Category Archives: Freedom of Expression

The Cost of Free Speech

Inayat Bunglawala used his latest foray on CiF to call for “consistency” of liberal values so that the clerics of the Islamic far-right, Bilal Philips and Zakir Naik, may be allowed into the country.

We already have a sufficient number of laws on the statute books to deal with incitement to hatred and violence, and the fact is that both Bilal Philips and Zakir Naik have visited the UK on several occasions in the past – and their speaking tours have passed by without incident. Neither speaker has said anything that has got them in trouble with the law, so why not just uphold our existing laws rather than seek to pre-emptively ban them? It is hard to avoid the conclusion that the exclusion order policy is yet another government PR gimmick designed to show that it is getting tough on those it regards as being extremists. And if the government believes that these speakers may still make some improper – though not unlawful – statements, then it should be regarded as a test of our commitment to free speech, especially if we regard its value as being universal.

Also posted in Islamism | 27 Comments

Now Bangladesh bans facebook

It’s official: banning facebook in Southasia is now a nationally transmitted contagion. Bangladesh has imposed a “temporary ban” on facebook.

The official statement used the Pakistani pretext. The government banned facebook because it had “hurt the religious sentiments of the country’s majority Muslim population” by carrying “offensive images” of Mohammed.

Go a little further and it transpires that the Bangladesh government enforced a ban not because facebook contained images that were offensive to muslims, but because it contained images that were offensive to the Prime Minister. A Bangladeshi blogger writes:

After publishing perverted images of Hasina and Khaleda (The Prime Minister and the leader of the opposition) in the second most popular site in Bangladesh Rapid Action Battalion (RAB – a special force) arrested a youth named Mahbub Alam Rodin. Bangladeshis could not access Facebook soon after that.

Posted in Freedom of Expression | 10 Comments

Pakistan’s jihad against the Internet

As you may have read, facebook is banned in Pakistan. Shiraz Maher discusses the dangerous implications:

The Lahore High Court banned Facebook after the social networking site was used to promote a viral campaign called: ‘Everyone draw Mohammed day’. Muslims generally regard any artistic depiction of Mohammed as blasphemous.

But why stop there? Pakistan rarely does things by halves so Youtube, Flickr, Wikipedia, and Blackberry services have also been proscribed “in view of [their] growing sacrilegious content”.

But what are the incidents that led up to the Lahore High Court ruling for the ban and what can be said of the precedent this sets? Urooj Zia writes in himal, tracing the background to the internet ban in Pakistan and string of related international events which set of the ruling by the Lahore court.

Posted in Freedom of Expression | Leave a comment

America’s Non-Controversial Christian Censorship

Glen Greenwald debunks the notion that censorship and religious offence-taking is now the mainstay of Islam alone. In particular, Greenwald dismantles Ross Douthat’s (of the New York Times) accusations that only Islamic sensibilities are granted special privileges, as the tribalistic and selective tropes of a right-wing Christian fundamentalist hack.

Douthat writes in the New York Times:

In a way, the muzzling of “South Park” is no more disquieting than any other example of Western institutions’ cowering before the threat of Islamist violence. . . . But there’s still a sense in which the “South Park” case is particularly illuminating. . . . [I]t’s a reminder that Islam is just about the only place where we draw any lines at all. . . .Our culture has few taboos that can’t be violated, and our establishment has largely given up on setting standards in the first place.  Except where Islam is concerned.

Also posted in Anti Muslim bigotry | 34 Comments

Prophet in a Bear Suit Was All About “Israel and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan”

It is quite astonishing how a small, motivated fringe of Muslim radicals managed to stop a TV network from airing an episode of ‘South Park’, simply by the threat of violence and religious offence. The episode of ‘South Park’ shown last week depicted the founders of various religions, including Moses, Jesus and Buddha, but declined to show the Prophet Muhammad outright and instead represented him as wearing a bear costume.

But that was enough for a member of the extremist group, Revolution Muslim, to post this on their blog:

“We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show. This is not a threat, but a warning of the reality of what will likely happen to them.”

Also posted in Islamism | 6 Comments

Support South Park

South Park is a popular cartoon well known for satirising almost every aspect of popular culture, religions, class, race. Most of ‘victims’ of the cartoon from Comedy Central have been sensible enough to see the funny side and shrugged off the piss-take.

Not the Islamists, however. True to form, a New York based Islamist groupuscule have threatened the makers of South Park with death, ordained by the prophet himself!

Here they are (see video) invoking Ibn Taymiyyah to reinforce the dubious doctrine of “Defence of the Prophet” and their religious obligation to behead the cartoon creators of South Park. They justify their intention by qualifying it with the story of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf, chief of the Jewish tribe of Banu Nadir and a poet, who was assassinated by an order of Muhammed for writing, and here we rely on Ibn Taymiyyah, ‘offensive poetry’.

Here is the censored episode of South Park:

Posted in Freedom of Expression | 12 Comments

Simon Singh delighted as BCA drop case

The BCA have dropped their case against Simon Singh! A delighted Simon says:

It still staggers me that the British Chiropractic Association and half the chiropractors in the UK were making unsubstantiated claims. It still baffles me that the BCA then dared to sue me for libel and put me through two years of hell before I was vindicated.  And it still makes me angry that our libel laws not only tolerate but also encourage such ludicrous libel suits. My victory does not mean that our libel laws are okay, because I won despite the libel laws. We still have the most notoriously anti-free speech libel laws in the free world.

Read more here.

And here is Simon’s original article about the British Chiropractic Association which kicked off their libel action, now legally republished on the Guardian.

Also posted in Lawfare | Leave a comment

“Halal Comedy” and Shazia Mirza

In Pakistan, you cannot joke about sex, religion or the president. Shazia Mirza performed in Lahore and and told jokes about sex, religion and the president.

The last time I performed in Lahore I was told: “You can talk about anything you like – religion, politics, drugs, you can swear and curse, just don’t mention ‘The Sex’.”

Any sexual words or connotations were banned – because in Pakistan there is no mention of sex on television, radio, or in public.

In Lahore this time I am told by armed security personnel before going on stage: “Be careful, it’s best you only do halal comedy.” Halal comedy? There is no such thing. That’s like saying, I only eat halal bacon.

I had some requests from members of the audience who came to my dressing room before the show to ask me specifically to do jokes about sex and religion. Which is what I had intended to do, anyway.

Posted in Freedom of Expression | 5 Comments

would it kill me to go along with dawkins and hitchens for once?

as you have probably heard, the hierarchy of the catholic church is coping with plenty of more-than-usually-unpleasant scandal involving the usual suspects: priests, paedophiles, children, cover-ups, pay-offs, not-quite-apologies, denials, denouncings and defrockings which have, for the first time i can remember, started to take on a somewhat apocalyptic tone, that’s apocalyptic in terms of the catholic church if not the rest of us. even the commentariat at the times smell blood:

“A pope with no moral authority simply cannot function as a pope. Yes, he has ecclesiastical power. But ecclesiastical power without moral authority merely exposes the hollowness of an unaccountable, self-perpetuating clerisy. Does he think we don’t know? Does he understand that any parent of any child will be unable to imagine themselves in the same moral universe as this man?”

and some of them are even sort-of-default-catholics for whom this is the final straw:

Also posted in Activism, Farce, Identity Politics, Interfaith, Lawfare, Obscurantism | 9 Comments

Religion, Literature and Offence

Philip Pullman at the Oxford Literary Festival, on the offence caused to Christians by the publication of his new novel The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ:

’nuff said.

Posted in Freedom of Expression | Leave a comment
  • Categories

  • Archives