Slashdot Mirror


U.S. Funds Anonymizer for Iranians

SiliconEntity writes "British online rag The Register is reporting that the U.S. Government is funding anonymizer.com to provide anonymous browsing services to Iranians. Using U.S. funding, the company created a special version of its anonymizing proxy which has instructions in Farsi and only accepts connections from Iranian IP addresses. The service defaults to the Voice of America web site, but users can input any address and browse free of (Iranian) government censorship."

7 of 498 comments (clear)

  1. It's understandable by mao+che+minh · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I would imagine that there will be a widespread knee-jerk reaction across America to this news. Afterall, our government is using tax dollars to deliver privacy and freedom to a member nation of the "Axis of Evil". I, however, do not mind one bit: You have to capture the hearts and minds of the people that your enemies hold sway over. You know full well that a government such as the one in Iran is doing everything possible to spread lies about the West. If the people remain closed we could end up with a populace similar to North Korea. Those feelings will be passed along to successive generations, and perhaps some day in the distant future, could lead to war - or worse.

    Propaganda both prevents and wins wars. Propaganda can serve as a tool of persuasion in trying political struggles between two or more nations. In the case of Iran, it is imperative that we win a large portion of mindshare to use as security in the future. For it would seem that the possibility of armed conflict with Iran is a reality, and we should do what we can to avoid it, considering the implications of such a thing.

    1. Re:It's understandable by ncc74656 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I would imagine that there will be a widespread knee-jerk reaction across America to this news. Afterall, our government is using tax dollars to deliver privacy and freedom to a member nation of the "Axis of Evil". I, however, do not mind one bit...

      I think it demonstrates that we have no quarrel with the people of Iran. It's the regime whose jackboot they're under with which we take issue. With access to outside news/information sources, maybe a few of them will learn that (1) we're not the Great Satan the ayatollahs told them about and (2) maybe they'll give the ayatollahs the heave-ho and make available to themselves the choice to live in the 21st century instead of the 13th.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    2. Re:It's understandable by Sphere1952 · · Score: 4, Interesting


      I've been watching Iran long enough to know that the parent is correct. the 65%+ of the population who are under 30 have no use for their government at all. The joke at the beginning of the Iraq war was "Good, we're next."

      --
      Big Brother Bush is doubleplus ungood.
    3. Re:It's understandable by ReconRich · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I used to work with a several guys from Iran. I was talking with one of them about religion one day when he said, very softly, "Sometimes I think, Fuck the Prophet". I told him that this was America, he could say "Fuck the Prophet" as loudly as he wanted to. His response "No I can't, I may have to go back to Iran someday".
      This guy, as well as the other Iranians that I worked with both hated and feared the government of Iran. But mostly feared.

      --- Rich

      --
      Free your mind and your Ass will follow -- George Clinton
  2. Re:We are past this point with China by leviramsey · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Bzzt. Wrong.

    If anything the Chinese were pulling for us in Vietnam. Who was the next country to declare war on the Chinese after the US? That's right, it was the PRC.

    People have this illusion that the various Marxist nations were lovey-dovey as part of the quest for International Socialism. The reality is that, while most were Soviet satellites, the Chinese were displeased with the USSR for a long time. There are dozens of recorded instances of territorial infractions, shots fired, and planes shot down between the PRC and the USSR. The Chinese basically took a neutral position on the issue of a NATO vs. Warsaw Pact war; their hope was that both sides would nuke each other into cinders.

  3. Young Iranians are rebels by tarp · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm a half-Iranian American and I have a lot of Iranian friends, some of whom came from Iran just a few years ago. I've yet to meet a single person who supports the regime in Iran. People want their freedom. The women pull their scarves high and show a lot of hair, they wear makeup and jewelry. Protests are a constant occurence. People won't put up with the Islamic republic for much longer.

    I wonder how effective the actual blocking within Iran is. I know that many Iranians can be found on Yahoo Chat. Iranians also download mp3's and porno. I doubt the filesharing services and chat would ever be effectively blocked by the Iranian government. Nevertheless, the anonymizer should help Iranians read western media and get a more accurate report of the world's news.

    Imagine if most of the rich and educated Iranians had't fled to places like Los Angeles, Toronto, Dubai, Washington, D.C., Paris and London. The Islamic government would have been dead by now.

  4. Obligatory Conspiracy Theory by MotherSuperior · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Maybe they all got modded down, but I'm noticing a disturbing lack of conspiracy theories, for the slashdot crowd.

    Personally, I see this as more of the same TIA/PATRIOT nonsense we've been enduring since 9/11. I find it far more likely that the GWB / Ashcroft crowd is using this as a tool for our own 'National Security'. Of the following 2 scenarios, which seems more likely given the practices we've seen from the current US administration?

    A> Washington truly and deeply cares for the plight of the Iranian citizen, and the censorship they're subjected to by their oppressive government, despite showing no such concern for its own citizens.

    B> Washington provides 'anonymous' internet access, in order to monitor the browsing activities of 'potential terrorists'. (Read: Everyone in Iran). All in the name of national security of course.

    Considering the US's track record on things like this, I'm personally voting for B. Total Information Awareness really said it all for me. The United States Government has decided that privacy is the antithesis of freedom and security. I find it really hard to take this act at face value, considering the US's current stance on Internet Anonymity.

    --
    This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine...