Shoaib Akhtar, Basit Ali's YouTube channels banned in India as government takes strict action after Pahalgam attack
In the aftermath of the deadly Pahalgam terror attack, which saw 26 civilians lose their lives last week on Tuesday, the Indian government took stringent action against Pakistan, banning as many as 16 of their YouTube channels in the country. Some of those channels belong to prominent Pakistan cricket personalities such as Shoaib Akhtar, Basit Ali, and Rashid Latif.
"This content is currently unavailable in this country because of an order from the government related to national security or public order. For more details about government removal requests, please visit the Google Transparency Report (transparencyreport.google.com)," this is what the message reads when either of the channels is visited in India.
These channels were blocked for allegedly disseminating provocative and communally sensitive content as well as false and misleading narratives against India, its Army and security agencies after the tragic incident. The decision was taken following recommendations from the Ministry of Home Affairs and constitutes a part of the Indian government's series of non-military actions against Pakistan.
A senior government official said, 'On the recommendations of the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Government of India has banned the 16 Pakistani YouTube channels including Dawn News, Samaa TV, Ary News, Geo News for disseminating provocative and communally sensitive content, false and misleading narratives and misinformation against India, its Army and security agencies in the backdrop of the tragic Pahalgam terror incident in Jammu and Kashmir.'
Besides the aforementioned three, former Pakistan bowler Tanveer Ahmed's YouTube channel was banned in India. As of now, none of these personalities has made a public statement on the ban, although it remains unclear whether it will be restored in the near future.
Overall, the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting blocked 16 big YouTube channels of Pakistan, which have a combined subscriber base of 63.08 million. These include both news agencies and individuals. The channels are: Dawn News, Irshad Bhatti, Samaa TV, ARY News, BOL news, Raftar, The Pakistan Reference, Geo News, Samaa Sports, GNN, Uzair Cricket, Umar Cheema Exclusive, Asma Shirazi, Muneeb Farooq, Suno News HD, and Razi Naama.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Wire
8 minutes ago
- The Wire
Justice, Speech and Selective Outrage: The Supreme Court's Contempt Dilemma
Menu हिंदी తెలుగు اردو Home Politics Economy World Security Law Science Society Culture Editor's Pick Opinion Support independent journalism. Donate Now Law Justice, Speech and Selective Outrage: The Supreme Court's Contempt Dilemma Rekha Sharma 4 minutes ago The Supreme Court's swift move to initiate contempt proceedings against journalist Ajay Shukla for a critical YouTube video contrasts sharply with the way BJP MP Nishikant Dubey was handled. Nishikant Dubey (left) and Ajay Shukla in the background. In the foreground is the Supreme Court. Real journalism holds power accountable Since 2015, The Wire has done just that. But we can continue only with your support. Contribute now On May 30, a Supreme Court bench headed by the Chief Justice of India initiated suo motu criminal contempt proceedings against Ajay Shukla, a Chandigarh-based journalist, for posting a video on YouTube allegedly containing scathing and scandalous remarks against some senior judges of the Supreme Court. The bench observed that though the Constitution guarantees to every citizen the right to freedom of speech and expression, this is subject to reasonable restrictions and that such a right does not permit someone to defame a judge or bring into disrepute the institution of the judiciary. Having said so, the court directed that the offending video be taken down forthwith. It also asked the Attorney General and the Solicitor General to assist the court on the next date of hearing. Though the video is no longer available, it is widely believed that contain some allegedly objectionable remarks against Justice Surya Kant, who is next in line for the Chief Justiceship, and Justice Bela M. Trivedi, who retired mid-May. It may be stated, at the very outset, that the dignity, majesty and honour of the Supreme Court, or for that matter any court of justice must be protected at all cost by every person including by the Supreme Court itself. That said, fair criticism of a judicial decision and the conduct of a judge – provided it is done in good faith and on accurate facts – also needs to be equally protected. In this background, while no one can question the right and the prerogative of the Supreme Court to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against Shukla, the action taken has given rise to certain questions. Not very long ago, highly objectionable and vicious remarks were made by Nishikant Dubey, a Lok Sabha member of the ruling party, against the then CJI, Justice Sanjiv Khanna. Dubey held him singularly responsible for all the alleged 'civil wars' in the country. He also alleged that the Supreme Court was taking the country towards anarchy. These remarks were not only highly toxic and outrageous, they had the potential to rock the very foundation of our judicial system and erode the people's faith in the judiciary and almost bordered on 'blasphemy'. And yet, even though the fountain head of the judiciary was personally targeted, it neither caused any stir nor a ripple. There was a sphinx like silence. No judge deemed it fit to issue any suo motu criminal contempt notice against the errant MP. It was the Supreme Court Bar Association which raised its voice, and urged the Attorney General to grant consent for initiating contempt proceedings against Dubey. The AG neither on his own nor on the request of the Bar Association has till date given or declined to give his consent. This, despite the fact that he as the first law officer of the country, has a duty to uphold the dignity and majesty of the court of which he is an integral part. It ultimately fell on the lot of Justice Khanna himself to give a befitting response to the likes of Dubey. Though the bench headed by him dismissed a petition which sought contempt action against the MP, he gave a very measured and dignified response to him. Holding that the comments were highly irresponsible and reflected a penchant to attract attention by casting aspersions on the Supreme Court and its judges, he wrote that the courts are not so fragile as flowers to wither and wilt under such ludicrous statements. He further observed, 'We do not believe that the confidence and the credibility of the courts in the eyes of the public can be shaken by such statements'. Kudos to Justice Sanjiv Khanna for such a befitting response. Going by media reports, Justice Bela Trivedi has not been given a farewell by the Supreme Court Bar Association. The CJI is reported to have expressed his disapproval over the decision of the Bar Association, and so has Justice A.G. Masih, who said that tradition must be followed. It is for the first time in the history of the Supreme Court that such a tradition has been broken. The bar, it is said, is the judge of the judges. It is not for nothing that Justice Bela Trivedi has been denied the honour of a farewell by the bar. The question is why did things come to such a pass? It should set both bench and bar thinking. Undoubtedly, a long standing tradition has been broken but, then, judgeship is not a blank cheque. It comes with responsibility. The bar not only helps judges make the justice delivery system work, it also acts as a watchdog. The bar has, by its action, sent a loud and clear message. It is time for judges to remember that they too are under watch. They may, in a given case, fail to grasp some suspected hidden meaning of a column written in English by an Oxford educated professor and leave the job of deciphering it to some police officer, and that too not from a particular state. But if they fail to take action against a minister who made a highly objectionable statement in simple and understandable Hindi, it does raise eyebrows. It is in such matters that the bar has to play its role. And, if it does play its role, there should be no protest. Rekha Sharma is a former judge of the Delhi high court. This piece was first published on The India Cable – a premium newsletter from The Wire & Galileo Ideas – and has been updated and republished here. To subscribe to The India Cable, click here. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments. Make a contribution to Independent Journalism Related News Central Hall | Governors Increasingly Acting like Political Agents as Constitutional Morality Erodes 'Same Sex Marriage Not Legalised But Couples Can Very Well Form A Family': Madras HC Indian Astronaut Shubhanshu Shukla-led Mission to International Space Station Pushed to June 10 'Highly Irresponsible': BJP MP Nishikant Dubey Faces Supreme Court Wrath Why the Process of 44 MLAs 'Forming the Government' in Manipur Is Not Straightforward US Supreme Court Rules $1.29 Bn Lawsuit Against ISRO-Owned Antrix to Proceed Modi-Shah Face Dilemma As Their Stormtroopers Cross All Limits of Propriety The Arrest and Trial of Professor Azaan M Free Speech on Eggshells: What the Ali Khan Mahmudabad Case Signals for All of Us About Us Contact Us Support Us © Copyright. All Rights Reserved.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
24 minutes ago
- First Post
'Combat terror, eliminate Jaish': Bilawal Bhutto delegation gets a reality check in US
US Congressman Brad Sherman gave a reality check to the Pakistani delegation led by Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, insisting that the country should 'do all it can' to eliminate terrorist group Jaish-e-Mohammad from the region read more Pakistan's bid to spread its false propaganda in Washington failed horribly after a US lawmaker called out the country's support for a globally recognised terrorist organisation, Jaish-e-Mohammad. On Thursday, American Congressman Brad Sherman delivered stern advice to the Pakistani delegation led by former Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari that the country should 'do all it can' to eliminate the terrorist group Jaish-e-Mohammad. Sherman also told Bhutto's team that Pakistan should ensure the protection of religious minorities in the country. Interestingly, the remarks from the US lawmaker came months after Pakistan's Army Chief Asim Munir made provocative remarks, expressing his support for the so-called 'Two-Nation Theory,' days after which India witnessed the Pahalgam terror attack. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Sherman took to X, formerly known as Twitter, to reveal that he emphasised to the Pakistani delegation the importance of combating terrorism and, in particular, the group Jaish-e-Mohammed. The American lawmaker pointed out that it was the JeM that was behind the murder of American journalist Daniel Pearl in 2002. For years, the people of #Sindh have faced political repression through enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings. Since its founding in 2011, Pakistan's own Human Rights Commission has documented over 8,000 cases of enforced disappearances, many of which have never been… — Congressman Brad Sherman (@BradSherman) June 6, 2025 Sherman shares the plight of the Pearl family In his post, the US lawmaker noted that he told the Pakistani delegation that it is important to combat terror groups like Jaish-e-Mohammed and shared the plight of the Pearl family. 'I emphasised to the Pakistani delegation the importance of combatting terrorism, and in particular, the group Jaish-e-Mohammed, who murdered my constituent Daniel Pearl in 2002,' the Congressman said. 'Pearl's family continues to live in my district, and Pakistan should do all it can to eliminate this vile group and combat terrorism in the region,' he added. Daniel was kidnapped by terrorists in Pakistan in January 2002, while he was on his way to what he had expected would be an interview with Pakistani religious cleric Mubarak Ali Gilani in Karachi. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The Congressman from California also raised concerns about the lives of minorities in Pakistan. 'Christians, Hindus and Ahmadiyya Muslims living in Pakistan must be allowed to practice their faith and participate in the democratic system without fear of violence, persecution, discrimination, or an unequal justice system,' he said in the post. During the meeting, Sherman also called for the release of Dr Shakil Afridi, who continues to languish in prison for helping the United States kill Osama bin Laden . 'Freeing Dr Afridi represents an important step in bringing closure for victims of 9/11,' he said. Dr Afridi is a Pakistani physician who helped the CIA run a polio vaccination programme in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The campaign eventually helped in the collection of the DNA sample of the Bin Laden family. Afridi was eventually arrested by Pakistani authorities shortly after the American raid on Bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad in May 2011. In 2012, a Pakistani court eventually sentenced him to 33 years in prison. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
India.com
28 minutes ago
- India.com
India Is Fifth Largest Economy, Their Presence At G7 Meeting Makes Sense: Canada PM
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney on Friday (local time) said that G7 countries will hold discussions on important issues, including security and energy, in their upcoming summit, adding that India's presence at the intergovernmental political and economic forum is essential. Carney said that India being the fifth largest economy and the most populous country in the world must be at the seat. "Let's put the two aspects in context- first is, we are in the role- Canada's in the role of the G7 chair and in those discussions as agreed with our G7 colleagues, include important discussions on energy, security, on digital future, critical minerals amongst others and partnerships actually in building infrastructure in the emerging and developing world," he said. Carney said that India is central to a number of supply chains, which makes its presence pertinent at the G7 chair consultation. "There are certain countries that should be at the table for those discussions, and in my capacity as G7 chair, I will consult with some others to make those determinations. India is the fifth largest economy in the world, effectively the most populous country in the world, central to a number of those supply chains at the heart of a number of those supply chains, so it makes sense," he said. Carney said that India and Canada are acting on law enforcement, and Prime Minister Narendra Modi has accepted his invitation. "In addition, bilaterally we have now agreed importantly to continued law enforcement to law enforcement dialogue so there's been some progress on that recognizes issues of accountability I extended the invitation to Prime Minister Modi for in in that context and he has accepted it," he said. PM Modi on Friday confirmed he would attend the upcoming Group of Seven (G7) leaders summit in Canada after an invitation from newly elected Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney. "Glad to receive a call from Prime Minister Mark J Carney of Canada. Congratulated him on his recent election victory and thanked him for the invitation to the G7 Summit in Kananaskis later this month. As vibrant democracies bound by deep people-to-people ties, India and Canada will work together with renewed vigour, guided by mutual respect and shared interests. Look forward to our meeting at the Summit," he said in a post on X. The announcement comes after a period of severely strained relations between the two countries, triggered by Canadian allegations that Indian agents were involved in the June 2023 assassination of Hardeep Singh Nijjar--a Canadian citizen and prominent pro-Khalistan activist--outside a Sikh temple in Vancouver, as per DW News. India strongly denied the claims, and both nations expelled senior diplomats in a tit-for-tat escalation, DW News reported.
