There was a recent news item suggesting that the ministry or governmental authority or whatever had declared that the ban on YouTube was not going to be lifted in Pakistan any time soon. The reason given was that improper content could not be removed from it. By improper content we all know what is meant. Primarily, one particular video is what this ban is all about. Here I think it is important to point out what is otherwise generally known: those really interested in accessing YouTube have already figured out how to do it, ban or no ban. And I am sure that these people are definitely not viewing the aforementioned video. If they really wanted to watch it they have probably done so already. The question then is: why the continued ban on YouTube?

Anybody who uses the internet regularly, especially to read foreign newspapers or any other source of information, inevitably comes across material that could be considered blasphemous. Concerning the notorious cartoons that created quite a stir in Pakistan a few months ago, most foreign newspapers published copies of those cartoons. Interestingly, The New York Times was one major newspaper that avoided doing so. The point really is that much that can be considered blasphemous is available to people in Pakistan even with the YouTube ban. However, as I was researching for a short article on the early history of Islam, I tried to search for ‘Muhammad’. To my utter disbelief, the Wikipedia entry on Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was blocked, obviously by the Pakistani side. And that did make me wonder who decides to block which site on the internet.

It is conceivable that as the mullahs keep on agitating against access to anything on the internet that is identifiably uncomplimentary towards Muslims, we will end up with bans on an increasing number of internet sites. However, the mullahs, in their ignorance about the internet, do not realise that blocking any number of sites does not prevent access to the sort of information they find objectionable. The only way to assure that nobody living in Pakistan can read any ‘blasphemous’ material on the internet is to prevent any access to the internet. Perhaps that is the direction we are going in, the so-called slippery slope towards complete censorship. But then we will also have to ban things like satellite television, which provides unfiltered foreign content that could also be quite reprehensible.

The next question about preventing access to inappropriate material brings us to the problem of Pakistanis travelling abroad and those Pakistanis who live in foreign countries, especially in the Godless west where blasphemous material is freely available. In this matter, the mullahs will have to decide pretty soon about the ‘purity’ status of those Pakistanis who have been exposed to such material while abroad and who did not try to kill all those responsible for propagating such material. Should such people even be allowed to re-enter Pakistan in this befouled state? Here, it is obvious that the only way to prevent ordinary Pakistanis from exposure to objectionable stuff is to prevent them from leaving the country. Only people who have been certified by the mullahs to be entirely incapable of either viewing or understanding any form of blasphemy (the totally ignorant?) should be allowed to go abroad. And even then somebody, preferably a mullah, must be with them to keep an eye on them.

This might sound excessive but I still remember a picture from a UN meeting during the heyday of the Soviet Union. The picture showed the Russian representative in front with one person watching him very carefully and another person watching the watcher very carefully. Clearly such surveillance will be necessary for any Pakistani who does go abroad. And if there is any evidence that such a person wilfully and deliberately indulged in watching forbidden materials then that person must be forced to return to Pakistan immediately and face justice. This could open up an entirely new reason for demanding political asylum while visiting any country in the European Union or in the United States and Canada since, on return to Pakistan, a person who willingly indulged in watching forbidden material could be executed urgently.

I can just imagine the hordes of Pakistanis in any of the above countries getting their picture taken with a ‘blasphemous’ cartoon prominently displayed next to them, putting that picture on social media and then demanding asylum. Even though I claim no expertise in such ‘legal’ matters, I am sure that no civilised country will deport a ‘foreigner’ back to a country where he or she might be subject to the death penalty for a crime that is not even considered a crime in the host country. Though I would not be surprised if they somehow made an exception for Pakistanis. Our Pakistani ‘elites’ who frequently frequent countries where blasphemy runs rampant must also be looked at very, very carefully. Clearly such persons must be water boarded to find out if they ever wilfully and deliberately watched blasphemous material while abroad and then punished appropriately. Fortunately, this will probably rid Pakistan of almost the entire leadership of all our political parties. If nothing else that would be great.

Finally, about our impressionable youth. Clearly they must be prevented from any access to the internet lest their fragile minds are contaminated by ‘inappropriate’ material. More importantly, none of these young people should be allowed to go abroad for education. We all know exactly what sort of things they will see and learn about while they are supposedly getting an education. Purity of the fragile Pakistani mind is definitely more important than the inevitable contamination by an advanced education in the Godless west. And, yes, I have a question for our mullahs: how do you figure out that something like a cartoon or a video is blasphemous without first wilfully and deliberately reading, seeing or watching it?

Daily Times

The post Goodbye YouTube appeared first on Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF).

Pakistan has been at war now for almost 35 years at a stretch. It all began with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan around 1979-80. A call went around the so-called Islamic world for recruits for jihad against the infidel Soviets. Our religio-political parties, led by the Jamaat-e-Islami and the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam, not only answered this call with religious fervour but they and their ilk also became the most vociferous champions of the American cause. The CIA flooded the jihadis with dollars and the most sophisticated weapon systems, and assisted by our intelligence apparatus, trained them in camps that mushroomed all over Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa. This jihad lasted for almost 10 years, enriching in the process, in dollar terms as well as in terms of political clout, our religio-political parties and those who toed their line, including those in the media, who promoted the jihad with extra passion.

However, our mainstream media kept itself physically at a safe distance from the jihad. No major newspaper sent its correspondent into Afghanistan to cover the war. A handful of Pakistani journalists, who did go in, were sent in mostly by the Western and US media. The Tuesday briefings at the USIS in Islamabad about the progress of the war, mostly confined to the number of Soviet troops killed in the preceding week, used to be the only remote window to the war for our mainstream media and that, too, confined only to their ‘cleared’ Foreign Office beat reporters.

Next, we willingly entered into two low-intensity clandestine wars by early 1990, one in Afghanistan on the side of the Taliban against the Northern Alliance, seeking strategic depth, and the other on the side of the freedom fighters inside occupied Kashmir against the Indian troops. Both these wars were being fought in the name of jihad by so-called non-state actors with the full backing of the state. This war had lasted for almost 12 years, having tapered off by the middle of 1999 after the Kargil fiasco. During this war as well, our mainstream media had kept itself largely aloof. There was no coverage from the war theatres by correspondents of our mainstream media. Whatever coverage appeared in our major newspapers was courtesy of foreign news agencies. However, on occasions, one or two Urdu newspapers would carry interviews of the Kashmiri jihad leadership, which used to be specially arranged by you-know-who to send some specific signals to friends or to mislead the enemy. These wars virtually came to an end by 2002 as in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, Afghanistan was invaded by the US and at the same time, the world had redefined armed freedom struggles like the one going on in Indian-occupied Kashmir, as terrorism.

The second Afghan war, which lasted for 13 years, was also covered by our mainstream media from a safe distance. Except for a few who already had the experience of covering the first Afghan war and the one that ‘we’ fought on the side of the Taliban, did cover this war but mostly for foreign media organisations. And most of the coverage of this war by our mainstream media was again courtesy foreign news agencies.

So, despite having lived in a war theatre for over 35 years, our mainstream media did not produce even a handful of experienced and well-trained war correspondents. That is why when war finally knocked on our own doors sometime in 2005, we were caught unawares. And that is perhaps why we have lost so many journalists in this war in the last 10 years or so. Pakistan, today, is known as one of most dangerous places for media practitioners. We have also lost a number of journalists covering the armed insurgencies indulged in by the militant wings of political parties in Sindh, as well as in the ones waged by nationalists in Balochistan. In fact, today the entire country has become a war zone and every journalist operating in this zone, no matter what his beat, has become a war correspondent but without being trained for the job. So, what is needed urgently is for media organisations to set up crash courses for journalists on the principles of working in a war zone. Are there any takers? Guess not.

Express Tribune

At the launch of its 2013 annual report at its London headquarters here, the human rights organisation’s Secretary General Shalil Shetty gave example of senior GEO TV and Jang Group journalist Hamid Mir, who escaped an assassination attempt in November when a bomb under his car failed to detonate. Quoting the annual report, Shetty said that the Pakistani Taliban had claimed responsibility for the attempt.

The AI report says that several journalists claimed to have been threatened for reporting on the military, political parties or armed groups, but the authorities failed to bring the perpetrators to justice.

Speaking to The News, AI’s Pakistan researcher Mustafa Qadri said that his organisation has received credible reports of threats to and attacks on journalists because of their coverage of the elections and alleged vote-rigging by some political parties. “Pakistan has a very poor record in protecting journalists from attacks and as far as we’re aware no one has been prosecuted for killing a journalist since the case of Daniel Pearl in 2002. Failure to address these attacks sends a signal that the perpetrators—be they political parties or other groups – can literally get away with murder. It obviously has a profound impact on freedom of expression in Pakistan because the media plays a critical role in informing the people and keeping the powerful accountable.

Unfortunately, some members of political parties feel they have a licence to use violence to influence the media. Threats to and attacks on journalists are a human rights abuse without any justification,” said Mustafa, without naming a political party, but it’s widely known which parties in Pakistan use violence and threats to media and political opponents.

He said that the people of Pakistan showed tremendous courage by coming out to vote in record numbers and braving the risk of attacks by the Taliban and other armed groups but these elections were not free of violence and rigging in many areas of the country, where in some cases whole polling stations were taken over by goons affiliated with political parties.

He said that it was unfortunate that members of the Awami National Party (ANP), Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) and Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), who faced the brunt of attacks by the Taliban attacks, have also been implicated in attacks on journalists, agreements seeking to prevent women from voting in some electorates, or incitement against supporters of other political parties. “As elected representatives of the people of Pakistan, politicians have a responsibility to demonstrate respect for human rights and the rule of law. Any individual or group implicated in abuses must immediately be investigated by the authorities, and, where admissible, evidence is available, alleged perpetrators of these abuses must be brought to justice in fair trials regardless of their rank, status or party affiliations,” he demanded.

The report says that religious minorities suffered persecution and attacks in 2012, with targeted killings by armed groups and religious leaders inciting violence against them. “The Armed Forces and armed groups continued to perpetrate abuses in the tribal areas and Balochistan province, including enforced disappearances, abductions, torture and unlawful killings. The courts successfully compelled the authorities to bring a handful of victims of enforced disappearance before them, but failed to bring perpetrators to justice in fair trials.”

The report lauded that in a landmark decision on September23, the Supreme Court ruled that members of the transgender community are entitled to the same rights under the Pakistan Constitution as other citizens.

The report alleges that the “security forces continued to act with impunity and were accused of widespread human rights violations, including arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearances, torture, deaths in custody and extrajudicial executions targeting political activists, journalists, and suspected members of armed groups”.

The report appreciates that the Supreme Court took bold initiatives on the issue of “victims of enforced disappearances” but “reports of enforced disappearances continued across the country, especially in Balochistan province and the north-west tribal areas”.

The report says that the Pakistani Taliban, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, the Balochistan Liberation Army and other armed groups such as the banned Sipah-e-Sahaba (SSP) and Ahle Sunnat Wal Jamaat (ASWJ) targeted security forces and civilians, including members of religious minorities, aid workers, activists and journalists. They carried out indiscriminate attacks using improvised explosive devices and suicide bombs, said the report adding that Lashkar-e-Jhangvi had openly claimed responsibility for the killing of Shia Muslims in many incidents.

The report notes that “Ahmadis, Hindus and Christians remained at serious risk of violence and intimidation on the basis of their religious beliefs. “There were at least 79 attacks on Shia Muslims – the most for any religious group in the country. Religious minorities were disproportionately represented in incidents where private individuals sought to invoke Pakistan’s vaguely formulated blasphemy laws.”

Source: The News