Pakistani Lawyer Petitions for the Death of Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg

[Cue]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/17/zuckerberg_faces_criminal_investigation_in_pakistan/

Because I know how much you guys love it when race/religion/etc x decides to take things out on person/group/company y because they think they did z/because they can.

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg is being investigated by Pakistani police under a section of the penal code that makes blasphemy against Muhammad punishable by death.
BBC Urdu reports — according to a Google Translation — that Pakistan's Deputy Attorney General has launched a criminal investigation against Zuckerberg and others in response to Facebook hosting a "Draw Muhammad" contest on its site late last month. On May 19, Pakistani authorities blocked access to Facebook over the contest, and this ban was lifted on May 31 after Facebook removed the page in Pakistan and other countries.

Because this'll totally get somewhere considering the fact that no sane American authority would force Mark to go over to Pakistan for trial on the basis of another country's law that does no coincide with their own American law, not to mention one that would lead to death.

And no, it wasn't Facebook's contest, it was a group setup by a random person (woman I think) under the alias 'Andy', which of course automatically makes Mark, Dustin and Chris the bad people here.

 

[Autosaver]

LOL

They take the religion stuff seriously over there. They'll kill people for little reason.
Didn't the South Park creators get threatend too?

 

[Chaos Knux]

...*gets a dolphinoplasti* There, now I'm not part of the human race anymore. *breathes easier*

 

[Cue]

...*gets a dolphinoplasti* There, now I'm not part of the human race anymore. *breathes easier*

Glad to know I'm not the only one losing faith in humanity.

 

[Bigboi]

What a fucking irrational religion. Is there anybody these guys don't want to kill?

 

[Fawfulfan]

What a fucking irrational religion. Is there anybody these guys don't want to kill?

I'd like to point out that, historically, Christians have been WAY more violent than Muslims (the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc.). In fact, for over a thousand years Muslims were far more progressive than either Christianity or Judaism (with the obvious exception of their subjugation of women). It has really only been the recent emergence of hateful terrorist networks affiliated with Islam that has caused the religion to go into a social backslide as of late, and even then the vast majority of Muslims around the world are still peaceful and opposed to the kind of violence we know them for.

(In case anyone is wondering, I identify myself primarily as an atheist.)

 

[SSNTails]

I'd like to point out that, historically, Christians have been WAY more violent than Muslims (the Crusades,

Do you know WHY there were the Crusades? It's because the Muslims invaded Israel and took it over. Islam has a pretty extensive history of a 'join us or die' mentality and they used it to take over a good chunk of the middle east after the Roman empire.

 

[sims]

I'd like to point out that, historically, Christians have been WAY more violent than Muslims (the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc.). In fact, for over a thousand years Muslims were far more progressive than either Christianity or Judaism (with the obvious exception of their subjugation of women). It has really only been the recent emergence of hateful terrorist networks affiliated with Islam that has caused the religion to go into a social backslide as of late, and even then the vast majority of Muslims around the world are still peaceful and opposed to the kind of violence we know them for.

(In case anyone is wondering, I identify myself primarily as an atheist.)

I'm fairly sure Christian leaders wouldn't call for the death of someone if they made fun of Jesus these days. Frowned upon, yes, but not put to death.

 

[Fawfulfan]

Do you know WHY there were the Crusades? It's because the Muslims invaded Israel and took it over. Islam has a pretty extensive history of a 'join us or die' mentality and they used it to take over a good chunk of the middle east after the Roman empire.

That's definitely true, but even when you take that into account it doesn't make Muslims more violent than Christians...it means you've got, as you put it, one set of people adhering to a 'join us or die' mentality slaughtering another set of people adhering to a 'join us or die' mentality.

I'm certainly not condoning Islamic violence or any other type of holy war here...as far as I'm concerned, killing is killing, and it doesn't matter if you claim to be doing it in the name of God. I'm simply trying to point out that today's religious violence is pretty tame compared to the bloodbaths of old. The real difference today is not how many people are getting killed, but how the free exchange of information allows the vision of intolerance and terror to spread just as easily as peace and harmony.

I'm fairly sure Christian leaders wouldn't call for the death of someone if they made fun of Jesus these days. Frowned upon, yes, but not put to death.

I'm not disagreeing with you on that. I stated that there has been more Christian violence historically...in modern times, the threat has absolutely shifted towards radical Islamic sects.

 

[akirahedgehog]

Mark Zuckerberg is the owner of Facebook and had nothing to do with the creation of the "Draw Muhammad Day" group. What's with this weird Muslim obsession with killing anything that opposes them?

 

[Autosaver]

I'm not disagreeing with you on that. I stated that there has been more Christian violence historically...in modern times, the threat has absolutely shifted towards radical Islamic sects.

That's the point, Christians won't kill you anymore. They changed.

A lot of Muslims will still want your head for opposing them.

 

[Cinefast]

Mark Zuckerberg is the owner of Facebook and had nothing to do with the creation of the "Draw Muhammad Day" group. What's with this weird Muslim obsession with killing anything that opposes them?

Well, it's in the Qur'an. There are many sites with excerpts on what it commands - and some of it is pretty filthy stuff. I don't believe in this airy-fairy 'only radical islam is at fault' view, because were it not for the fact most Muslims were kind, decent people, they'd all be going off to carry out Jihad.

 

[MascaraSnake]

Yay, Anti-Muslim sentiment!

While this death threat is absolutely hilarious, I hate how people start making direct connections to the Islamic religion and their supposed violent culture. Radical idiots exist in every religion, and I dare say that there are quite a few radical Christians, especially in the United States. Sure, they are not as openly violent, because then they would get serious legal problems, but they sure are just as hateful.

 

[Fawfulfan]

That's a perverse curiosity, not just with Islam but with every religion. The Bible, Torah, Qur'an, and every other holy book on the face of the Earth is filled with passages telling of peace, harmony, tolerance, forgiveness...but every now and then, they slip in one passage about how God hates something, and BAM! You have thousands of people slaughtering thousands of other people in God's name. You can easily find passages in the Bible which are just as violent as the worst passages in the Qur'an...there are messages to kill homosexuals, subjugate women, even stone children who don't work hard enough! Yet it's all buried under thousands of other passages that state that God is peaceful and kind and wants you to love your neighbor.

At the moment, it's really only a problem with radical Islamic groups, but the fact is that religious laws promoting peace are supposed to be far more fundamental than religious laws that suggest violence, and yet these violent laws always seem to rally people more strongly, and this has caused all kinds of religious groups to go at each others' throats...Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, even Buddhists, for crying out loud!

They've actually done scientific studies on the psychological effect of holy scriptures, and discovered that people (even those who don't claim to be religious) react more strongly to violent passages than peaceful passages. I suppose it makes sense when you think about it, but it doesn't bode well, does it?

If you ask me, the real problem is not what Islam inspires people to do versus what other religions inspire people to do...the problem is actually how much Islamic states like to base their government policy on literal interpretation of the Qur'an. The Middle East, which everyone knows is a Muslim powerhouse, rejects the separation of church and state (Would you call it that? Church is a Christian term, but never mind) far more thoroughly than any other place in the world. I think if we reconfigured some country so that it based its laws strictly on the Bible, you'd get a lot of other radical stuff (though it might be much more tangled because the Bible is much more self-contradictory than the Qur'an).

 

[MascaraSnake]

Yay, Anti-Muslim sentiment!

While this death threat is absolutely hilarious, I hate how people start making direct connections to the Islamic religion and their supposed violent culture. Radical idiots exist in every religion, and I dare say that there are quite a few radical Christians, especially in the United States. Sure, they are not as openly violent, because then they would get serious legal problems, but they sure are just as hateful.

EDIT: Also, since when does the fact that the Muslims conquered Jerusalem justify the crusades? The Muslims have as much of a right to that city as the Christians have, and under Muslim leadership, the city was open to Christians. When the Christians conquered it, they slaughtered every Muslim in the city and sealed it off.

Umm, since fawfulfan wrote a response while I was editing my old post, this weird "quoting my own post" thing happened...

 

[wolfs]

Mark Zuckerberg is the owner of Facebook and had nothing to do with the creation of the "Draw Muhammad Day" group.

Since he allowed that content on HIS site, that makes him responsible for it. Although I still think the one that made it should get the lecture and the ass whooping.

 

[Cue]

Since he allowed that content on HIS site, that makes him responsible for it. Although I still think the one that made it should get the lecture and the ass whooping.

Facebook has a good 10 groups being made every minute, how does one pick them out? I believe it says somewhere that Facebook is not responsible for the content posted on the site, or something like that.

EDIT:

FACEBOOK IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACTIONS, CONTENT, INFORMATION, OR DATA OF THIRD PARTIES, AND YOU RELEASE US, OUR DIRECTORS, OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROM ANY CLAIMS AND DAMAGES, KNOWN AND UNKNOWN, ARISING OUT OF OR IN ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH ANY CLAIM YOU HAVE AGAINST ANY SUCH THIRD PARTIES.

 

[Wombatwarlord777]

I'd just like to second SpiritCrusher's notion that the accusers here are acting in an absolutely hilarious manner.