India is getting activists and journalists suspended off social media

[Pakistanian]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Not only is India killing civilans in Kashmir with impunity, but also it has successfully pressured Facebook and Twitter into blocking Kashmiri activists and journalists posting footage of these attrocities.<br><br>How isn't this a much bigger scandal?</p>— CJ Werleman (@cjwerleman) <a href="https://twitter.com/cjwerleman/status/1081376822065979392?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 5, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


So the indian government is getting activists suspended off social media, Muhammad Faysal who is a wellknown kashmiri activists and writer also got suspended recently for criticizing the indian army.

What's interesting is that there are accounts tweeting fake news propaganda against Pakistan and China yet those accounts aren't being suspended like the one below.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Fake news! Not Chinese language!! Not even Chinese police uniform!!! This is sheer propaganda against China, trying to sabotage relations between China & muslim countryies. There’s no ‘East Turkistan’ in China. Only terrorists & their sympathizers call Xinjiang ‘East Turkistan’. <a href="https://t.co/kCMm8zX6CE">https://t.co/kCMm8zX6CE</a></p>— Lijian Zhao 赵立坚 (@zlj517) <a href="https://twitter.com/zlj517/status/1080753573070340096?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 3, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Hitman]

So now FB and Twitter are turning into RAW agents?

 

[slipcatch]

So now FB and Twitter are turning into RAW agents?

If Saudia Arabia can have Netflix drop a show.

If CNN can fire a journalists for speaking out.

If BBC can censor an Interview from Pakistani politician.

Then why can’t India influence FB or Twitter? FB and Twitter are also in the business of making money.

I know it is tough to swallow truth by some Indian because they have this image of India being the most innocent and fair country in the world, But let’s not believe that rest of the world is as delusional.

 

[Hitman]

If Saudia Arabia can have Netflix drop a show.

If CNN can fire a journalists for speaking out.

If BBC can censor an Interview from Pakistani politician.

Then why can’t India influence FB or Twitter? FB and Twitter are also in the business of making money.

I know it is tough to swallow truth by some Indian because they have this image of India being the most innocent and fair country in the world, But let’s not believe that rest of the world is as delusional.

The journalist whom CNN fired was employed by them.

The censor job that BBC carried out was their own digital property.

Saudi Arabia censored a certain program available in Netflix in their own country.


Kudos to you intelligence.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

The journalist whom CNN fired was employed by them.

The censor job that BBC carried out was their own digital property.

Saudi Arabia censored a certain program available in Netflix in their own country.


Kudos to you intelligence.

It's still censorship, and once you ban an opposing view your own view can be described quite correctly as propaganda.

 

[CricketCartoons]

It's still censorship, and once you ban an opposing view your own view can be described quite correctly as propaganda.

by that token, the history taught in textbooks and the glorification of certain leaders as statues and on currency notes is propaganda.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

by that token, the history taught in textbooks and the glorification of certain leaders as statues and on currency notes is propaganda.

That is how they are often described by countries which pride themselves on freedom of information.

 

[CricketCartoons]

That is how they are often described by countries which pride themselves on freedom of information.

that is indeed propaganda, and it is needed to keep the generations believe in a national opinion, that the history taught to them is the correct interpretation and that they must revere the icons who are hoisted as statues and currency notes. freedom of speech should never get precedence over national opinion/national propaganda, otherwise it leads to anarchy.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

that is indeed propaganda, and it is needed to keep the generations believe in a national opinion, that the history taught to them is the correct interpretation and that they must revere the icons who are hoisted as statues and currency notes. freedom of speech should never get precedence over national opinion/national propaganda, otherwise it leads to anarchy.

We British have a slightly different view, while opposition may be portrayed unfavourably, they are not censored outright, they will merely be presented in a negative light while our own national identity must always be paramount. I don't believe HM govt has demanded Facebook or Twitter delete footage of atrocities committed by our security services as there are none in the first place.

 

[CricketCartoons]

We British have a slightly different view, while opposition may be portrayed unfavourably, they are not censored outright, they will merely be presented in a negative light while our own national identity must always be paramount. I don't believe HM govt has demanded Facebook or Twitter delete footage of atrocities committed by our security services as there are none in the first place.

the british invaded and bombed iraq on falsehood, but that doesn't count as atrocity, but a humanitarian intervention. good to see the native brits and the ethnic minority british like you on the same page when it comes to national opinion.

 

[slipcatch]

The journalist whom CNN fired was employed by them.

The censor job that BBC carried out was their own digital property.

Saudi Arabia censored a certain program available in Netflix in their own country.


Kudos to you intelligence.

Lol,
This is the best ‘genius’ reply you have got to defend India’s honor?

C’mon soldier, you have to be better than this to defend India’s crime against innocents in Kashmir. Don’t let down the occupying Army in Indian occupied Kashmir.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

the british invaded and bombed iraq on falsehood, but that doesn't count as atrocity, but a humanitarian intervention. good to see the native brits and the ethnic minority british like you on the same page when it comes to national opinion.

Britain has since acknowledged the Iraq war was waged on a falsehood, in any case even that being the case, we would never have demanded Facebook delete footage of any atrocities, if you can recall, even the photos and stories of atrocities committed by British soldiers were investigated thoroughly before being dismissed as fake. The editor of that newspaper was sacked such was his disgrace in publishing fake news.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3716151.stm

 

[CricketCartoons]

Britain has since acknowledged the Iraq war was waged on a falsehood, in any case even that being the case, we would never have demanded Facebook delete footage of any atrocities, if you can recall, even the photos and stories of atrocities committed by British soldiers were investigated thoroughly before being dismissed as fake. The editor of that newspaper was sacked such was his disgrace in publishing fake news.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3716151.stm

Britain invaded iraq on falsehood by british soldiers never committed any atrocities? let me know what you understand from atrocity so that we are on the same page.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Britain invaded iraq on falsehood by british soldiers never committed any atrocities? let me know what you understand from atrocity so that we are on the same page.

Opinions will vary on what constitutes an atrocity from individual to individual, but for arguments sake I have reprinted below the generally accepted view as held by major world courts as of today:

A war crime is an act that constitutes a serious violation of the laws of war that gives rise to individual criminal responsibility.[1] Examples of war crimes include intentionally killing civilians or prisoners, torturing, destroying civilian property, taking hostages, performing a perfidy, raping, using child soldiers, pillaging, declaring that no quarter will be given, and seriously violating the principles of distinction and proportionality, such as strategic bombing of civilian populations.[2]

The concept of war crimes emerged at the turn of the twentieth century when the body of customary international law applicable to warfare between sovereign states was codified. Such codification occurred at the national level, such as with the publication of the Lieber Code in the United States, and at the international level with the adoption of the treaties during the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907. Moreover, trials in national courts during this period further helped clarify the law.[1] Following the end of World War II, major developments in the law occurred. Numerous trials of Axis war criminals established the Nuremberg principles, such as notion that war crimes constituted crimes defined by international law. Additionally, the Geneva Conventions in 1949 defined new war crimes and established that states could exercise universal jurisdiction over such crimes.[1] In the late 20th century and early 21st century, following the creation of several international courts, additional categories of war crimes applicable to armed conflicts other than those between states, such as civil wars, were defined.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime

 

[CricketCartoons]

Opinions will vary on what constitutes an atrocity from individual to individual, but for arguments sake I have reprinted below the generally accepted view as held by major world courts as of today:

I thought we were talking about atrocity, not war crimes. please can you check what atrocity means so that we can move forward?

 

[Hitman]

Lol,
This is the best ‘genius’ reply you have got to defend India’s honor?

C’mon soldier, you have to be better than this to defend India’s crime against innocents in Kashmir. Don’t let down the occupying Army in Indian occupied Kashmir.

Is this the best reply you have in your books? How about you counter my points rather than beating around the bush and ultimately running away?

 

[Gabbar Singh]

People should be allowed to post the truth on social media - however there have been numerous cases of 'activists' posting graphic photos and videos of incidents which took place elsewhere in the world, like in Syria, Burma and Gaza, and claiming it happened in J&K. Or recycling old content. If this is the case then people only have themselves to blame when they're banned from social media.

Although these fake photos have also been held up at the UN so it's not surprising to see 'activists' follow the lead of the politicians.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-41427929

 

[Itachi]

I hold a different view regarding censoring social media. In some level, censoring should be done.

It's a different case when someone is reporting some conflicts which doesn't put immediate danger but there are also some circumstances where social media can ignite clash between two or more communities based upon series of events that was happening in another place and had no relevance with them. It can also put law and order out dangerously and can descend in to anarchy specially in a multicultural society. Whether true or not, posts will be flying acorss fb and Twitter which will ignite the fire more. More lives will be lost.

Social media is a great responsibility. But many hasn't learn to bear it.

 

[IMMY69]

Is this the best reply you have in your books? How about you counter my points rather than beating around the bush and ultimately running away like a little girl?

Mate please grow up and learn to reply properly.
Otherwise it’s going to be another thread where “he said, she said”, more like a primary school ground disagreement...

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I hold a different view regarding censoring social media. In some level, censoring should be done.

It's a different case when someone is reporting some conflicts which doesn't put immediate danger but there are also some circumstances where social media can ignite clash between two or more communities based upon series of events that was happening in another place and had no relevance with them. It can also put law and order out dangerously and can descend in to anarchy specially in a multicultural society. Whether true or not, posts will be flying acorss fb and Twitter which will ignite the fire more. More lives will be lost.

Social media is a great responsibility. But many hasn't learn to bear it.

On that I will agree with you. I have argued previously that social media in the hands of the ignorant is dangerous, especially in countries where ethnic and religious divisions are highly sensitive. Perhaps a blanket ban on social media would be the fair way to go in countries like India where irresponsible messages can lead to riots and bloodshed. We could look at it again every five years as civilisation in these places progresses.

 

[GBK_Fan]

On that I will agree with you. I have argued previously that social media in the hands of the ignorant is dangerous, especially in countries where ethnic and religious divisions are highly sensitive. Perhaps a blanket ban on social media would be the fair way to go in countries like India where irresponsible messages can lead to riots and bloodshed. We could look at it again every five years as civilisation in these places progresses.

As a fellow Brit I think you are being racist there captain. Don’t we go against people who post hate messages on social media. There have been far right nutters who have been jailed for hate speech on twitter. India is being far more civilised than us again, it’s simply asking Twitter to pull them out from display in India not hauling those knobheads to the prison like we do.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

As a fellow Brit I think you are being racist there captain. Don’t we go against people who post hate messages on social media. There have been far right nutters who have been jailed for hate speech on twitter. India is being far more civilised than us again, it’s simply asking Twitter to pull them out from display in India not hauling those knobheads to the prison like we do.

I can't imagine many fellow Brits who would equate political struggle of minorities with far right majority groups promoting hate speech. I think there would be even less Brits who would then go on to promote India as civilised as compared to our advanced and hygienic country.

Are you a born British if you don't mind me asking? Or perhaps a naturalised immigrant?

 

[GBK_Fan]

I can't imagine many fellow Brits who would equate political struggle of minorities with far right majority groups promoting hate speech. I think there would be even less Brits who would then go on to promote India as civilised as compared to our advanced and hygienic country.

Are you a born British if you don't mind me asking? Or perhaps a naturalised immigrant?

Any true Brit would tell you it’s not about how you got the passport but how well you are “integrated” in British society. You would be loathe to assume a second generation Brit in inner city Birmingham, selling kebabs and who has never tasted beer let alone seen the inside of a pub, is considered more Brit than a first generation technocrat living in London. Isn’t this the entire good immigrant debate based on?

Also on Kashmir, all right thinking Brits know that the people pelting stones, have violently massacred the real minority living amongst them. You just have to follow our country’s stand on Kashmir, to know we support the principled stand by India.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Any true Brit would tell you it’s not about how you got the passport but how well you are “integrated” in British society. You would be loathe to assume a second generation Brit in inner city Birmingham, selling kebabs and who has never tasted beer let alone seen the inside of a pub, is considered more Brit than a first generation technocrat living in London. Isn’t this the entire good immigrant debate based on?

Also on Kashmir, all right thinking Brits know that the people pelting stones, have violently massacred the real minority living amongst them. You just have to follow our country’s stand on Kashmir, to know we support the principled stand by India.

This is true, white Brits do appreciate immigrants who integrate readily, and that is certainly something Indians do better than Kashmiris, but no Brit would ever accept some immigrant describing British as less civilised than Indians, especially considering the lack of general hygiene and rights for women in that country. We would be likely to say, if India is that great, why don't you book a one way ticket to India and enjoy the civilisation to your heart's desire?

 

[GBK_Fan]

This is true, white Brits do appreciate immigrants who integrate readily, and that is certainly something Indians do better than Kashmiris, but no Brit would ever accept some immigrant describing British as less civilised than Indians, especially considering the lack of general hygiene and rights for women in that country. We would be likely to say, if India is that great, why don't you book a one way ticket to India and enjoy the civilisation to your heart's desire?

Now now Cap don’t go quoting from the Nigel Farage handbook. You don’t get to decide (and rightfully so) who lives here.

We have historically learned a lot from the Indians. Multi-culturalism itself is an Indian influence. Without it, Papa Rishwat would not be allowed here and you wouldn’t get to Tom-Tom your dual British citizenship. Try stepping out of your closed echo chamber, there is a lot for you to learn.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Now now Cap don’t go quoting from the Nigel Farage handbook. You don’t get to decide (and rightfully so) who lives here.

We have historically learned a lot from the Indians. Multi-culturalism itself is an Indian influence. Without it, Papa Rishwat would not be allowed here and you wouldn’t get to Tom-Tom your dual British citizenship. Try stepping out of your closed echo chamber, there is a lot for you to learn.

I am not trying to decide who lives here, merely representing an honest view of the indigenous community. We Brits are not against Indians who know their place, one of the reasons why most Indians are happily accepted as they integrate so well, adopting our ways of life and mannerisms and doing a good job in the background.

But don't make us laugh, no Indian would ever have the temerity to talk about the Brits learning from Indians or teaching us about multiculturalism. That too from an immigrant. Bravo for typing all that out on a Pakistani forum, but you won't hear it from any British Indian publicly.

 

[GBK_Fan]

I am not trying to decide who lives here, merely representing an honest view of the indigenous community. We Brits are not against Indians who know their place, one of the reasons why most Indians are happily accepted as they integrate so well, adopting our ways of life and mannerisms and doing a good job in the background.

But don't make us laugh, no Indian would ever have the temerity to talk about the Brits learning from Indians or teaching us about multiculturalism. That too from an immigrant. Bravo for typing all that out on a Pakistani forum, but you won't hear it from any British Indian publicly.

Cap cool down. I am not suggesting you don’t understand the mainline view. Given you can write English well, I am sure you are gainfully employed and can hold a conversation if someone does come up to talk to you. I just pointed out the fallacy of using birth as a marker for mainstream British views.

Regarding the rest of your post, I can understand the frustration felt by a British Pakistani when the PM talks about greater cooperation with India. Vent it out cap, where else but an anonymous Internet forum.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Cap cool down. I am not suggesting you don’t understand the mainline view. Given you can write English well, I am sure you are gainfully employed and can hold a conversation if someone does come up to talk to you. I just pointed out the fallacy of using birth as a marker for mainstream British views.

Regarding the rest of your post, I can understand the frustration felt by a British Pakistani when the PM talks about greater cooperation with India. Vent it out cap, where else but an anonymous Internet forum.

Well, let's assume you are right and I am frustrated and absolutely fuming about greater British and Indian co-operation. Does that make any difference to the points I have raised? I think if anything they must have hit too close to home, hence the rush to shoot the messenger rather than face up to the message. Read it again and have another go.

 

[GBK_Fan]

Well, let's assume you are right and I am frustrated and absolutely fuming about greater British and Indian co-operation. Does that make any difference to the points I have raised? I think if anything they must have hit too close to home, hence the rush to shoot the messenger rather than face up to the message. Read it again and have another go.

Now now cap I see no reason to reread or respond to your anecdotal life experiences and prejudices. I am simply educating you on the mainstream British view. Now that you agree to it, my job here is done.