Iran Blocks, Unblocks Access to Google

morpheus83 writes "Iran has blocked access to the Google search engine and its Gmail email service as part of a clampdown on material deemed to be offensive. Hamid Shahriari, the secretary of Iran's National Council of Information did not explain why the sites were being blocked. Google, Gmail and several other foreign sites appeared to be inaccessible to Iranian users from Monday morning. Iran has tough censorship on cultural products and internet access, banning thousands of websites and blogs containing sexual and politically critical material as well as women's rights and social networking sites." That didn't take long. Iran has now unblocked Google claiming the censorship was an error.

Comments

Censorship is the last resort of a failing regime

[The_Fire_Horse]

As has happened many times before, What starts as a simple censorship of a website ALWAYS turns into more nastier things while the 'people in charge' are trying to control the masses.

How stupid are these governments - really. Do they honestly believe that the problems of their country can be solved by stopping someone having a GMail account, or preventing them looking up camel porn on google?

Iran is in a desperate attempt to return to old school biblical times (great if you are not a woman - "Iran has tough censorship on internet access .... as well as womens rights") and are now clutching at straws - it can only result in resentment from the citizens.

Unblocked

[gravos]

Actually, it has been unblocked.

Re:Unblocked

[UnHolier than ever]

No, there are twelve. However, I would expect all of them to use the same blacklist provided by the government.

Good for them

[ratnerstar]

I think it's a great idea. After all, Google can give you plans and instructions for making a nuclear weapon! We wouldn't want that information to fall into the wrong hands.

That's the least of the problems with Iran today

[dusanv]

Censorship of Google is the least problem there today unfortunately.

Information needs to be free

[downix]

The loss of information is a step in the direction of cultural collapse. If you constantly treat your citizens as children, you either a) stop being productive or b) get a bunch of very angry citizens.

Iran, you might have a culture that demands things, but if you force them onto your population, you will create resentment, resentment becomes anger, and anger begets revolution. Remember the Shah? The current government is running along the same path, and will meet with the same end.

Re:You can't "slap a Jap" anymore

[MyLongNickName]

Wow. I have seen a couple instances where you take fact A add it to fact B and come up with false conclusion C. This is another one.

Fact A: The US has a history of stereotyping other cultures
Fact B: The US executive administration wants to go to war with Iran.
False Conclusion C: We are not allowed to paint Iran as bigoted, sexist or totalitarian.

The fact that the US has problems does not correlate to Iran being pure as the wind-driven snow. In fact with all of our problems, I'd much rather live here we have the opportunity to fix our problems.

Re:You can't "slap a Jap" anymore

[faloi]

In the obvious run up to the war with Iran, it seems like the media is all too happy to paint them with the bigot, sexist, and totalitarian brushes. We are doing this with China. We did this with Iraq. Now, with Iran in our sights, they also get the black tar treatment.

Oddly enough, I find it hard to be sympathetic toward a country that hosts a Holocaust Denial seminar. Maybe I really am part of the problem.

Re:Censorship is the last resort of a failing regi

[JustNiz]

Th US has to stop trying to be the world police. Why should Iran just expect the US to jump in? They should grow some balls and try standing up for themselves.

Re:Censorship is the last resort of a failing regi

[dbolger]

That logic can be applied both ways. Imagine right now, on Tehrandot.org:

"I heard on Al Jazeera last week, from an American protesting in Washington, that there are a large contingent of the population is is pro-peace, and who are looking for better relations with the rest of the world. But if that's the case, why has there been no real groundswell to remove the current government?"

I'm looking at this from an outsiders perspective, but it seems to me that in both countries (United States and Iran), there are a reasonable, sane majority of people just trying to get on with their lives, who are being pushed into war by a vocal, fundamentalist minority.

Rational people on both side look out, and see only the extremists. Joe Washington doesn't want war but everything he hears regarding Iran is negative - they want to wipe out Israel, they want to build nukes. Joe Tehran has a generally pacifist outlook too, but when he reads about America, it is usually because of attrocities like Abu Ghraib, or some other massacre. Time passes, and the crazies on both sides get louder and louder, while the rational people - constantly exposed to this propaganda, start to feel that even though they want peace, the "other side" is giving them no choice but to go to war.

a MILLION dead Iranians

[Scrameustache]

I heard on NPR last week, from an Iranian who had returned from visiting family, that there is a large contingent of the population that is pro-American and is looking for better relations with the rest of the world. But if that's the case, why has there been no real groundswell to remove the current government?

Because their government, as awful as it is, stands between them and the enemies of their people. It just so happens that they know for a fact that the US and its imperialist buddy the UK have proven beyond the shadow of a doubt to be enemies of the people of Iran:

In 1951, a nationalist politician, Dr. Mohammed Mossadegh rose to prominence in Iran and was elected Prime Minister. As Prime Minister, Mossadegh became enormously popular in Iran by nationalizing the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (later British Petroleum, BP) which controlled the country's oil reserves. In response, Britain embargoed Iranian oil and began plotting to depose Mossadegh. Members of the British Intelligence Service invited the United States to join them, convincing U.S. President Eisenhower that Mossadegh was reliant on the Tudeh (Communist) Party to stay in power. In 1953, President Eisenhower authorized Operation Ajax, and the CIA took the lead in overthrowing Mossadegh and supporting a U.S.-friendly monarch; and for which the U.S. Government apologized in 2000.

[...]

With more than 100,000 Iranian victims[73] of Iraq's chemical weapons during the eight-year war, Iran is the world's second-most afflicted country by weapons of mass destruction-- second only to Japan. The total Iranian casualties of the war were estimated to be anywhere between 500,000 and 1,000,000. Almost all relevant international agencies have confirmed that Saddam engaged in chemical warfare to blunt Iranian human wave attacks; these agencies unanimously confirmed that Iran never used chemical weapons during the war

Donald Rumsfeld met Saddam Hussein on 19 December - 20 December 1983. Rumsfeld visited again on 24 March 1984; the same day the UN released a report that Iraq had used mustard gas and tabun nerve agent against Iranian troops.