Muslim lawsuit prompts Indian court to order Facebook and Google to remove ‘anti-religious’ content

by 1389 on January 3, 2012

in 1389 (blog admin), blog censorship, censorship, Facebook, Google Blogger, India, Islam, litigation jihad, social media, YouTube

If this censorship takes effect, it would apply to everyone using Google Blogger, Google Orkut, Google+, Yahoo, Facebook, YouTube, and the other sites mentioned, whether residing in India or not.

‘Clean up your website’: Indian court orders Facebook and Google to remove ‘anti-religious’ content

(h/t: Nilk via GoV)

Social websites including Google and Facebook have been ordered by an Indian court to remove all ‘anti-religious’ and ‘anti-social’ content within six weeks.

On Saturday a Delhi Court ordered 22 social networking sites, including Yahoo and Microsoft, to wipe the objectionable and defamatory contents and file compliance reports by February 6, 2012.

The order will raise serious questions about how users’ posts and opinions will be edited, censorship and freedom of expression.

On December 22 Judge Kumar had issued summonses to the social networking sites, demanding they remove photographs, videos or texts that might offend religious sentiments, the Hindustan Times website reported.

The order comes a day after a criminal court issued summonses to the sites for facing trial for allegedly webcasting objectionable contents.

Santosh Pandey, appearing for complainant Mufti Aijaz Arshad Qasmi, told The Hindu Times after the court hearing that the websites have to submit a report to the court by February 6 describing the action they had taken to remove the contents from the websites.

Representatives of Yahoo India Pvt Ltd and Microsoft told the court that they had not got copies of the order and complaint against them, but Qasmi’s counsel told the court that he would supply the relevant documents to them, according to the Hindustan Times.

The order comes at a controversial time as IT minister Kapil Sibal had recently discussed with representatives of some of the companies ways to guarantee the offensive contents are not posted.

India Today quoted him as saying: ‘There were some demeaning, degrading, clearly pornographic depictions of gods and goddesses which no reasonable, sensible person anywhere in the world would accept, on any site.

The minister insisted he was not smothering free speech but was suggesting screening possible ‘incendiary’ material.

The Hindu Times reported Facebook India, Facebook, Google India Pvt Ltd, Google Orkut, Youtube, Blogspot, Microsoft India Pvt Ltd, Microsoft, Zombie Time, Exboii, Boardreader, IMC India, My Lot, Shyni Blog and Topix were all given the order.

A Google spokesperson told the website: ‘We comply with valid court orders wherever possible, consistent with our long standing policy.

‘We’re yet to receive the details of this order and can’t comment on this specific case.’

Additional Civil Judge Mukesh Kumar passed the order on a suit filed by Mufti Aijaz Arshad Qasmi seeking to restrain the websites from circulating objectionable and defamatory contents.

More comments/photos here.

{ 19 comments… read them below or add one }

1 noallahhere January 3, 2012 at 7:55 am

Dear God, are the Muslims going to restrict comment on their so-called religion so that no-ne in the world can see what a false demonic cult it is? Are we on this earth going to lose the capacity to question and analyze? This ideology and these people will drag us back to the stone age if something isn’t done.

2 Zilla January 3, 2012 at 8:32 am

So will India now censor speech that is critical of the islamogenocide against Hindus? The country is mostly Hindu, not muslim, so it will be sad to see Indian people’s right to defend their right to not be murdered curtailed.

3 Mullah Lodabullah January 3, 2012 at 10:33 am

Grist for the “UN control of the Internet” mill?

4 BayouCoyote January 3, 2012 at 12:26 pm

“incendiary’ material.”

Has herr minister ever read the ko-ran?

5 Gramfan January 3, 2012 at 8:00 pm

Hello all…

I call this Muslim Chutzpah! 😈
They take everything from everyone!

Onya Nilk if you get to read this 😀

6 WLIL January 3, 2012 at 8:56 pm

What is the difference? The indians are also disgusting tyrants, whenever they have socalled power. The islamics are also disgusting tyrants whenever they have socalled power.

7 1389 January 3, 2012 at 10:03 pm

I don’t think you are familiar enough with the history of the area to make that claim. The difference is that India is not predominantly Muslim and therefore is not inherently totalitarian and expansionist. By and large, they have not sought to impose the standards and mores of Hinduism on the rest of the world.

8 WLIL January 3, 2012 at 11:31 pm

I don’t like to be treated shabbily by anyone whehter they are hindu or islam or any other ideology. Hindus and other typs of indians have treated me most shabbily too. That is why I know what I am talking about. The facts is too many indians are moslems/islamic and they are totalitarians tyrants, similar to islamic tyrants though not exaclty like islamic ideology .

9 WLIL January 3, 2012 at 11:32 pm

I am from asia and I know what I am talking about and I fed up with being treated shabbily by those moaning intolerant asians whatever ideology they are from.

10 WLIL January 3, 2012 at 11:37 pm

India is indeed a problematic place and they are known to be bullies whether they are moslems/islamics, hindus or whatever. They have to sort out their own infighting. they are alot of welathy indians. so why don’t they sove their own community poverty problems first instead of bullying other races.

11 WLIL January 4, 2012 at 12:53 am

Even if indian hindus or of other faith or nonfaith are not as totalitarian as indians moslems, they are still expanding their too many unpleasant culture to the west.

12 1389 January 4, 2012 at 6:46 am

I think you may have some personal disputes with various individuals from the subcontinent that are beyond the scope of the matters that we address on this blog. This blog focuses on the counterjihad and, to some extent, on other hard news matters such as elections and the economy, primarily as they relate to the counterjihad. This is not the place to debate the relative merits of various non-Muslim races, ethnic groups, or cultures. Such arguments draw negative attention, arouse anger, and take the focus off the counterjihad.

13 Always On Watch January 4, 2012 at 6:53 am

Blasphemy laws, huh?

Goodbye, freedom! 👿

14 WLIL January 4, 2012 at 8:50 am

I think you are not looking at the broad picture. I think it is wrong to support any country that don’t respect freedom of speech or presonal rights.

15 WLIL January 4, 2012 at 9:02 am

furthermore, non-moslems, whatever ethnic background they are, who supported (blatantly or subtlely) moslems extremist intolerant agenda are just as bad as moslems, even though they are not called moslems.

16 1389 January 4, 2012 at 9:09 am

Please understand that I am NOT supporting the actions of this judge or of the government of India in capitulating to the demands of Muslims to censor the Internet. That said, there is no cause to make a blanket condemnation of India and of Hindus or non-religious Indians and their culture. Our governments in the West are equally to blame for capitulating to Muslim demands, and there is a multitude of examples of this.

17 WLIL January 4, 2012 at 6:50 pm

Also please understand my opposition to anyone or any group is not due to personal disputes as you implied. I analysed it from a wide perspective. If a certain culture or certain group (whether they are of islam of not) are noted to be consisting of mostly of manipulative unreasonable eastern bullies that is continuosly damaging to our survival, freedom, decency, economy, jobs, etc, it is only right that one speak out against it.

18 philipzhao January 4, 2012 at 10:10 pm

Allal allows only one voice !!

19 T January 5, 2012 at 2:11 am

”The minister insisted he was not smothering free speech but was suggesting screening possible ‘incendiary’ material.”
WHAT A perfect example of talking out of both sides of your face. IF you are going to label speech ‘incendiary’ which means any words or speech that critisize Islam , then shut up about free speech.

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: