Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Iranian Government Cuts Off Internet Access Again

CmdrTaco posted more than 5 years ago | from the but-i-wouldn't-wanna-live-there dept.

Censorship 374

AlbionTourgee writes "It is reported that Gmail and Yahoo mail at least have been blocked in Iran, along with many English-language sites. While news of demonstrations seems to be getting out of the country, the government appears to be trying to prevent people within Iran from communicating and from learning what's happening. It remains to be seen whether TOR and Freenets can be effective to combat this sort of effort to block communications, and whether the general circulation of information about the protests around the world will help."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Israel is Blocking Them (-1, Flamebait)

Philip K Dickhead (906971) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490375)

Then blaming Iran. Part of the ramp up to get the US to do their dirty work.

Expect Americans to die by the gross, in Afghanistan, thereafter.

Re:Israel is Blocking Them (0, Offtopic)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490415)

Are you actually claiming Israel controls Gmail and Yahoo?

Re:Israel is Blocking Them (3, Funny)

PLfag (1613207) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490491)

Jews control everything, didn't you know?

Re:Israel is Blocking Them (0, Flamebait)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490631)

Sadly, no. I was raised Jewish, but I was never let in on this supposed conspiracy.

But you did make my point for me -- to believe Israel is behind this pretty much requires you to believe Jews control everything.

Re:Israel is Blocking Them (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29490807)

Sadly, no. I was raised Jewish, but I was never let in on this supposed conspiracy.

But you did make my point for me -- to believe Israel is behind this pretty much requires you to believe Jews control everything.

Hehehe that must suck, to be excluded from the very definition of judaism.

Re:Israel is Blocking Them (1, Offtopic)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491049)

to be excluded from the very definition of judaism.

Well, nor were my parents, grandparents, nor anyone at the synagogue I went to...

At some point, you'll have to accept that your paranoid delusions are just that -- delusions. That is, unless you have some evidence for me to consider...

Re:Israel is Blocking Them (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29491247)

Hollywood's a good example, I guess :)

Re:Israel is Blocking Them (2, Funny)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490931)

Jews control everything, didn't you know?

I thought it was the Scientologists?

Re:Israel is Blocking Them (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490585)

I can not tell if you just have the world's worst sense of humor are are just a complete nut job.

Re:Israel is Blocking Them (1)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490947)

Why do you reject the possibility that he's simply an attention-starved troll?

Re:Israel is Blocking Them (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491063)

Well the idea that one would make an effort to get attention on slashdot makes my head hurt.
But you may be right so I will add that to the list.

Re:Israel is Blocking Them (1)

Artifex (18308) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491283)

Well the idea that one would make an effort to get attention on slashdot makes my head hurt.
But you may be right so I will add that to the list.

validation from peers is more than just CRCs at the MAEs.

Re:Israel is Blocking Them (1)

Artifex (18308) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490593)

Then blaming Iran. Part of the ramp up to get the US to do their dirty work.

Expect Americans to die by the gross, in Afghanistan, thereafter.

Citation, please, showing where Israel is directly upstream of them.

No way! (1)

dmmiller2k (414630) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490379)

Not Iran.

Re:No way! Gmail and Yahoo Mail (0, Troll)

smooth123 (893548) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490867)

I thought they only used twitter in Iran.

Re:No way! Gmail and Yahoo Mail (1)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490963)

Only old people use Twitter in Iran

That's news to me... (4, Funny)

PLfag (1613207) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490431)

They have internet in Iran?!

Re:That's news to me... (2, Funny)

Philip K Dickhead (906971) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490453)

Christ.

You need to get out of the house more often, don't you! :-)

Re:That's news to me... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29490513)

Christ.

You need to get out of the house more often, don't you! :-)

If I was Christ I wouldn't leave the house either. Sweet Beelzebub just look at what has gone down in the name of Christ in the past millennium.

Re:That's news to me... (1)

log0n (18224) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490669)

Time to stop dehumanizing our fellow humans.

http://tehranlive.org/ [tehranlive.org]

Re:That's news to me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29491373)

MY fellow humans.... don't try to kill people for not believing in their invisible sky wizard.

Fuck iran.

Re:That's news to me... (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490729)

They have internet in Iran?!

Until recently. It was iRan, see?

Re:That's news to me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29491313)

Is this after the iRaq series of server racks failed miserably?

Silly Mudslums (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29490547)

Their religion tells them to oppress and be oppressed...

Islam - the religion of pieces... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29490701)

Another Al Qaida plot to mass murder civilians on the 9/11 anniversary foiled in NY. You filthy Muslim apes need to get the fuck out of this country and wallow in your 3rd world oppressive shitholes, killing each other and gouging out clitorises in the name of purity like you've always done...

Fuck Allah. Fuck that murdering pedophile phony "prophet" Mohammed. I shit on his rotten image!

Re:Islam - the religion of pieces... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29491333)

/signed

Re:Silly Mudslums (3, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490835)

Their religion tells them to oppress and be oppressed...

Uh, I don't think that's true. At least not from what I've read in the Qur'an, there wasn't anything detailing what's going on in Iran right now and saying that that is how you must run your nation state. In fact, if you look at a lot of laws like the extreme forms of Sharia [wikipedia.org] they are more founded on what leaders after Muhammad's death decided he meant. In my mind I liken it to the perversion that several Popes have put in place ... in the name of The Bible. Despite the Popes calling themselves Christians, they spent their lives very comfortably unlike Jesus Christ. Similarly certain leaders today call themselves Christians and Muslims yet do not live their lives like either Christ or Muhammad. Usually it's not safe to compare religions like this but I'm trying to illustrate that these historical religious figures suffer distortion today across the world in Iran and the United States. Perhaps one is worse than the other but your criticism of "mudslums" religion telling them to be oppressed is no more apt than me saying that Christianity tells Christians to be oppressed. Indeed, speaking for any religion that has hundreds of diverse sects is a ridiculous act in and of itself.

I might also warn you that Western media (especially in the United States) concentrated on only the bad things from "The Middle East" from the 1980s to the 1990s. Although it's recently become much better, I read a book by Edward Said called Covering Islam [wikipedia.org] that itemized a few publications and looked at the hilarious slant. Granted, he cherry picked those works and the book was not as even handed as I had hoped, he did point out to me that I do not know the average life of a regular citizen in Tehran ... much less most of "The Middle East." Because we weren't paying our media outlets to disperse that, we were only rewarding them on shock reporting mostly spurred by the Iranian hostage crisis. That's all we saw of Iran on the news and for a while that's all Iran was to us, a hostage crisis ... not a country with millions of citizens doing a lot of the same stuff we do here in the states.

Re:Silly Mudslums (1)

Mikkeles (698461) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490849)

And this differs from any other religion how?

It's almost fun to watch Cristian sects get on their high horses about human rights violations ever since secular authority stopped them from torturing and burning people for disagreeing with them.

Re:Silly Mudslums (1, Insightful)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490981)

ver since secular authority stopped them from torturing and burning people for disagreeing with them.

Yes, only the secular authorities are allowed to do that nowadays.

Re:Silly Mudslums (1)

Mikkeles (698461) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491323)

Darn right; ideology is evil no matter what authority enforces it.

Re:Silly Mudslums (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29490997)

My handful of quarters as an atheist who studied these two religions:

You're wrong. I've studied both the bible (several versions of it) as well as the Qur'an. Islam differs from christianity in a very important and fundamental way; it literally and bluntly, with no room for reasoning, divides humanity into two camps: the good (the muslims) and the bad (the 'kafir'; the non-muslims); and literally, page after page, calls for the shedding of the blood of the kafir in the form of "conversion, 'by free will' or 'by sword'". Christianity differs here in the fact that nowhere in its holy scriptures does it divide humanity into camps, and nowhere in its holy scripture does it call for bloodshed of non-christians. What it does, however, is call for the bloodshed of those who DISGRACE and VIOLATE christianity - which is a very important difference to make note of - whereas the Qur'an calls for bloodshed of ANYONE simply not being muslim, regardless the person. (and, no, the christian crusades were not called upon by the bible or the religion itself; the crusades were ages of abuse of the religion, in its own name.)

End rant.

Re:Silly Mudslums (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29491129)

i hear you brother - we gotta kill these fucking mudslums.

Re:Silly Mudslums (2, Informative)

Philip K Dickhead (906971) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491397)

Jesus killed Mohammed:
The crusade for a Christian military
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/05/0082488 [harpers.org]

He found his lieutenant, John D. DeGiulio, with a couple of sergeants. They were snickering like schoolboys. They had commissioned the Special Forces interpreter, an Iraqi from Texas, to paint a legend across their Bradley's armor, in giant red Arabic script.

"What's it mean?" asked Humphrey.

"Jesus killed Mohammed," one of the men told him. The soldiers guffawed. JESUS KILLED MOHAMMED was about to cruise into the Iraqi night. ...

  The Iraqi interpreter took to the roof, bullhorn in hand. ...

"Jesus kill Mohammed!" chanted the interpreter. "Jesus kill Mohammed!"

Tor can be blocked as well. (3, Interesting)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490557)

All they have to do is block the known Tor entry points or set up their own hacked TOR routers.
There really isn't any technical reason why Iran couldn't stop covert communications over the Internet they could even go to a white list system if they really needed to.
The only thing preventing is their own population. I just don't think they would tolerate becoming prisoners in the their own nation.

Re:Tor can be blocked as well. (2, Insightful)

brian0918 (638904) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490737)

I just don't think they would tolerate becoming prisoners in the their own nation.

People who preach unquestioning submission would *never* tolerate becoming prisoners. Riiight...

Re:Tor can be blocked as well. (5, Informative)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491037)

Actually a lot of population of Iran is well educated and some what more liberal than a lot of Arab nations.
You might have seen the protests on the streets a while back. I think you may be under estimating the actually people. Now the current government is lower than what I scrape off my shoe but I think the people are better than you believe.

Re:Tor can be blocked as well. (3, Insightful)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491117)

I just don't think they would tolerate becoming prisoners in the their own nation.

People who preach unquestioning submission would *never* tolerate becoming prisoners. Riiight...

Quite possibly "riiight". Its not necessarily the people teaching unquestioning submission that would tolerate becoming a prisoner to the state, its that those same people coming to power may use the state to force that unquestioning submission on others. I fear that America has far more in common with Iran than a lot of us would like to admit.

Re:Tor can be blocked as well. (1)

Diabolus Advocatus (1067604) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491079)

The only thing preventing is their own population. I just don't think they would tolerate becoming prisoners in the their own nation.

They are prisoners in their own nation. They are not tolerating it. Hence the protests. Sure the fundamentalists have a solid backing among the populace but the rigged elections and censorship of protests show it is not as solid as they need to maintain power fairly.

It doesn't matter if they block TOR or just websites, they are still censoring what their people can see and read.

Re:Tor can be blocked as well. (2, Interesting)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491357)

Actually I think that it isn't all that hard to travel outside of Iran for Iranians or own satellite TV systems. I think the current government has pushed to the limits of it's control and that the people are pushing back.
Will Iran be free? Well that depends on how free is free. In the US we have a very high standard for freedom of political speech. We have less protection on things like nudity and language.
In some EU countries they have more protection on things like nudity but less on political speech. For instance there are countries where printing books that say the holocaust didn't happen is illegal. While part of me loves the idea of not seeing that kind of trash it is still political speech.
Different countries have different ideas of just how free they want to be. In the US we seem to feel that the best protection is get the ugly ideas out into the light and them them wither.
Other nations because their history is different have different ideas. I am sure that a lot of people think that letting Hitler ever publish anything for ever speak any place was a terrible idea.

test (3, Interesting)

Tei (520358) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490597)

well.. It seems tor is showing is usefullness for us, these that love freedom.

maybe could be a good idea to start building a system better than tor, for.. you know, if theres something like a race arms, and tor is blocked / detected. :-I

This is their right. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29490601)

They are the Government of that country, whether or not we happen to agree with their policies. If they want to ban automobiles and have everyone ride around on horses, it is their perogative. We can get our undies in a bunch as much as we want, and hem and haw and harrumph about the situation. They are a sovereign nation and may make their own laws as they please. If you don't like it, revolt. Oh that's right, you don't live there but would like to impose your views and laws on them.

Re:This is their right. (5, Interesting)

cryfreedomlove (929828) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490763)

No, sorry, I disagree. The USA was founded on the premise that human beings have some inalienable rights endowed by their creator. Whether you believe your creator is God, Mother Nature, your Mom & Dad, I believe this in this idea with all of my heart. For hundreds of years it has inspired oppressed people everywhere that their rights are independent of the capricious whims of the current dictator in charge. The Iranian people have a natural right to communicate with one another even if their current turd of a leader does not respect it at this time.

Re:This is their right. (1, Insightful)

Kell Bengal (711123) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490829)

And if Iran was the USA, you'd have a point.

Re:This is their right. (5, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491031)

And if Iran was the USA, you'd have a point.

What part of "inalienable rights" is so hard to understand?

Re:This is their right. (2, Interesting)

Jahava (946858) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491127)

And if Iran was the USA, you'd have a point.

cryfreedomlove's point was that the rights are inherent to humanity, not tied to a nation. That such a right is codified only provides a statement of intent by a government to respect and enforce that right. He speaks of an an underlying entitlement to those rights shared by human beings as a species. Oppressive governments and cultures seek to suppress that sense of entitlement, and succeed largely by doing so. The rights themselves transcend governments and circumstance, and their denial in any situation is oppressive, regardless of the international and local legalities involved.

Iranians, consisting mostly of human beings*, share these inalienable rights on virtue of their humanity. And the Iranian government, by suppressing them, is evil in the greater moral sense.

Granted the specific set of rights and the significances behind them are quite subjective, but the principle stands. Also granted the USA's specific track record on respecting and enforcing its statement of such rights is sketchy at times, but remember that a flawed implementation doesn't signify a flawed underlying principle.

* One of my ex-girlfriends was Iranian and proved to be an exception to the rule :)

Re:This is their right. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29490837)

Pah. The US government didn't mind wiping their collective arses with "inalienable rights" when they coined the term "enemy combatant" and stuffed a bunch of people in that oubliette called GitMo.
I think that the founding principles of the USA are fantastic.
I also think that anyone who believes that the USA actually still functions on those principles is a deluded moron.

Re:This is their right. (1)

BhaKi (1316335) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490843)

The Iranian people have a natural right to communicate with one another even if their current turd of a leader does not respect it at this time.

Of course, that is a natural right. Nobody should question it. I think the other person was referring to USA's big brother role.

Re:This is their right. (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490853)

The USA was founded on the premise that human beings have some inalienable rights endowed by their creator.

That doesn't mean everyone has to believe what you do, nor does it give you right to force your opinion on anyone else. The US was also founded on the premise that a nation should choose how to govern itself, and not let a foreign government across the ocean do it. So let Iran do the same thing and govern themselves.

Re:This is their right. (5, Insightful)

King_TJ (85913) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490875)

This is true, but there's also a thing called "personal responsibility". The United States has gotten itself into a massive debt (weakening its status in the world in the process), in no small part because of our propensity to try to protect those inalienable rights for people who aren't even our own citizens.

I wish the people of Iran the best in this situation, but it's really THEIR fight to fight. If there's a small way people in other countries can assist with technology (hosting Tor servers or proxies or what-not), that's great! But individual rights and freedoms are only as "valid" as one's willingness to fight for and demand them. (Even United States law recognizes that people typically have the opportunity to "sign a right away", if they wish to waive it.)

Re:This is their right. (2, Insightful)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491331)

The United States has gotten itself into a massive debt (weakening its status in the world in the process), in no small part because of our propensity to try to protect those inalienable rights for people who aren't even our own citizens.

If by "people who aren't even our own citizens" you mean corporations that the legal system has declared to be people, then I agree with you. If, however, you are referring to foreign aid you need to crunch your numbers again.

(Even United States law recognizes that people typically have the opportunity to "sign a right away", if they wish to waive it.)

Perhaps you should take an intro to U.S. law class. Signing a contract that negates an individual's inalienable rights is always ruled as an unenforceable contract provision unless specifically limited in scope and directly compensated. The most common example of a person waiving their right would be waiving one's right to not self-incriminate or to legal representation, but you can always change your mind at a later date. The right is not gone because you are not exercising it and signing a paper that says you won't exercise it is unenforceable.

Re:This is their right. (3, Insightful)

ph1ll (587130) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490957)

"The USA was founded on the premise that human beings have some inalienable rights endowed by their creator."

Unless you were one of the million or so Africans who were shipped over to live and die as a slave.

Some perspective, please...

Re:This is their right. (1)

0racle (667029) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490999)

Or Native American. Or Irish. Or Asian. The US was founded that there were inalienable human rights endowed to White, Northern European, Germanic descendants.

Re:This is their right. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29491309)

Sorry to have to point this out, but do you not think the Irish are of White, Northern European, Germanic descent?

Re:This is their right. (1)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491177)

Given perspective, most Europeans/Americans at the time didn't consider slaves to be human. Of course they were later shown to be wrong. but that is besides the point.

Re:This is their right. (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490989)

All I heard in my head while reading this comment was "Americuh! F*ck yeah! Freedom is the only way, yeah!"

The Middle East is not your playground. You are not the world's moral compass. We do not see you as something to aspire too, but simply another way of doing things. You're doing such a bang up job in Iraq and Afghanistan; Please, beseech your leader to enforce the indomitable will and unwavering ideology of Western Society on another Middle Eastern territory. They're completely ready to move away from the current political system they have, and won't descend into exactly the same situation in no time at all as the people are still living in a society where religion and law are still very closely knitted together.

It took Yeomanry and the Renaissance in Europe to get us out of a heavily feudal system, with separation of church and state. Leave them to it and they will get there.

Re:This is their right. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29491285)

The Middle East is not your playground.

No of course it isn't. But in the past some folks used it as their playground and made quite the mess of things by arbitrarily drawing borders and other shit without much regard to what the various indigenous peoples thought about that. They still seem a bit upset about that.

You are not the world's moral compass.

What a coincidence. Neither are you.

Leave them to it and they (the Middle East - ed.) will get there.

Bear in mind as they "get there" they might just blow some of you up when they blow themselves up while blowing some of your shit up.

If you're cool with them blowing your shit up that's fine.

We, however, are not cool with having our shit blown up. If someone blows our shit up then we'll damn well go act as if their home is our playground for a while. If they don't like how we play while we're there maybe they'll be better behaved in future.

Re:This is their right. (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490815)

Sure, because all Iranians agree with their government, and no one accused the government of forging votes.

I'm completely opposed to using force to change the government of other countries, but we have he right not to make commercial and other agreements (and convince others to do the same) with countries that violate our view on Human Rights.

Re:This is their right. (1)

MindlessAutomata (1282944) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490819)

Trying to defend your "right" to own slaves and lynch blacks, AC? Your bullshit version of ethnocentrism may be popular at Berkely but even Iranian citizens don't agree with you and appreciate the help and support of outsiders.

Re:This is their right. (5, Insightful)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490905)

They are the Government of that country, whether or not we happen to agree with their policies. If they want to ban automobiles and have everyone ride around on horses, it is their perogative.

If we follow that logic, then it would have been wrong for Germany's neighbors to make a fuss about how it treated Jews during WWII.

Are you sure that your policy is a good one?

Re:This is their right. (1)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491093)

Very few countries cared in the slightest what Germany did to the Jews. That includes Great Britain and the United States.

I think most European countries were far more concerned about Germany's invasion or plans for invasion of their countries.

Re:This is their right. (1)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491365)

Very few countries cared in the slightest what Germany did to the Jews. That includes Great Britain and the United States.

I think most European countries were far more concerned about Germany's invasion or plans for invasion of their countries.

You may be right (I have no idea), but we were talking about what policies a country should adopt, not what they have adopted in the past or their reasons for having done so.

Here come moral relativists (5, Insightful)

Robert1 (513674) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490933)

Sorry, no. Moral relativism is complete bullshit. Some things are morally wrong ABSOLUTELY. One of them is supressing your populace's ability to communicate. I'm sick and tired of people justifying morally corrupt behavior just because it's state-sanctioned. Sorry, forcing women they have to wear a head-dress is absolutely not acceptable. Denying them basic human rights is absolutely not acceptable. Persecution of homosexuality is absolutely not acceptable. EVEN IF ALL THESE THINGS ARE STATE SANCTIONED. I'll take that one step further and say that it is even absolutely morally unacceptable for a radical state to possess nuclear weaponry, even more absolutely morally unacceptable for such a regime to have such unabashed hatred based on another people's religion.

The difference between a state and a mob is that one controls the military and one does not. Simply being a group does not magically grant anyone moral superiority or the ability to redefine basic human rights. Saying that its ok for ANYONE to do that is fucking retarded, and something that is continued by apologists. Your moral 'relativism' is the reason why atrocities like this are allowed to perpetrate.

Re:Here come moral relativists (2, Insightful)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491233)

Who decides what is absolutely unacceptable? You, or the native voting population? You may be surprised that Iranians don't like meddlesome foreigners telling them what they should do.

Oh and BTW, Muslims think it is absolutely unacceptable that American women go to school, and since your argument is that foreigners know better than the natives, they must be right.

Moral absolutism is complete bullshit, served up self-centered narrow-minded bigots who are unable to see things from anyone else's point of view.

Re:Here come moral relativists (4, Informative)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491383)

Oh and BTW, Muslims think it is absolutely unacceptable that American women go to school

Some Muslims. Visit a university in Morocco or Iran and you'll see that they are full of female students, and they and their families remain in good standing with their mosque and community.

Re:Here come moral relativists (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29491237)

Some things are morally wrong ABSOLUTELY

Like cutting off internet access?

Re:This is their right. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29491061)

That's a rather long-winded way of saying you have no moral objection to people owning other people.

Protests (3, Interesting)

Drunken Buddhist (467947) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490627)

Unfortunately, given the current socio-economic state that the US and it's allies are in, Iranian leaders -- very possibly not being the caricatures many americans would assume them to be -- may be making a large bluff in this and other moves it has made. The US can ill-afford a continued string of wars in smaller powers that do not offer a consumer incentive; i.e. any war that doesn't have us retooling our auto companies to make tanks, telling our people that if they ride alone they ride with the ayatollah. If we're to go to war, it needs to be a manufacturer's war, not a war of attrition fought by a people that have sufficient stores of it's most important tactical resource (people) to not care about when it "wins".

Iranian leaders, if they have any semblance of intelligence, knows that we cannot call their bluff unless a larger ally steps in and makes the war "interesting". For now, despite the horrible situation in Iran, the best thing that we can do is encourate the Iranian people, and let them know that their voices are being heard, that they have the power to revolt and change their own destinies. Most of all, that if they take the initiative, we will respect any free government they impliment in the aftermath.

But we cannot help them with guns. We cannot help them with bullets. We cannot help them with manpower. Any fight we make on their behalf, is fighting their cause. Every bullet we fire at an oppressive Iranian government, we fire at Democracy. If we have learned anything from Iraq-ganistan, it is that a policy of policing the world leads to later generations of peoples turned from ally to staunch enemy with the memory of american guns killing their people outweighing the memory of american guns killing their enemies.

May God and Allah see eye to eye in this conflict.

Re:Protests (2, Informative)

ThiagoHP (910442) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490783)

May God and Allah see eye to eye in this conflict.

Allah is the name of God in Arabic [wikipedia.org] , so you're saying that God will see himself eye to eye.

Re:Protests (1)

Kell Bengal (711123) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490845)

So you're saying god's cross-eyed?

Re:Protests (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29491393)

Maybe he has a mirror?

If not I am sure he could make one.

Re:Protests (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490891)

Allah is the name of God in Arabic [wikipedia.org] , so you're saying that God will see himself eye to eye.

Provided that the conflict would take place close to a massive black hole, he just might.

Re:Protests (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29490991)

Makes as much sense as anything else in a religous book.

Re:Protests (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29491085)

so you're saying that God will see himself eye to eye.

Maybe God's got a mirror, is crosseyed, or has eyestalks. A superbeing creates the universe in a couple days, and that's okay, but if it can look itself in the eye, that's impossible?

Re:Protests (1)

Drunken Buddhist (467947) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491241)

The statement was inteded as a commentary on the ignorance of the west as well as separately referencing a christian Jehovah, often referred to as God, as well as the judaic Adonai, in comparison with the Muslim Allah, singled out specifically.

Rather than say may Jehovah, Adonai and Allah all see eye to eye on this issue, I preferred my wording.

But thanks. :)

Gmail will save the day! (2, Funny)

JudgeSlash (823985) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490645)

That's ok Google will just leak the contents of everyone's email to everyone else in Iran!

What's that you say? Gmail is blocked?

Missed it by that much....

We don't care (3, Insightful)

petrus4 (213815) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490671)

The only people who do care, are gullible, interventionist Americans.

I'm fed up with the Middle East. The region is this planet's equivalent of a high school oval. It's the traditional venue that pretty much everyone goes to when they want to have a fight. There is conflict of some sort happening there constantly, on a literally second by second basis.

These endless conflicts also are not ours. The rest of the world very rarely has any real stake in them, for the most part. Oil is about the only legitimate interest anyone else has there. Semitic monotheism, and who owns a particular mosque or church or whatever, is utterly meaningless as a legitimate incentive for war.

If the Iranian government wants to completely exterminate its' constituency, let it. If the Arabs and Jews want to mutually remove each other from human memory, let them.

At least if that were to happen, the rest of us might finally get some peace and quiet.

Re:We don't care (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29490859)

you think you're really that far that fallout won't reach you?

Re:We don't care (3, Interesting)

garcia (6573) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490983)

If the Iranian government wants to completely exterminate its' constituency, let it. If the Arabs and Jews want to mutually remove each other from human memory, let them.

I suppose that is the Iranian government's *own* right but it's not what the majority consider a global right and thus the concern. Do you believe that it's acceptable for the head of a household in the next town to kill all but themselves and one other family member to cleanse their household?

While the majority of us would probably say that's not ok, I really want to know if that's ok to you.

Re:We don't care (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29491019)

If the Arabs and Jews want to mutually remove each other from human memory, let them.

Muslims != Arabs.
For instance Persians, the people of Iran, are not Arabs.

Re:We don't care (4, Insightful)

Warhawke (1312723) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491053)

"All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to stand by and do nothing."

- War and Peace

Re:We don't care (2, Insightful)

MobyDisk (75490) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491153)

That generally refers to the population of said country. Not people living on the other side of the globe with no stake in it. That quote should be directed to the good people of Iran.

Re:We don't care (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29491231)

If only it was exclusively good men being involved in interventionist missions. As opposed to, you know, massive corporations that want to make a quick buck off both the US (in government contracts) and the victim country (in natural resources and government contracts).

Re:We don't care (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29491289)

These endless conflicts also are not ours.

Nice one, are you gonna be performing here all week?

Surely, it must be humor since no one could be that ignorant..

Don't panic (2, Funny)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490707)

It's the routine planned Monday outage.

Don't Nukem! (4, Interesting)

MassiveForces (991813) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490755)

Why is this tagged nukem? Lots of Iranians are extremely hot, like princess Princess Jasmine from Aladdin - they are largely Persian. We have one at our lab and she says about 70% of Iranians hate their government but are being oppressed (people disappearing in the middle of the night kind of thing). They need liberating more than Iraq did (though that's not too hard) and they probably would WELCOME a liberation instead of blowing up! In fact that's what they're scared of most - not being liberated by America but being blown up by America because their government is an asshole.

Re:Don't Nukem! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29490773)

Um, we nuked Japan and it turned out okay. What's not to like?

Re:Don't Nukem! (1, Troll)

BlueStrat (756137) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491349)

Um, we nuked Japan and it turned out okay. What's not to like?

Actually, a very good point. We here in the US know, for instance, that terrorists will never, *ever* nuke Washington D.C. The terrorists know that, at this point, the American people would probably end up being forever grateful and that getting rid of those 535 corrupt, self-serving, power-&-wealth-lusting people would only serve to make the US a better, saner, and stronger nation than it has been for at least the past 50-100 years.

I'd say that well over 90% of the problems in the US are the direct or indirect result of a too large and powerful federal government. Whenever national governments get large and powerful, systemic corruption *will* become a problem. No amount of lawmaking, oversight programs, or other regulatory power can change it, as it's part of basic human nature.

The "we just need better oversight" excuse you hear from those in government when they're caught in some embarrassing/dishonest behavior is disingenuous at best. We need a much smaller federal government and the powers that the federal government has usurped from the states and the people respectively need to be returned.

To minimize corruption and power-seeking, a central government must be weak and poor enough that it's simply not worth cheating the system, and gaining control over it clandestinely won't provide any significant power over the citizens themselves because most of the actual domestic governing is done more locally.

Strat

Re:Don't Nukem! (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491411)

I wish I still had mod points, I would mod BlueStrat #29491349 up eleventy million insightful...

Re:Don't Nukem! (5, Funny)

NYMeatball (1635689) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490799)

Don't worry, things labeled nukem have a habit of never getting finished.

Re:Don't Nukem! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29490919)

Hey Duke...

If I had mod points I would mod you up.

Google is used to this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29490793)

Apparently their "Gmail" app was duplicating the function of "Persian" script, and the government hasn't blocked it! They're just "researching" it

Reported from Iran by Internet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29490817)

i) Stage color-coded 'revolution'
ii) Raise rumor of election fraud - (and ignore fraud-riddled elections in Afghanistan)
iii) Raise rumor of internet censorship
iv) ...
v) Profit - but for whom?

Perhaps the Iranian gov. isn't at fault? (1)

jd2112 (1535857) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490883)

It could be the Iranian equivalent of the MPAA/RIAA is just forcing the Iranian ISPs to kick file sharers offline.

Here are some more probable causes (1)

BhaKi (1316335) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491025)

It could be that the USA's cyber-warfare department is doing its best to disrupt Iranian networks. Or it could be that government shills are "reporting" fake news so as to create antagonism towards Iran in order to reduce the number of protests that the USA government would face during its future war against Iran.

iran big loss (1)

CHRONOSS2008 (1226498) | more than 5 years ago | (#29490929)

move along

yes, that's tragic, but (1, Insightful)

Punto (100573) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491027)

how is it related to Michael Jackson?

united states (3, Insightful)

MrSpiff (515611) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491171)

tell me again, how is this different than the bill to allow the president of the united states to "shut down the Internet" in case of emergency? or is this simply a case of different intentions?

I got another block story (4, Informative)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491217)

Iran? The fundamentalist run Islamic republic has banned Yahoo and Google?

Try this, a NATO member, EU member designate, secular (still!) neighbor of Europe and having actual part in Europe country, Turkey has banned Myspace in addition to Youtube today. Yes, Myspace, that "personal blog" or more like "music demo" site.

Keep watching Iran and China though...

ive just never grasped (2, Interesting)

nimbius (983462) | more than 5 years ago | (#29491261)

why these countries have leaders that vehemently insist they have the best hackers and the best computer cultured cyberpunks in the known world, however actively block collaboration tools and sites that are used by practically all of them.

im not sure the censorship is a huge deal, or not as huge as im being led to believe..i think its a self correcting problem. have internet, or restrict it, you will reap the consequences either way. If your iranian computer wizards hate your censorship enough, they will leave. If you censor your internet enough, you'll find your relevance and influence on the network as a whole to be rather paltry. Censored internet is a countries most apparent resignation to continue living in the stone age, pounding the drum to dictatorial policy that will never be considered compatible with the information age.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?