule. which is fascism. Also, I would strongly suggest that you bone up on your history – start by reading the Munir Report.Recommend
Mr. Fasi, it is always a joy to read your columns. i agree with you thus far. the way the ‘Facebook’ issue has been mishandled will do more harm in the longer run to our reputation as muslims than any ‘draw Muhammad (pbuh) day’ by unknown facebook users can or will do…
muslims should be adopting a more principled, all-inclusive approach rather than adopting a narrow-minded and opportunistic posture…
spot on!
now on to the 2nd & 3rd parts…Recommend
The argument is that if denying the Holocaust is illegal is some parts of Europe so should Prophet Mohammad insulting be illegal. There are several fallacies to this that I hope are self-evident. But here is another- if Muslims want the west to see these two as the same why don’t they? If insulting Islam is punishable by death then so should denying the Holocaust, right? Muslims don’t seem to understand the “two way street” thing. If Muslims think Holocaust denial and Prophet Mo insulting are the same why arne’t they killing people who denying the Holocaust? Why is Holocaust denial permitted in the Muslim world, but not insulting the Prophet Mo? It seems like Muslims need to correct their own double standards doesn’t it?Recommend
For all those whining the Holocaust revisionism is banned from facebook so it Bosnian ethnic cleaning revisionism. Why no notice? If you start a fan pag eto MKilosevic you will be banned? Why? Did he committ genocide of self defense? Why won’t the Muslim media cover this injustice and double standard/.Recommend