Thoughts on economics and liberty

Sibal, there is a difference between Prophet Mohammed and Sonia Gandhi

A "top" Indian functionary (whatever that is) is reported to have said:

“What do you think about these derogatory pictures of the Prophet Mohammed, the (Indian) prime minister and the Congress president? Anybody will feel outraged. The government of India does not believe in censorship. But sensitivity and feelings of different communities cannot be allowed to be hurt. They (the Internet companies) host these sites and they must regulate it (the content),” a top official functionary said." [Source]

The Indian government, led by that clown Kapil Sibal, is engaged in a battle with Facebook for allowing "alleged derogatory, defamatory and inflammatory content about religious figures and Indian leaders such as Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi on the Web".
Sibal, you clown, Prophet Mohammed is in a TOTALLY different league to Sonia Gandhi. You may not know the difference but the people of India do.
Good judgement is expected from those who try to defame Mohammed. While such actions don't violate the principles of freedom of speech, they are abominable and must be condemned (not censored).
However, there is simply no protection for those who head criminal organisations – people like Sonia Gandhi and MMS (I speak from direct personal experience of the criminality of Congress). 
Plus, in politics all views must be allowed expression. There are no protections (or even the presumption of respect accorded to religious leaders) in politics.
The Sonia and MMS led Congress has forgotten entirely the history of the Indian National Congress and its fight against British censorship and oppression in India. Do they want India to become an Afghanistan, a China? 
Let there be freedom of speech, including total freedom to "defame" the CORRUPT AND CRIMINAL LEADERS OF INDIA.

Vote out the Congress in 2014. That is the ONLY way to get rid of these scum.
Unfortunately, there are not many good alternatives for India – yet. FTI is still assembling. So please step forward and join FTI, if you want to ensure freedom of speech and good governance in India.

View more posts from this author
14 thoughts on “Sibal, there is a difference between Prophet Mohammed and Sonia Gandhi
  1. Polevaulter Donkeyman

    1. While I agree with you that defaming Mohammed should not be censored, why should it be condemned per se?
    2. Do you think the woman in this video should be punished for her speech?

  2. Sanjeev Sabhlok

    Dear PD

    1. A lot of people feel strongly (positively) about Mohammed. If an academic discussion finds faults in him, that is a different matter, but any lowly attempt to “paint” him or do some such thing is a cowardly, incompetent attack that can only deserve condemnation. Yet even such boors and lowly scum have the right to free speech.

    2. The youtube video you linked was extremely offensive and boorish. The woman was illiterate, incompetent, incoherent and generally unfit to be a mother or citizen. I’ve deleted the link to the video. There are 1000s of such people who must be pitied not punished. Regardless of what someone says (except a direct threat to violence), there is no ground to punish them. If possible such people could be educated. If not they should be ignored.

  3. Sanjeev Sabhlok

    PD, thanks for letting me know. I’m astonished (but I guess no longer so – this is becoming so common) that this woman is being charged of an offence. Sure, she was yelling, but that’s no big deal. All kinds of nut cases yell. I didn’t see her hit anyone.

    JS Mill’s essay On Liberty should be made mandatory reading (and understanding) for all British MPs. Such nonsensical laws should not exist.


  4. Supratim

    I am a little surprised, Sanjeev, that you seem to hold that Prophet Muhammed can not be criticised by laymen.
    That is but one step away from what the faithful say: that you can not criticise or question or in any way debate the Prophet or the Qu'ran in any manner, whatsoever. And, only the learned mullahs may discourse politely and respectfully about the Quran, since they have spent their lives studying it, and you may only study it in the original Arabic.
    I have to disagree with this thought process – lay men should be allowed to discuss and debate all religious texts and figures, critically, pompously, jocularly and sarcastically. The faithful have to bear up with it.

  5. Supratim

    As a proud Pastafarian, I welcome and invite all readers to come and witness how we deal with all the withering and hate-filled criticism that we have deal with – you may find us here:

  6. Sanjeev Sabhlok

    Dear Supratim

    I’m not at all against critical analysis of anyone or anything. By laymen or whoever. That was made clear (I thought) in what I said.

    What I condemn is the throwing of mud by people who are driven purely by a desire to “show-off'” their “liberal” credentials. Those who have no critical analysis to offer but either mere hatred (which is puerile and hence to be pitied) or a desire to splatter mud and “show-off” how terribly smart (or better than others) they are. Note that I condemn, but I don’t see that as a reason to stop even such puerile or contrived expression.

    The same standard applies to “Ganesh” for example, and you know that I have objected to Hindus who wanted to stop a play in Melbourne because it showed Ganesh as being tortured by Hitler. I may (I actually don’t since I don’t believe playacting is terribly enlightening or harmful) condemn the playwright or director of the play but I will staunchly defend his/her right to write/stage the play.

    Even Mein Kampf must be fully and freely made available, despite the hatred it spews. But I do retain my right to condemn it.

    Condemnation means that I do not agree with the sentiment displayed. It is not an excuse to in ANY WAY restrict such expression or punish people just for saying something offensive.


  7. Supratim

    Thanks for the clarification, Sanjeev. Your point is well drawn and accepted.
    Meanwile, I think Sibal was just trying to protect his masters from the vitriolic comments of the blogosphere (the allusion to Muhammed was probably gratuitous) – unfortunately, for him, he adopted possibly the worst process EVER – calling the India reps of FB, Google, etc to his office to scold them like a school headmistress. He has drawn such a whirlwind of ridicule and opprobrium for trying to "regulate" the internet, that it would probably take him until 2014 to recover!

  8. abu

    Mr.Sabhlok, i agree. Equating Prophet with SG or MMS is madness. After all, to those, who have jaundiced view of the Prophet let them, study, "The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History" written by an American Michael H. Hartin 1978, and why he places the Prophet at No.1 among all other humans ever to have existed in this planet.
    And let the Prophet-haters bring the history-biography of any person in human history, whose every action has been documented. And to remind about the criticism, nay the insult heaped against the Prophet, it has been in existence as old as Islam and Prophet himself for 1400 years. And the barrage of garbage and rubbishness thrown at the Prophet is not something new, as in his own lifetime, he was maligned and hurted with worst scenario. And the most ardent academic critic like William Muir, Montgomory Watt etc. praised him. The result, his enemies and defamers are in the garbage bin of history. And the Prophet, raised to the highest pinnacle of behavior. And that is the reason Muslims around the world emulate and imitate him.
    If you want your freedom to throw your dirt at Prophet, then nobody stops you from your action of condemning him. But for how long, till your grave?? Well, if you want extension, then defy your death.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *