Originally posted by: blue-ice
LOL...Krystal...what do u think our Censor Board is for...it chops off what it doesn't want the public to see and rightfully ...How does it matter if a portion of a movie. a dialogue , a cuss word or a whole movie is banned...at the end of the day...the result is the same...In India also they ban,...rather in small parts...so does that make us undemocratic?...
Democracy doesn't mean ultimate freedom to do what u want...If u think that banning a movie is undemocratic...i would say that not allowing me to drive over a certain speed limit is undemocratic...after all who is the Govt to decide for me...but no ur freedom ends where my nose begins...the Govt of any country has absolute right to ban whatever they think is not right for their citizens...or may bring down the image of their country...or may cause unrest in the country...there are absolutely no two ways about it...Didn't India ban the documentary on Nirbhaya? So there u go...even highly democratic countries do it...they regulate how things are conducted in their country...there is never any ABSOLUTE FREEDOM in a civilized world...
BTW...is Saeed listed as a terrorist in Pakistan?? If not then they can take action on his plea as a citizen of their country who demands protection...It may be wrong from India's POV...but for Pak Govt...if he is not categorized as a terrorist ...he is another normal citizen for them...Shouldn't we be more worried about why the Pak Govt is not categorizing him as a terrorist and try to convince them of handing him over to India...instead of throwing fits over banning of a movie...
People have been raving and ranting about Nihalni's infamous declaration of pulling the axe on cuss words in movies, for a reason. Ditto for the ban on Uddwin's "India's Daughter". Both of these were undemocratic decisions.
Freedom of speech is never absolute, correct. However, there are some limitations which are accepted as "reasonable" universally. For e.g., propagating harmful or illegal ideas, or inciting violence. Making a political statement about a State doesn't fall into that ambit. And the movie is not even directed at the Pak Government/State.
Speeding is not a valid analogy, since it has the potential to damage or take a life.
I agree with the last few lines of your post though. The Pakistani Government's constant glossing over of the facts regarding the likes of Saeed and Lakhvi is hugely worrying, and a lot is being done about that at the appropriate (read Diplomatic) levels. There's very little the general public can do about it.
Edited by krystal_watz - 10 years ago
2