FIA arrests person for expressing blasphemous thoughts to Ansar Abbasi

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
61

There's a difference between asking for freedom of religion, freedom of speech and freedom to offend a whole nation.

Our religion doesn't allow to insult and accuse any Prophet nor it allows to mock any religion.

62

People want freedom of thought/speech/expression for different things. Just because you restrict it to religion doesnt mean others will.

Secondly in this specific case, the 'whole nation' wasnt offended, unless Ansar Abbasi is a nation unto himself.

63

Holocaust denial is not a crime in the UK, on freedom of speech grounds.

wherever it is a crime it is a violation of free speech, and has been condemned by Muslim leaders such as Ahmedinejad.

64

People can't always say whatever in their mind without a reason and especially when they accuse someone of something they can't do that without a proof.
Ansar Abbasi is not a nation but he does represent one.

And I don't think I'm the one restricting it to religion.

65

They do have some sort of laws for holocaust denial, this is what I found on wikipedia,

As a result a compromise has been reached within the EU and while the EU has not prohibited Holocaust denial outright, a maximum term of three years in jail is optionally available to all member nations for “denying or grossly trivializing crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.”[128]](Holocaust denial - Wikipedia)[129]](Holocaust denial - Wikipedia)

Ahmedinejad actually himself denies it so obviously he’s gonna opposse this law.

66

Why not?

You are when you draw the distinction between freedom of speech and freedom from religious offence.

No you need to read the wiki article..

Full implementation was blocked by Britain and the Nordic countries because of the need to balance the restrictions on voicing racist opinions against the freedom of expression.

,

The EU extradition policy regarding Holocaust denial was tested in the United Kingdom(UK) during the 2008 failed extradition case brought against the suspected Holocaust denier Frederick Toben[130] by the German government. As there is no specific crime of Holocaust denial in the UK the German government had applied for Toben’s extradition under racial and xenophobic crimes. Toben’s extradition was refused by the Westminster Magistrates’ Court and the German government withdrew its appeal to the High Court.

Under Section 130 of the German criminal code, Holocaust denial is illegal and offenders can face up to five years in jail, but the case caused unease in Britain where there is no such law.[131] Chris Huhne, a Liberal Democrat Member of the British Parliament and a former MEP, said individuals should not be extradited to foreign courts for Holocaust denial, which is not a crime in the UK and raises the issue of Freedom of speech.[132]

67

that much is upto personal reaction and thought process. Legally no breach of any law is in place if one reports what i find as distasteful incident as this. The person in question was writing to a journalist and he was deliberately offensive. If you care to go through the article you posted after investigating him it was found that this was a regular occurrence. So the privacy or whatever to me appears a flimsy excuse of being deliberately offensive to others and their believes. If personally i was recieving abusive email i wouldn’t try to ignore it i would take what action i legally could against that person.

i might be wrong as i said i am not certain and maybe you have a point there.

Actually whilst discussing this with you i took the matter through a bit of research so that i donot give you historic incidents without reference. This one incident where one person was killed for blasphemy, and this did not take place during jihad the only reason was the blasphemy.

  1. One was Kab b al Ashraf. A poet who frequently wrote poetry to denigrate Prophet pbuh (this instance comes perfectly under you freedom of thought and expression).

My personal understanding so far has been it doesnt have to a death penalty only. It depends on the case and ulemas abotu what they decree, it could be life imprisonment or some other form of penalty. In pakistan so far this has been the take of ulemas and they have their reasons. Both death penalty and others were given as you can see thtrough history during prophet’s time.

If you truly think laws of pakistan will in turn shape the laws regarding muslim in western countries than that is a speculative claim. I personally donot see any connection what so ever , other wise the appeasement policy that most muslim countries and especially pakistan follows should make us the heroes of west. There is a death penalty in some countries for drug trafficking, in some countries the concept of capital punishment is shunned. There are difference in this world why should i be ashamed of what i find to be a punishable offence? I certainly donot consider offending anyone and their holy scriptures and figures (and that too regualrly) an act that should be ignored.

sense and sensibilities of us humans. Common regard and basic politeness for another.

why must they make fun of others? In the case of punishment for blasphemy all the guilty has to do is repent to be spared the penalty. If muslim anywhere are stupid enough to write inflammatory material to natives and then insist upon their right to express themselves then yes they will deserve what they come towards them. In any case muslim are prohibited from being offensive to others and their holy figures. Bear in mind hear the key term is offensive , not believing that cow is god is not offensive but saying inflammatory stuff to a hindu is offensive.

Right so before he went on to send the email to abbasi he said this is between you and me and then when he was responded to he again revised his stupidity by subsequent mail. Really there is nothing private about this. If somebody writes me an email disrespecting or abusing my parents do you think i will dance aroudn the issue of privacy?

freedom of religion is something , freedom of beign stupid and hurtful always comes at a price.

and we cant have it both ways. we either are muslims or not. To me one can talk about the nature of penalty but to ask a muslim to just ignore abuse that is specifically directed (since abbasi didnt read his diary)at them is a suggestion that is just not acceptable. and i hope it never becomes acceptable trend.

EID MMUBARAK
68

yes and then he paid the police to construct evidence in the confiscated laptop of guilty to plant emails of similar nature to others . :rolleyes:

i find it amusing that you can support a political group that has a taste for killing people who disagree with the caricature named altaf and yet develop scruples here. small mercies indeed

69

Re: FIA arrests person for expressing blasphemous thoughts to Ansar Abbasi

It's not hard to create fake emails and I know very well the abilities of the FIA. I would be surprised if they knew how to turn on a computer. Ansar Abbasi has a long history of lying, so it is hard to trust his accusations.

Pakistan Railways : Saad Rafique Exclusive
70

^yea whats next ? abbasi planned terror attacks of 9/11? :hehe:
no i know he probably he did all of this so that you can out smart him and FIA.
Discreditting anything from anyone simply because they have different political slant seems to be the only theory concocted by you and khoji so far. cheers, scotland yard is empty without you two.

71

And I am criticizing his personal reaction and the actions taken as a result of his personal thought process. Not as illegal, but still shameful.

Twice to ansar abbasi. Not regular by my count.

it would be nice if you always had the option of getting them killed eh?

Thanks.

I previously mentioned we might have different historical basis. This probably wouldnt be in mine. Even so I wouldnt say the only reason was blasphemy. Heres a fuller description of the circumstances:

According to Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad called upon his followers to kill Ka’b because the latter “had gone to Mecca after Badr and provoked Quraysh to fight the prophet. He also composed verses in which he bewailed the victims of Quraysh who had been killed at Badr. Shortly afterwards he returned to Medina and composed amatory verses of an insulting nature about the Muslim women.”[3] Other historiographical sources state that the reason for killing of Ka’b was that he had plotted with a group of Jews to kill Muhammad. The writings of the later commentators such as al-Zamakhshari, al-Tabarsi, al-Razi and al-Baydawi provide another distinct report according to which Ka’b was killed because Gabriel had informed Muhammad about a treaty signed by himself and Aba Sufyan creating an alliance between the Quraysh and forty Jews against Muhammad during Ka’b’s visit to Mecca (According to Professor Uri Rubin, some allusions to the existence of an anti-Muhammadan treaty between Quraysh and Ibn al-Ashraf may be found in the earlier sources).

Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Far from being someone who said some casual poetry.

I dont believe death penalty was given besides this case, and in atleast one named instance (although the munafiqeen were a known group of people) no action was taken against the people.

I do not care if the laws of the western countries do change as a result. i am not worried about consequences, I am concerned with what is right and what is wrong. Whether we have the moral right to begin with, to ask for freedom of religious expression.

Total non-sequitor. Freedom of speech does not equate with no capital punishment.

Then you should agree that Muslims shouldnt expect openended religious freedom elsewhere.

You do not decide what is offensive to another. In Pakistan people have been killed for saying things like “Your prophet married an 8 year old”. To someone that might be a statement of fact, just as for us saying a cow is just an animal is. How about eating beef? Currently Muslims are allowed to do that, on the basis of religious freedom, despite objections of Hindu hardliners. Do you side with the BJP on this? Would you like Muslims killed for such offenses?

You should. Being emotional may be an excuse it is not a justification.

What you call stupid another calls religion, and vice-versa.

So, if you were outside Pakistan (i dont know if you currently are) and recieved such an email, what would you do? You cant get the person killed, and according to you the appropriate reaction is indeed that. Would you kill him yourself?

72

fair enough thats a matter of personal take on it. I thought when you said breach of privacy law you meant it in techincal terms. He himself made his personal thought process public by sending it to strangers, abbasi wasnt his cousin.

Actually not only twice to Ansar abbasi, this is from the article you posted.

hmm could you please quote me where i suggested all the blasphmers should be killed? I have been saying that killing them has been an option under the islamic law since most alims appear united on this front however my personal preference would be to always have in an islamic country a law that makes it a punishable offence for anyone to openly commit blasphemy and that too in a purely provocating manner.

yes but regardless of the fact most seerah books would bring him and other instances as a blasphemer, there are also a handful of people who werent given protection after conquering Makkah.

Many scholars are concerned about a trend that might emerge where udner the guise of freedom of expression regular blasphemy becomes common place and gradually the concept of the “Holy” Prophet pbuh becomes a novelty as it has become a novelty an eg would be christianity and disregard for Hazrat Esa a.s. We already see the problems of factions in our society where impostors are acting as prophets and their followers call themselves muslims. So the threat by ignoring a flagrant act of blasphemy is to the cocnept of state in itself. Hardly a private matter.

I disagree munfiqeen were a known group of people to Allah and his Prophet pbuh, unless they openly were caught in a mischevious act they werent punished, that in my mind doesnot give us the message of ignoring blasphemy.

Yes well right and wrong and our perceptions of it are influenced by our cocnepts of morality. Where i look to inform my morality by religious decree some rely on their own senses and preferences. No one can claim moral superiority on each concept.

see once again to me this is non sequitur for freedom of speech and expression doesnot equate to provoking otehrs by disregarding their religious figures.

in secular country they should in a theocracy they cant.

yes but you need to appreciate that abbasi didnt take a gun to the guys head, nor did he enrage a rally to lynch him. He took the legal means provided to the citizens of pakistan. The basic concept behind the law of blasphemy is that only the state is at the liberty to punish not individuals.

perhaps you should think about the fact that if we are going to follow an austere sense of privacy we should also appreciate that religion then becoems a private matter. If someone is uncouth enough to then privately send messages to random strangers that are essentially offensive they loose the right to privacy.

Please ravage now you are being delierately obtuse. Calling names and posting offensive material about religious figures is not a religion nor is it required by any religion.

I wouldnt do anything other than reporting the person as public nuisance or as a spammer to the service provider or I would simply pursue the legal means available to me by the law of that country. You need to appreciate that the punihsment for blasphemy or anyother sin and crime are not carried out by individuals, the islamic laws come in place in an islamic state and only the state is at the liberty to carry them out. That is the basic understanding that all muslims must develop. According to me, ravage, the appropriate reaction of an islamic country is not to ignore it and tell its citizen to ignore it, i can understand while people living in non muslim countries have to tolerate alot since they are outsiders why should we impose it upon the people of pakistan? That is why perhaps i find your condemning a law that finds it roots in religion that our coutnry was supposedly created for most confusing.

73

Naturally, he must be lying because hes always exposing the corruption, hypocrisy and the criminal activities of the party of angelic MQM.

Timepass - October 2013
74

That is the penalty in Pakistan. Do you oppose the death penalty, your subsequent text isnt clear.

[quote]

yes but regardless of the fact most seerah books would bring him and other instances as a blasphemer, there are also a handful of people who werent given protection after conquering Makkah.

[/quote]

What other instances, reference?

[quote]

Many scholars are concerned about a trend that might emerge where udner the guise of freedom of expression regular blasphemy becomes common place and gradually the concept of the "Holy" Prophet pbuh becomes a novelty as it has become a novelty an eg would be christianity and disregard for Hazrat Esa a.s. We already see the problems of factions in our society where impostors are acting as prophets and their followers call themselves muslims. So the threat by ignoring a flagrant act of blasphemy is to the cocnept of state in itself. Hardly a private matter.

[/quote]

Not really clear what you're argument is.. that allowing 'regular blasphemy' would lead to false prophets?

[quote]

I disagree munfiqeen were a known group of people to Allah and his Prophet pbuh, unless they openly were caught in a mischevious act they werent punished, that in my mind doesnot give us the message of ignoring blasphemy.

[/quote]

Once again, their mosque was burned and many of them went into hiding. If they werent known or there werent evidence what sense is it to burn the mosque?

[quote]

Yes well right and wrong and our perceptions of it are influenced by our cocnepts of morality. Where i look to inform my morality by religious decree some rely on their own senses and preferences. No one can claim moral superiority on each concept.

[/quote]

If consistency is a 'good' concept, then you have the same problem I have.

[quote]

see once again to me this is non sequitur for freedom of speech and expression doesnot equate to provoking otehrs by disregarding their religious figures.

[/quote]

It doesnt equate to religious provocation, it includes it. If 'freedom of speech' did not imply protection of offensive speech then it would be a meaningless concept.

[quote]

in secular country they should in a theocracy they cant.

[/quote]

Dont talk in the abstract. Lets say countries like France or UK or India or Canada who outlaw certain Muslim practices or expression based on it being offensive to others (say Da'wah or the veil). Muslims in this forum have been vocally protesting it calling it a restriction of their freedom. Can they demand freedom as a valuable commodity if they deny it elsewhere?

[quote]

yes but you need to appreciate that abbasi didnt take a gun to the guys head, nor did he enrage a rally to lynch him. He took the legal means provided to the citizens of pakistan.

[/quote]

No difference. Also you ignored my question. Do you side with the BJP on the issue of treatment of cows in India by Muslims?

[quote]

The basic concept behind the law of blasphemy is that only the state is at the liberty to punish not individuals.

[/quote]

That has never been the issue.

[quote]

perhaps you should think about the fact that if we are going to follow an austere sense of privacy we should also appreciate that religion then becoems a private matter. If someone is uncouth enough to then privately send messages to random strangers that are essentially offensive they loose the right to privacy.

[/quote]

No they do not. Email is a two-way interaction, and like I said.. with modern technology if you recieve mail from the same address twice you are really choosing to recieve it.

[quote]

Please ravage now you are being delierately obtuse. Calling names and posting offensive material about religious figures is not a religion nor is it required by any religion.

[/quote]

Religiously offensive statements can ABSOLUTELY result from (different) religious beliefs.

[quote]

I wouldnt do anything other than reporting the person as public nuisance or as a spammer to the service provider or I would simply pursue the legal means available to me by the law of that country. You need to appreciate that the punihsment for blasphemy or anyother sin and crime are not carried out by individuals, the islamic laws come in place in an islamic state and only the state is at the liberty to carry them out. That is the basic understanding that all muslims must develop. According to me, ravage, the appropriate reaction of an islamic country is not to ignore it and tell its citizen to ignore it, i can understand while people living in non muslim countries have to tolerate alot since they are outsiders why should we impose it upon the people of pakistan? That is why perhaps i find your condemning a law that finds it roots in religion that our coutnry was supposedly created for most confusing.
[/QUOTE]

You misunderstand me. In any other country you would have NO legal resource, assuming this wasnt a case of harassment and it was just about you being religiously offended. In this case would you have gone and killed the person?

75

^gone on long enough with you around this one.

Unless france ,canada and even australia declare themselves a christian state they cannot deny any of its citizen the freedom to practise their religion because it will be going against their own law. Now as you can see that they still restrict what they perecieve to be against their own culture. Now Pakistan is an islamic country and you are advocating that we should just ignore blasphemy, why? does it go along with our national philosophy? Why should i oppose death penalty or suggest any otehr penalty?I am simply not qualified enough to make fiqhi decisions or suggestions.I am afraid i am intent on leaving this matter to ulemas not laymen.

Secondly the current law in pakistan talks about life imprisonment *and *death penalty. These penalties can be changed depending on the decrees by ulema. Secodnly the person in question can always repent to be spared the life sentence of death penalty, since this is obviously a religious law. If the person first send an offensive email, then subsequently fails to apologize and then fail to see an error in his ways than i dotn feel any sympathy for him.

As for the other examples after the conquest of makkah, look it up . I already provided you with one example.You can also see the rulings of most alims, you can also consult the time period of four sahabas. I also mentioned that if blasphemy is to be ignored or tolerated it will become a common place thing. The next thing that comes after that is fake prophets or further disregard for religion.it is not vague it is pretty obvious unless one is bent on ignoring the obvious.

The concept of freedom, freedom of speech and expression are both different to what they will be in a secular democracy and a religious theocracy. Since Allah's will is the law in a muslim country and muslims themselves submit to being His slaves. You cannot compare the two since the ideaology is different. The freedom to insult others and their religon is certainly not considered a birth right in Pakistan.

Nor can you equate a person who is deliberately being offensive by sending emails that are basically blasphemous in nature to news editors. If the person had some personal epiphany about Prophet pbuh that could be considered blasphemous and he then chose to email those thoughts to a news editor then he himself made his thought process public. You ,yourself a are a mod on forum where offensive pms are regularily reported, do you go on rants about some abstract sense of privacy that offender deserves?

As for an individual going ahead and killing a person. These are islamic punihsment, carried out in an islamic country by an islamic state. One cannot simply hand out individual justice disregarding the law of its land. The stablishment of islamic law is the obligation of islamic state not an individual msulim in a non muslim land already binded by the citizenship contract. I donot misunderstand your question I pity the attempt to create a weird scenario to side track the legal case for blasphemy. But since you ask that what will my reaction be. I think i already gave you the answer i will pursue whatever legal means are available to me. if in your projected (very particular) scenario there is nothing to be done legally, i will simply have to put up with it. And i am absolutely surprised that you ask. The penalty (be it death, life imprionsment or anyother) is upto ulemas, am i an alim? no. The need to establish rule of Allah becomes an obligation in an islamic state , if there is no legal mean available to me it is not an islamic state. Even in an islamic state the penalty is carried out by authorities not individuals (even the ones on teh receiving end of abuse) so i think these to you should provide answers enough. However that is hardly the case in real, there are human right comissions,there is the service provider and then again there is the question of receiving a mail out of nowhere.

76

Re: FIA arrests person for expressing blasphemous thoughts to Ansar Abbasi

And since you are intent on painting this as a private issue here is the taste of secular laws about offensive emails in US. As i said before and i will say again you can talk about the nature of penalty but to say one is receiving emails that are offensive by choice is truly a gross misunderstanding.

also sending offensive emails is considered a punishable offence in scotland

in pakistan the govt has sought to include itself among the things that shouldnt be vilified through electronic media. Funny human rights and your sensebilities only take a yawn when religion is invovled. Fact is, if blasphemy was to be publicly tolerated we will see unrest in pakistan and therefore a potentional peace problem. People in most countries are provided the benefit of reporting harrasment and offensive communication only on gupistan have i ever heard that one who reports is to be held contemptible and the one casting offence has the right for privacy.

77


Like his colleague Immi Khan, Abbasi has failed in even this endeavor and thus the need for fake stories to promote himself to next Amir in line after Baitullah Mehsud gets a hellfire missile to the head.

78

Oh I bet that threatens pir Altaf's gaddinasheen right to the khilafat.