Pakistan To Cut Phone Services To Prevent Muharram Attacks 119
A reader writes with this news from the Indian Express: "Pakistan's interior minister Friday said the government will suspend cell phone services in most parts of the country over the next two days to prevent attacks against Shia Muslims during a key religious commemoration. Militants often detonate bombs using cell phones and this is the first time the government has implemented such a wide-scale suspension. Saturday and Sunday are the most important days of Muharram, the first month of the Islamic calendar, especially important to Shias. Pakistani Shias Sunday observe Ashoura, commemorating the 7th century death of Imam Hussein, the Prophet Muhammad's grandson. Different parts of the Muslim world mark Ashoura on different days —neighbouring Afghanistan, for example, observes it on Saturday. 'The suspension of cell phone services will begin at 6 am Saturday and run through the next day,' Interior Minister Rehman Malik told reporters in Pakistan's capital, Islamabad. He said 90 per cent of the bombs set off by militants in Pakistan have been detonated using cell phones. Some criticized the government for suspending services, saying it was a huge inconvenience."
Idiots (Score:3, Insightful)
the whole bloody lot.
Re: (Score:2)
On what basis...
you sound like some "grumpy" old guy
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I'll second that. All it takes is for the bad guys to use the alarm function and then they still get the bomb to go off and the victims can't even call for help. What a stupid idea.
I don't think there is a greater hell (Score:5, Insightful)
than being a religious minority in Pakistan
Shia, Sikh, Hindu, or Christian
the West should just allow all religious minorities free passage out of Pakistan
they're being hunted
Re: (Score:1)
They don't want to leave, it's their home.
Re:I don't think there is a greater hell (Score:4, Insightful)
and they've done a lot for pakistan:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minorities_in_Pakistan [wikipedia.org]
The largest religious minority in Pakistan after Muslims, is that of the of Christians. This includes Anglicans, Protestants, Catholics, Armenian Orthodox, Assyrian/Chaldean, smaller numbers of Nestorians and more recent Evangelical sects. They are represented in many fields of Pakistani society and have to some degree, achieved higher positions in the government, bureaucracy and businesses. The Pakistani government has reserved quotas in educational institutes and reserved seats in government to ensure appropriate representation of the Christian community. Famous Pakistani Air Force pilot Cecil Chaudhry is a Pakistani Christian and was credited with numerous kills receiving the PAF awards for gallantry and bravery.
but then
Due to forced conversions, extortion and kidnapping of girls Hindus are fleeing to India. The kidnapping and rape of a teenage Hindu girl, Manisha Kumari, on August 7, 2012 is said to have caused widespread concern among the community. On 10 August 2012 around 250 Hindus refugees from Pakistan crossed over to India.[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]
the honorable thing to do is stay and fight for your country. which is why i hate on liberal americans who whine about fleeing to canada should republicans win
but staying and fighting assumes an honorable opponent, and a numerical balance
when you are vastly outnumbered, and the enemy has no problem committing vile acts that go unpunished, it is time to run, and live to fight another day, as an expat
Re: (Score:2)
How about conservative Americans who want to secede?
Re: (Score:3)
i think that is a hilarious revelation in the dichotomy between left wing douchebags and right wing douchebags
1. a right wing douchebag will claim provenance over the land, even when everyone has moved past their antiquated values that, in reality, never really existed except in myth. therefore, they think secession actually has a chance, because it nicely dovetails with their bullshit belief they are somehow more authentically american. they honestly believe, if they are in a room of 100 americans, and 99
Re: (Score:2)
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep arguing about what to have for dinner.
It's far more commonly two sheep and a wolf which is just as unfair to the wolf as the original scenario was for the sheep.
On second thought, maybe facile animal metaphors aren't the best models for political systems...
Re: (Score:2)
Don't stop before you get to the "moderate" wing douchebags. They'll listen to the arguments of the other douchebags and say, "you guys are douchebags. Let's do half of what each of you want." Because obviously averaging two bad ideas is just like having a good idea, right?
Re: (Score:2)
The only thing in the middle of the road is a yellow strip and dead animals.
Re: (Score:2)
Wish I had mod point to give you solely for fact you haven't been brainwashed by either side and will openly acknowledge they are both idiots.
Re: (Score:2)
they are butthurt morons.
What i don't get though that you can't talk even hypothetically about secession in the US. Ron Paul recently said that the secession, no matter how improbable, should always be on the table, so the federal government doesn't get too comfortable with pushing plebes around. He was shat all over by everyone, including all those tolerant, peace loving progressives. Are they against self-determination and freedom of association only because 200 years ago people's ancestors joined some un
Re: (Score:2)
Lots of people are for political self-determination until it lessens their own political power.
Re: (Score:2)
Ron Paul is an idiot. The US already had this debate, and the answer was no [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
nice ad hominem. Why won't you do the same with B.H.Obama who is directly responsible for deaths of thousands as the head of the war machine. Oh yeah, he looks cool on TV and poses for memetastic photos a lot so he's justified.
Re: (Score:2)
he looks cool on TV and poses for memetastic photos a lot so he's justified.
I'm sorry, did you have a better standard in mind? Because I'm open to suggestions, but until I hear some I'm going to keep photoshopping these image macros of the president.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry, the phones will all be up and running on Christmas eve.
Re: (Score:1)
Don't worry, all the phones will be ringing.
Signed, Jobe.
Re: (Score:1)
Not even that. Most phones have a schedule alarm function. Shouldn't take much more than five minutes poking around the settings menu. Sure they might not be able to ring or text it to set it off, but if they have an idea of the date and time where a target is most likely to show up it doesn't take a genius to figure out the rest. If they're already familiar with a certain model phone for triggering bombs, disabling the actual phone function isn't going to throw them off by that much.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
No. ALL Superstition is bad. ALL Superstition is enemy to the search for truth because it promotes dogma instead.
We shoud DESPISE primitive beliefs and seek to keep their adherents away. We have enough Superstitionist nutters in the West already.
If any can PROVE their Sky Fairie exists, I shall recant and kiss his/her/it's Noodly Appendage. They've had THOUSANDS of years to prove they aren't promoting lies designed to enslave men to other men.
Re: (Score:2)
Intolerance is intolerance, no matter what you believe or don't believe. An asshole is an asshole, no matter what he believes. Consider circletimessquare's post to be ditto'd here.
Re:I don't think there is a greater hell (Score:4, Insightful)
i would prefer a moderate religious person over an atheist zealot, any day
What exactly is the definition of an "atheist zealot"? Asking for positive evidence sounds perfectly reasonable to me, especially whenever what those people profess is only one of a large number of equally likely alternatives. That's just simple logic of reasoning to me.
Re: (Score:1)
What exactly is the definition of an "atheist zealot"?
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/extremists [theoatmeal.com]
Re: (Score:2)
You should have noted that Mr. Oatmeal did some careful digging and posted a link to atheistcartoons.com, where this comic was originally conceived.
Still funny, in a very sad http://books.google.com/books/about/Laughter_through_tears.html?id=hyLzAAAAMAAJ [google.com] sort of way.
Re: (Score:1)
I'm not sure if this is what he meant, but one can be an atheist who is zealous about something non-theistic, such as an atheist libertarian zealot, an atheist communist zealot, an atheist animal-rights zealot, or an atheist law-and-order zealot. Those can be more dangerous than your garden variety moderate theist.
Re: (Score:2)
Modded down... awwww did some libertarian zealot get his widdle feelings hurt?
Re: (Score:2)
i would prefer a moderate religious person over an atheist zealot, any day
What exactly is the definition of an "atheist zealot"? Asking for positive evidence sounds perfectly reasonable to me, especially whenever what those people profess is only one of a large number of equally likely alternatives. That's just simple logic of reasoning to me.
Well, he could start by not implicitly linking a few psychopaths who USE BOMBS AND MURDER OTHERS with those who go to church or have their own personal beliefs. He is not asking for evidence to satisfy his own inquiry. That would be a separate discussion. He's simply expressing his hatred and mockery of anyone who entertains beliefs he finds distasteful.
Blaming all religion (and he made no distinction) for the problems in Pakistan is like never eating food again because someone was choking.
This one
Re: (Score:3)
First, let's not confuse atheists with agnostics...
Speaking for myself only, I'd call all self-assured atheists crazy zealots. If you profess to be rational, but are CERTAIN that there can't be any deity out there, you're just nuts. There's the simple fact that you can't prove a negative, the fact that insufficient evidence to prove a positive does not disprove the original point, etc.
If you don't know what's out there, so you don't believe in any particular religion (agnostic), I say more power to you.
Re: (Score:3)
I define atheists and agnostics quite differently.
> you don't believe in any particular religion (agnostic)
That's atheistic for me, not agnostic. Agnostic is when you say one/some of the religions *might* actually be correct, but there is no way to know for sure. As an atheist, I hold that all *current* religions made enough demonstrated blunders by their claims that their cosmic myths and escatologies don't deserve any further consideration (the validity of their social philosophies are a different matt
Re: (Score:2)
According to Merriam-Webster...
Agnostic:
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
Atheist:
: one who believes that there is no deity
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
We're talking beliefs here, rationality doesn't enter into it. Besides, I've personally encountered several such irrational atheists (hence my original post), so they most certainly do exist in decent numbers, and the term is perfectly useful. It's not my fault that some of the folks you may identify with, just happen to be just as irrational (and frankly, batshit insane) as the various religious extremists.
Other sources have similar definitions of the term. Wikipedia uses a similar definition as well:
"A
Re: (Score:2)
They're written from the point of view of the person who mashed word parts together to coin them.
A-gnosis-ic -- describing something/someone that/who has no knowledge (of a god)
A-theus-ist -- refers to a person who believes there is no god
Sure, word meanings can (and do) change, but as coinages that's what the damn words meant. If you want to arbitrarily change them, that's fine, but stop pretending that's not what you're doing.
Re: (Score:1)
Of course they can. I rationally believe that there is no Loch Ness monster. I rationally believe that there are no teapots in orbit around Mars. I rationally believe that there is no deity.
I don't need to pretend to accept that there's the possibility of these things purely to satisfy the false arguments of monster/teapot/deity believers.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd just like to thank you for stepping-in to this conversation at the right time, and completely proving every one of my points.
Re: (Score:2)
No, he hasn’t... not a single one of your points. You are just eager to claim victory.
You are confusing between two statements
a.) I hold that it is rational to assume that there are no deities.
b.) I can formally assert that there can absolutely be no deities.
The Webster definition can, in theory, be taken to cover both. Your argument is a strawman (despite your claims below that it isn’t) in that you insist that atheists follow (b). They don’t. I can’t speak for the atheists yo
Re: (Score:1)
And yet you have no argument as to how.
If you don't think it's rational to believe that there are no teapots in orbit around Mars, then your thinking is crooked.
And by extension of your argument it's certainly NOT logical for you to believe that there IS a deity.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Right, so holding up a definition from your favourite dictionary wins. Unless you've truly given this very little thought and study, you surely must be aware that it's nowhere near as clear-cut as you claim. Have you read the Oxford English Dictionary definitions?
Atheist: a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods
Agnostic: a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God
Hey, wait. You as an agnostic are specifically claiming that not
Re: (Score:2)
No, I've referenced several dictionaries, and encyclopedias. Oxford is the only deviant that seeks to expand the term to accommodate common mis-use of the word.
It's no straw man by any stretch of the imagination. You can find LOTS of people who hold such views, even in this very thread: http://slashdot.org/comment [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I am sick of these atheist zealots bombing cities in the name of spreading atheism. I wish there were more conservative atheist. All they do is talk.
Re: (Score:2)
Prove your Imaginary Friend exists and I'm all ears.
Otherwise, how DARE you defend Superstition when you cannot supply evidence for its supposed "truth"?
Moderates ENABLE extremists, and moderate Superstition is still socially oppressive and still an enemy of the search for truth.
Sorry if pointing that out annoys you. Prove your God is real or fuck off. Is asking for proof insulting? Precisely WHY? Do tell. In detail.
Re: (Score:2)
than being a religious minority in Pakistan
Shia, Sikh, Hindu, or Christian
the West should just allow all religious minorities free passage out of Pakistan
they're being hunted
yes, I'm sure Israel would be glad to take them all in.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes there is, try being a religious minority in Saudi Arabia(frankly, all non-wahabi), in Burma(muslims), In Srilanka(hindus)...
My country is a miserable, miserable place, but trust me, I have seen worse.
Re: (Score:1)
Cell phones don't kill people (Score:5, Funny)
...people kill people.
Re: (Score:2)
the roaming charges can be killer
Re: (Score:2)
The right to bear arms (if you interpret that as either the right to have and serve in an army/militia, or a personal right to own a gun) doesn't mean you just get to shoot people for the hell of it, or because you disagree with their religion though. If you're using a gun for that purpose your gun (and your freedom) can and should be taken way.
Cell phones aren't speech, at least not in the constitutionally protected sense of being able to say what you want, no matter how vile, without the government stopp
why not just jam the signal ? (Score:1)
why disable everything and not just jam signals around the area ? i've been to a couple of events here in Canada where they have Cellphone Jammers and they work really well !! nothing like getting zero cell-phone coverage on parliament hill !
Re: (Score:2)
You don't have to go far to find such technology in use. One of the black vans that accompanies the president is supposedly a continuously operating cell jammer.
But the difference here is that it is done for religious purposes, to protect one of the most violent religions in the world today. And since the bombings would target markets and parades and Mosques, the number of areas needing protection pretty much constitutes the entire country.
Will phone service be up and running all through Christmas and East
Re: (Score:1)
Nope, that's just the regular coverage of our crappy carriers.
Are they going to ban the sale of clocks too? (Score:1)
probably. (Score:2)
some of the wacko bin Loonies would like to roll the clock back to 700 AD, so shut off the electricity and phones and let them see what it would be like. oh, and there were no rifles and RPGs and stuff, let them go back to horses and bayonets.
Re:probably. (Score:4, Funny)
...and binders for their women.
no, the other kind of binder.
way back in the sticks, it's still done there (Score:2)
some Sauronesque minds out there....
Re:Are they going to ban the sale of clocks too? (Score:5, Funny)
Even easier - give AT&T the contract for all Pakistani cell phones. Nothing would get through, anytime.
Re: (Score:2)
Will they then also ban all devices capable of being involved in triggering a bomb: clocks, watches, matches, and egg timers?
That won't help you. If you're going to commit a serious crime, what's a pesky ban to prevent you from doing it? Anyway, building your own radio-controlled detonator shouldn't be difficult these days. With modern electronic components? Child's play.
why not block the area off and force any one (Score:2)
why not block the area off and force any one entering to go under a full body cavity search
Re: (Score:2)
full body cavity search
That sounds like a call for laparoscopy to me. Anyway, a shaped charge in the abdominal cavity isn't such a bad idea! You get quite a lot of bang for the buck, pardon my pun.
Re: (Score:2)
They do this, things are cordoned off, barb wires, military snipers, the works, etc.
But you underestimate terrorists. My neighbour could be a terrorist and I would never know until I went BOOM.
Police have discovered cellphone-bombs in dustbins, and even bins used to house torn piece with Islamic words on them (they are then disposed of separately)...terrorists are like honeybadgers, they don't give a shit.
Hence the blanket downage.
Doesn't seem a real solution (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Doesn't seem a real solution (Score:5, Insightful)
The bombers don't come from across the borders. The come from the next street over.
And they use stolen phones.
they'll just send a Nobel vest over there (Score:2)
plenty of people they can coerce into wearing clothing that ticks.
Re: (Score:3)
Why people always seems to think that the bad guys must be stupid?
Everybody is stupid.
The problem is that some people are stupid enough to assume that their enemy is more stupid than themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
I expect they use stolen phones -- a phone stolen that day, or the day before, if necessary -- so none of what you proposed will work.
Re:Doesn't seem a real solution (Score:4, Interesting)
The PTA (Pakistan Telecommunications Authority) has been on a MASSIVE crackdown to block unregistered SIMs...but with a zillion unregistered sims floating around (it was so bad that *hawkers* used to sell sims with attractive numbers on stands everywhere...) that nothing short of a blanket ban is effective.
Re: (Score:2)
Timers suck. What if you need to abort? Also, timing can vary... do it at the right time and you can maximize your kill rate... at the wrong time, it is minimized. Worse, you accidentally kill a friend or relative.
Note IANAT [I am not a terrorist], but it's not hard to imagine... I wonder if the people who actually do this stuff give this much consideration to the act?
Re: (Score:2)
Worse, you accidentally kill a friend or relative.
A truly dedicated terrorist HAS no friends, nor relatives.... anymore!
Re: (Score:3)
There are a lot of ways you can use a cell phone. Basically any way that triggers the speaker can be used.
The timer option is only chosen for airplanes which will be out of cell range.
Most of the time the bomb is triggered by a simple text message or phone call after it is carried into the target area
by a imbecile too stupid to understand what they are doing or an equally imbecilic jihadist convinced that the 17 virgins will be waiting for him.
The bombers are usually watching, so they can set it off early
Re: (Score:1)
(I read somewhere that the number of village idiots in Pakistan and Afghanistan has fallen to nearly zero.)
Unfortunately, no. Humanity is exceptionally efficient in this regard. No matter how quickly we use them up, we make more of them even faster.
Re: (Score:2)
(I read somewhere that the number of village idiots in Pakistan and Afghanistan has fallen to nearly zero.)
Unfortunately, no. Humanity is exceptionally efficient in this regard. No matter how quickly we use them up, we make more of them even faster.
I suppose you are right, especially given the level of inbreeding over there.
The story I read was in the news when a pretty dim witted woman was convinced to carry a backpack into a market.
After they identified the body, they were able to trace her to a village where her family had grown tired of caring for
her with no prospect of a mahr.
Uhm... That won't work... (Score:4, Insightful)
In addition to turning off towers, they will need to set up phone jammers everywhere. If not, all the bad guys need to do is set up one of those portable mobile phone hacking things to enable calling the remote device from a reasonable distance. I know it seems like a lot of work, but you know? If someone is going to go through the trouble of making a bomb detinator using a phone, then it's not a stretch to imagine taking that extra step to ensure that it works.
Other thoughts? If your religion preaches intolerance, it is already a failure. (Yeah, I get it, the number of devout followers of these intolerant and violent religions would offer evidence to the contrary, but I mean failure in another sense.)
Also, Islam would do well to learn lessons from Christianity. Look at how adaptable Christianity has been! It adopts all sorts of holidays and celebrations so that people think it's religious (like Christmas and Easter) and allows participation with pagan holidays like Halloween without fear of corrupting people because it's all in fun, not to be taken seriously. Also, in the 60s, they avoided a serious departure from Christianity in the US by changing God's personality from fire, brimstone and harsh punishment to a gentle god of love, forgiveness and tolerance. And it worked! The face of Christianity in the US today is completely different from the pre-60's version. Islam is like it is stuck 1000 years in the past.
Re: (Score:1)
Or rather, they are 600 years behind. Wikipedia mentions [wikipedia.org] the first Muslim traditions dating from around 630 AD.
As you said yourself, only some 50 years ago, Christianity in the US had a bit of an ugly face to it. Give Muslims a couple of hundred years, and they'll sort it out as well.
Re: (Score:3)
Also, in the 60s, they avoided a serious departure from Christianity in the US by changing God's personality from fire, brimstone and harsh punishment to a gentle god of love, forgiveness and tolerance. And it worked!
You mean the Christian god who says that killing dark skinned people is great if you think they might be a threat, that carrying a gun is great in case you have to kill someone who might try to "steal your property," that killing doctors is fine if they are "killing innocent fetuses," and that gays are such an abomination that he sent his holy plague of AIDS to kill them? When you look at it, are the Muslim extremists any worse than the Christian ones? Agreed there are issues in the Islamic world that nee
Re: (Score:3)
I get what you mean, but I guess I should have added there was a hint of joke in what I was asserting about Christianity. (What I was saying is that Christianity is so adapted and modified, that it's DEFINITELY not what the original god and/or leadership intended... it just does what it has to to keep its customers happy.)
Re: (Score:2)
Or they can use the wi-fi functionality. Pre-planting a few wi-fi devices would not be difficult in a dense urban area. I'm afraid this is also aimed at blocking cellphone _cameras_, and recording of political speeches and security force behavior.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a very interesting point. So you say they are interested in blocking the truth of any given situation. Seems likely given that this is the case all over the world and especially in the feedom loving US of A. (You can't record cops on video... not even when the courts expressly say you can!)
How in the world can they.. (Score:1)
do this? - They won't be able to track anyone.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure they can. Just listen to the devices looking for towers but don't transmit back. In fact, it would work even BETTER like that because mobile phones transmit with more power when they have trouble receiving.
Once they outlaw cellphones (Score:3)
Mi-Fi (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
See, the problem here is that people who are against religious freedom or a particular religion are carrying out these violent attacks, where the victims of these attacks are peaceful and religious individuals. In reality, the killing is born out of a sentiment against religion, so really you are not at all different from the people you're attempting to criticize. In fact, you're even more extreme than them. These killers say that a particular religion is evil; you say all religions are evil.
Re: (Score:1)