3 ms·

This is flamebait. There is absolutely zero chance anything will come of this. Mark Zuckerberg may want to avoid traveling to many Muslim countries, but with a

This is flamebait. There is absolutely zero chance anything will come of this. Mark Zuckerberg may want to avoid traveling to many Muslim countries, but with a name like Zuckerberg, I'm not sure that would have been advisable to begin with. No international enforcement agency is going to take this seriously, and specifically with regard to INTERPOL, their constitution would seem to disallow them any involvement in this matter: Article 3: It is strictly forbidden for the Organization to undertake any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character. http://www.interpol.int/Public/ICPO/LegalMaterials/constitution/constitutionGenReg/constitution.asp#art3 http://www.interpol.int/Public/ICPO/LegalMaterials/constitut...

anamax 16y ago
> Article 3: It is strictly forbidden for the Organization to undertake any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character. Would Interpol get involved in a case involving defamation of a head of state? Does that change if the head of state is also a religious figure? (Both the Queen of England and the Roman Catholic Pope are religious figures.) Heck - did Interpol get involved when the Pope was shot? These questions are relevant because there's not always a bright line. Are laws against murder religious? ("Thou Shalt not Kill" is one of the commandments.) If not, then why is a civil law against saying the wrong thing about the flying spaghetti monster? What about a law banning non-believers from Mecca?