Slashdot Mirror
Iran May Shut Down Internet During Election
daveschroeder writes "'The Iranian government might block private access to the Internet for the general legislative election on March 14, two Iranian news outlets reported Monday. In 2006, the authorities banned download speeds on private computers faster than 128 kilobytes per second. The government also uses sophisticated filtering equipment to block hundreds of Web sites and blogs that it considers religiously or politically inappropriate. Many bloggers have been jailed in the past years, and dozens of Web sites have been shut down.' It would appear that Iran's own government is more a threat to the nation's internet connectivity than the fragility of the undersea cable network."
This was trimmed from the original submission:
Slashdot readers may recall the assertions, roundly dismissed by undersea cable experts, that the cables were deliberately cut to sever Iran's internet connectivity, which, contrary to popular belief, never occurred.
Many fervently believed the cable "cuts" were a prelude to war; still others insisted they were part of a plot to prevent the opening of the Iranian Oil Bourse. Interestingly, no one could explain how cutting only one of several mechanisms of Internet connectivity to Iran would stop the bourse from opening...
Well, there was no secret invasion of Iran, and the Iranian Oil Bourse, after many self-incurred delays, still opened, to little fanfare. The opening of the bourse -- which doesn't deal in US dollars -- was supposed to be the turning point that sent the dollar into a freefall; however, myriad other factors seem to be hurting the dollar just fine on their own.
Why am I mentioning this? Because I think it is incredibly important to take a step back, get some perspective on things, and realize that actual totalitarian regimes are far more dangerous and damaging to individual freedoms and the free flow of information, in a very real and tangible sense, than even the wildest imagined conspiracy theories.
Say it with me in unision, in national pride - CENSORSHIP!
Alive and well in 2008!
I swear some countries seem like it's the year 0008!
So many people in the technology world seem to be worried about censorship of user's rights online, and some must certainly work for the vendors who supplied Iran with the "sophisticated" filtering technology. My question is why are companies supplying countries with a known track record for human rights violations and crimes against people speaking out against the government?
This is typical and not too surprising. The nice thing for them is there's no chance of us going to war with either Hillary or Obama in office. They'd have to bomb the capital building... and even then...
I am posting anonymous because I know some classified information that I shouldn't, let alone reveal. Their "sophisticated equipment" is a Halliburton project.
Run uncensored internet to the target country. It wouldn't surprise me if this actually happened.
Never overestimate the end user. -jeramy b. smith
It's a CONSIPRACY!
Wait... is it still considered a conspiracy if it's out in the open and it's definitely 100% not the US or oil companies? I'm not sure which I prefer, prelude to war or the possibility that the Iranian leadership could become MORE crazy.
Being a naive westerner, it appears to me that the freedom-hugging ideas that float around on the internets don't seem to have an effect on political/religious thinking of countries like Iran.
Does this indicate that it is having an effect?
An ignorant populace is a stupid unproductive populace. It couldn't happen to a more deserving place.
More seriously, we need to research better real-time speech-to-text and dissident video and audio outlets need to provide transcripts for faster downloading and allow real-time participation over slow pipes.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Now, if only they could do that here, as well, along with the news and TV ads. :P
I remember listening to the Persian/Canadian blogger who at Wikimania 2005 (Frankfurt) talked about blogging, activism and internet censorship. He mentioned that the Iranian government was pretty lax compared to China and many others, and speculated that it might continue like that. However, they are really picking up speed now sadly. Probably because the iranian blogosphere was so hopeful and full of momentum in 2005.
I certainly don't support this, however I am curious as to what the real rationale is and for HOW LONG the internet is gone. For example, here in Canada we have a media blackout on election results during the day the elections are running... obviously that's not a problem in Iran because the TV is estate controlled, but I can definitely see something like that being used to justify internet closure. I personally don't support any kind of blackout since it sets precedent, but you kind of have to keep in mind that without a constitution and censorship tendencies, legislation like this passes through without a blink.
1. So it will only block private access. Does this mean you can still log on to the net from work?
2. What is this meant to do? I see no real security benefits to blocking the internet.
3. In speculating after what happened in Africa, is this an attempt to block outsiders from knowing what is going on in the country, or to keep outsiders from influencing the country, or to keep their own people unaware of what is going on in their own country? No matter which one, info will come out eventually, so the only thing I can see happening is that people can't tell others what is going on at the polling places before it is too late. But either way it would be too late, because there wouldn't be time for others to come and help out if there is forced voting.
I guess I'm just confused as to how this is supposed to help them out, as it only makes them seem overly secretive, with little to no long term benefit.
...a fundamentalist regime that doesn't much like free thought, free association or free speech. I bet ol' George Bush can't make up his mind whether to bomb them or hug them. And would anybody like to take a bet on whether Yahoo served the bloggers up to Iran's secret police on a platter?
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Maybe with a controlled media and no internet they are just trying to prevent the media from declaring a winner at 23% precincts reporting, just so they can say they were the first to announce it.
Let's not even talk about Saudi Arabia, where we don't even talk about attempts of censorship since Saudi Arabia always has total censorship of media. Also, if you want to criticize the elections in Iran and interference and ballot-striking when someone is too reform-minded, not that there isn't anything to criticize, why not talk about Saudi Arabia where they don't even have elections. Saudi Arabia doesn't have problems with their electoral process it doesn't have problems at all. Of course, Saudi Arabia always does what the rich people in the US tell it to do, always does what the "US" (meaning the interests of very rich Americans) wants it to so it is rarely criticized. Iran has the gall to kick out the CIA installed puppet and run their own government so they have to constantly be bashed, US puppet regimes like Saudi Arabia which are much worse get a pass. US jailing people for letting people see Al-Manar gets a pass as well. What a fraud. The biggest enemy of a secular, social democratic, pan Arab Middle East has always been the United States. The US wants the Middle East to be one big Saudi Arabia/Egypt/Jordan/Pakistan - dictatorial US/Israel bootlickers whose citizens get sent to madrassas instead of schools. The mujahideen and Hamas were creations (heavily funded and supported) by the US and Israel to fight and destroy the secular, social democratic, pan-Arab forces in their country - have fun sucking up the rewards.
this story doesn't help us to understand why the usa is the center of all evil in the world. where is my giant list of us cold war atrocities? where is my creative line of reasoning as to explain how the usa is responsible for what its enemies do?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Can I suggest an upsell?
*License* the rope. Patent the knot design.
Get subscribers to sign up for the feature presentation. Then copyright the video.
Sell advertising slots. Tie in action figures complete with movable rope.
Air a documentary on E!. Stir up the talk show networks with a recorded last message.
Write a computerized algorithm for robots to tie knots. Patent that.
Then no one can die this way again without your estate's permission. Sue them posthumously with previously prepared legal documents.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Remember, this is slashdot. Political correctness is required. DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT state that the Iranian government is an islamic theocracy and is doing exactly what it's religion is asking.
... ... obviously has NOTHING AT ALL to do with islam.
Despite every member of that government stating that this is islam, ie. censorship, gay executions, repression ("islam" in arabic), all are essential tools for living the islamic religion. Ie. doing censorship, genocide on gays, starting wars etc is obviously all part of being a muslim (muslims disagree, allah, however does not (e.g. kuran 2:216), then again allah also says muslims should lie about this)
In short, state censorship, despite being a central tenet of islam, which is long implemented by this islamic government, with islamic punishments for dissent (ie. death), remember all these constant violations of human rights, and basic decency
(so speak the gods of political correctness, ensuring more people die needlessly every day)
* if you need an excuse, this is all bush's fault, and obviously certainly NOT of the appeasement tactics of the democrat president "carter" in the 70's
I hear about the internet being able to "route around the damage"? Doesn't appear to be the case, does it? Besides, it doesn't seem to have much effect on elections anyway. The Americans are still electing crooked politicians in spite of the internet. It doesn't present much of a threat to the status quo as one would hope. Still waiting for an effective wireless mesh so that we can cut the corporate cable...
What?
Obviously the people above any criticism are the ones implementing this (according to you "criminal") act.
:)
Guns don't kill people, people do
Firewalls don't censor the internet, people do
Repeat this once, so you can appear to have intellectual capacity exceeding the leve of a 5 years old :
firewalls don't censor the internet, oppresive governments do
(or take it a bit further, and closer to (a part of) the truth
firewalls don't censor the internet, muslims do, because of islam
The poster reiterated comments made by Obama. If you don't agree with the comments, don't vote Obama. Don't shoot the messenger.
This is bullshit. Hillary has been prowar, except when campaigning. The Clinton administration had a couple war efforts. Obama's foreign policy guy is Brzezinski, who isn't specifically anti-war. Only when it's a terrible, terrible idea.
Can we not mod up baseless political bullshit from either side? Thanks.
Please stop stalking me, bro.
Curring underseas cable, changing the name-server like Pakistan just did and shutting off YouTube for hours, sometimes affects alot more than thie own country. The InterNet is robust from attack but not invulnerable.
The infringement of civil liberties in Iran is being justified to counteract 'American interference', just like the wiretapping is getting justified by 'terrorist plotting'
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
People cannot handle the truth when it shatters their illusions. That's ok I have karma to burn.
-DC
the one who holds the usa responsible for all evil in the world, including things its enemies do, in a creative line of reasoning that excludes the existence of all other players and agendas
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
but don't let that stop you from being blind and prejudicial
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
The cable cuts weren't meant to disrupt communications completely, they were to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt among potential non-dollar oil investors. Simple, logical explanation. Now, I ask you all, why might someone in the intelligence business want us to believe that the cable cuts were mere coincidence?
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
If the US keeps nukes, we should shut the fuck up about anyone else getting nukes. Hell, we should give every nation their own nukes and delivery system. MAD you know. That's the only use for nukes, so you might as well do it right.
Since the US will never do that, I think we should get rid of ours. Seems our real threats are goat-herders with 50-year-old tech and more stomach for the fight than the nation that took it to their homeland.
Don't need nukes for that, we need high tech weapons to pick out the terrorists from civilian populations.
Blar.
They make contradictory claims about why, but in the end, it is a one day inconvenience for internet users. The most sinister reason I can think of for them wanting to shut it down is to prevent riots caused by posts alleging election improprieties (real or imagined). Really sinister.
Am I missing something? What's the big deal?
(warning: this is completely off topic)
Did anybody else read the title as "Iron Man Shut Down Internet During Election"???
I was like "Say Whaaatt!?!".
Sorry.
Just shut it completely down. Null-route everything in Iran. Nothing in, nothing out, make it a great big echo chamber. If they want to completely screw their population they shouldn't half-ass it. They need to full-ass it.
--
# Canmephians for a better Linux Kernel
$Stalag99{"URL"}="http://stalag99.net";
How then will I get my prons?
I agree completely. The Colombian government was actually participating with Chavez and France to get those hostages released by the FARC and were making good headway, when out of nowhere the US sent in a delegation to meet with the president. Next thing you know Chavez is kicked out and Ecuador gets bombed. Now there are troops lining up in both Ecuador and Venezuela, and Brazil is calling for public apologies to Ecuador from Colombia. The whole region is now being engulfed in a dispute that seemingly stemmed from US intervention over what appeared to be a large step forward in negotiations with one of the greatest unruly powers in Colombia.
I can't begin to imagine what it is the US has invested in Colombia that would have necessitated Colombia's sudden change of heart.
You're nothing; like me.
Ever been outside the US? I have. All you ever hear is "Yankee Go home.....and take us with you"
You see the problem with being spoon fed a steady diet of Revisionist Berkeley Marxist inspired horseshit is it blinds you to the reality of the utter disgrace and dysfunction most of the regimes in the world are. Oh I am sure you have a Hugo Chavez poster and Che T-shirt and you chatter about the evil empire what is America to all your friends down at Starbucks, and that's fine. Being retarded isn't a sin, being proud of it is.
What exactly is nefarious about intercepting an enemy's communications?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
What exactly is "nefarious" about intercepting (or trying to) one's sworn enemy's communications?.. I mean, even if US is behind the recent outages (and splicing an optical cable — under water! — ought to be much harder than an electrical one), there is nothing nefarious about it.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
I'll help: the actions of the United States could be said to have paved the way for the current regime to come to power.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax
Too busy staying alive... ~ R.A.
I simply don't care about your "point", and only referenced it because you obviously didn't do anything to further it in your previous reply.
Do try to understand what you're replying to.
Now, about those questions you're still afraid to answer...
I simply don't care about your "point",
You should, it's what started this whole sub-thread.
Do try to understand what you're replying to.
Funnnnneeeeeee.
Now, about those questions you're still afraid to answer...
I did answer them. You just don't like the answer because you're trying to make some obscure point that has no relevance to the discussion you butted into.
Weak troll attempt. FAIL.
Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
"I did answer them."
Funny, all I saw was your troll that sated "Change Ayatollah for Bush, and you've made my point for me. Cheers. And chill out dude. Those kids on your lawn? Much more important." and have yet to see your "answers".
That's because you didn't answer the questions, aren't capable of answering them, and are in fact lying. Which is incredibly sad, but totally obvious.
"Weak troll attempt."
Don't be so hard on yourself, your reply to me wasn't that bad.
Answer the questions, we can check your posting history and confirm you haven't, so stop lying and dodging trolling and answer the man's questions or admit you can't.
"Why are you against this sort of speculation?"
Because it's not supported by any evidence and isn't a claim that can be examined for accuracy.
Congratulations, in your eagerness to bash the US and forward stupid conspiracy theories, you've sunk to the level of an ID'er.
Your family must be proud.
"How am I a nut, exactly?"
I'd say the fact that you're relying on tactics normally used by ID'ers and you don't realize it is how. Don't bother disagreeing, if you don't realize you're arguing the same way an ID'er argues, you're not going to accept honest criticism either. In fact, every single time I've seen you post, you attack and get irrational when refuted.
How am I bashing the US, Dave?
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Let's hope they don't mean that literally, recalling recent events involving Pakistan.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
"Dave?"
Just like an ID'er, assume you know something is true when it isn't.
No, it's not Dave. Awful, awful attempt, Dave is many things, but he doesn't post AC to support himself.
You, on the other hand, would be lying if you claimed you didn't.
"Why is that, Dave?"
Because you're a nut. We've been over this, your perception is not reality.
"Haha, who but the real Dave would deny his Davehood?"
Um, anyone who isn't Dave (me in this case)? I realize you're basing your assumption that I'm lying on your own behavior, but I'm obviously not you, so don't judge me based on what you would expect yourself to do.
You might assume people are lying, but that has more to do with you being a liar than who you're replying to.
"You write just like him"
You're not a very bright guy, or a very good reader, are you?
"For heavens sakes, do you think they actually have a choice in the matter?"
They do, regardless of whether I say so or not.
"If you're facing up against a regime that doesn't respect basic human rights, you need more than mere smarts or a kick-ass attitude."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_revolution
They seem to have dealt with exactly those issues not too long ago.
"Perhaps if you were one of those citizens in the middle of this mess, you might think differently."
Nope. I've always believed freedom sometimes requires bloodshed. I'm not you, I have convictions that don't change with the wind or what's convenient.
"Us americans have a choice."
So do Iranians, they can take up arms and overthrow their government.
Oh wait, they'd never do that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_revolution
"Open your eyes just a little wider..."
I've read every reply from you in this thread.
All you have to do to shut me up is post the answers, a link to them, or an admission that you're a coward and won't answer.
Trite replies are fun, but all they do is reinforce your failure to answer the questions you're afraid of.
"God, I really wish you would already."
I have and you're a liar, you never answered his questions.
For all the porn.
along with the actions of a number of other players, including, believe it or not, the iraqis themselves
when we look to the usa as the blame for everything, you implicitly say the usa is the solution to the problems. yet of course the goal of blaming the usa for everything is to get the usa uninvolved... huh? it doesn't logically follow
if you don't want the usa involved in other parts of the world, you don't blame the usa for things, you blame the iraqis for what happens in iraq, the brazilians for what happens in brazil, the russians for what happens in russia, etc.
what an amazing concept
people say 9/11 is the fault of the usa. saner people that is, not those who think 9/11 was a government plot. they know it was done by al qaeda, but they say it happeend in the usa, which is our security, and therefore our fault
well, if something happens in iraq, it should be iraqis fault. this is the ONLY route to a sense of accountability and responsibility in the world that sees the usa less involved
the path of blaming the usa for everything leads the usa to be more involved in the world
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
There are a few religious radicals in Iran in the lower to mid levels of the government, but they are significantly outnumbered by the other group.
Wanna know who this other group is? Please read on, till the end...
I start with someone you are familiar with; do you consider Dick Cheney a radical Christian or a ruthless businessman which uses religion or any other tool as a means to make profit? like when he talks about supporting the troops does he really care about the troops or he has an agenda of his own? Well, Cheney is one of the members of the "Other Group", the businessmen, except he is American.
In Iran we have our own businessmen. Since the 'Islamic' revolution of 1979, these people have taken over the government in a country where 90%+ of the economy is owned and operated by the government.
A clear example, is the largest of these business entities: Islamic Republic Guards Corps (IRGC), most recent bogeyman on CNN/FOX. While the American media focuses on the 'military' part of IRGC's operation, they neglect to mention the much much bigger side of IRGC. Revolutionary Guards is the single biggest business entity in Iran, they build all the dams, bridges, tunnels and roads, railroad, they operate civilian airports all across the country, they do the largest mining operations, they own many of the largest and most profit generating financial institutions in Iran and this list goes on forever.
Almost half of the members of the current parliament are former IRGC members, Ahmadinejad himself made his way to being Tehran's Mayor and later, Iran's president through IRGC.
Another example is Mesbah Yazi, a mid-level clergy, known as the mentor of Ahmadinejad, the biggest fucking piece of shit I know in Iran. Plays the same role to Ahmadi Nejad as Dick plays to Bush. But there's another side to this guy, he is also known as "Sultan of Sugar" in Iran. He controls import, distribution and sale of all Sugar in Iran. Believe me, in a country of 70 million population a monopoly on sugar is better than a monopoly on gold mines. He also says that the 'Zionist regime' of Israel is doomed, however nuking them means end of the sweet sugar business for him.
Former president Rafsanjani, former parliament speaker Nategh Noori and many others are businessmen too. They don't give a fuck about religion unless in public when preaching people.
In conclusion, I just want you to think, what benefit does nuking Israel which guarantees a much much harsher reaction from Israel bring to these ruling businessmen? See, that's why Iran, even with nukes is no threat at all to any other country?
All that matters to these people is survival of their business, they are not religious zealots, they don't believe in the second coming or afterlife or crap like what they preach to people. If a day comes where wiping their asses with pages of Quran helps them keep control of their business, then that's what they WILL HAPPILY DO.
Thanks for reading my rant.
Adding up to that, one interesting and very recent example: One commander of Tehran's police force (also a high ranking IRGC General) who runs the division in charge of shutting down any voice of protest (can't translate name to English) was arrested last week in a brothel run by and for IRGC members with six girls. The girls confessed that he asked them to take off their cloth and do a prayers game! Girls could not believe such a person which is so famous for enforcing Islamic moral values would make fun of most sacred things in Islam like that. He was arrested by the direct order of head of Judiciary without informing Tehran's General Prosecuter because GP has close ties to IRGC and would have stopped the operation. There's chaos in Judiciary now and they are trying to keep it as quite as possible, at least before the election. His replacement did not g
Well, I COULD just claim you were a Dave sock puppet, but you're probably not. Just another moronic 'Merka is always right' type. So, now that you've admitted who you are, maybe you could explain what, exactly is wrong with my theory? It isn't anti-scientific like ID, because it can be proved or disproved. I say the US has the motive. Oil trade shifting away from the dollar would decimate the economy. Do you refute that? I say we have the means, everyone knows we have subs configured to do this job. And we had the opportunity. So, care to try to refute any of the actual points instead of engaging in petty, childish name calling and psycho-babble?
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Oh, and isn't it funny how easy it was to get you to admit who you are? You had a reason for posting AC in the first place, but now an account is irrevocably tied to those AC comments, just like I wanted.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Yes, it will always be easy to get me to do what you want as long as the end result is me proving you wrong like I did here.
I'll do that all day, gladly.
And isn't it REALLY funny that there's a long trail of posts now which demonstrates your propensity to jump to conclusions and fabricate evidence?
In the future, the next time something looks "obvious" to you, remember how stupid your assertions looked after I shut you the fuck up, and reconsider them. Maybe you'll avoid looking like an idiot, which you couldn't do this time.
"Just another moronic 'Merka is always right' type."
Like that one right there. Take a second, re-read the posts you're too stupid to understand, then, when you realize I NEVER IN ANY WAY CLAIMED ANYTHING ABOUT AMERICA, HOW RIGHT IT WAS IN ANY SITUATION, OR ANYTHING ON THE SUBJECT AT ALL, you might consider that your reading comprehension skills aren't up to snuff.
You're an imbecile. Not the flamewar, you said something I disagree with imbecile, but the can't read above a 2nd grade level despite being an adult type of imbecile. A REAL imbecile, the kind who manufactures positions out of thin air because arguing a point on its merits is beyond your ability. And based on your fabricated position that you attribute to me, you're a liar as well.
The funniest thing about this whole encounter is that you really aren't capable of understanding what you're doing and why it makes you look so pathetic.
So, more childish name calling, and still no refutation of any point I've made, except for falling for my "You're Dave" stratagem. Par for the course with you. You've only scored points in your own head, everyone else here can not only see that I've played you for a fool by getting you to admit who you are, but that you can only hurl insults rather than refuting points. But everyone here already knew that about you. Still, if you'd stayed AC, there would be one less data point proving what an inferior debater you are.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
"The funniest thing about this whole encounter is that you really aren't capable of understanding what you're doing and why it makes you look so pathetic."
Read that until you understand it, you still seem to be having trouble.
Also, I'm pretty sure you lied about my position on a subject, but have totally failed to support your lie.
So, please show me where I claimed "'Merka is always right'" or anything like it.
"and still no refutation of any point I've made"
I'd say proving you'll lie and jump to conclusions is refutation plenty. If you can't understand why no one is refuting points you made read this again "you really aren't capable of understanding what you're doing and why it makes you look so pathetic" to gain some insight.
But, because you're not bright enough to get it, people don't need to refute lies. When you lie (as I have proven you do) then EVERYTHING YOU SAY is suspect. I've refuted you as a PERSON, what you say now is irrelevant, as you are a liar and nothing you say can be trusted.
That you will lie and fail to own up once shown to be lying tells me that I can assume everything you say is a lie and place the burden on you to support it.
Which, by the way, you have completely failed to do.
"Still, if you'd stayed AC, there would be one less data point proving what an inferior debater you are."
And yet I've crushed you repeatedly. You had to resort to lying, what else is there to say?
So if I'm an inferior debater, and I roundly destroyed you, what does that say about your debate skills?
So, again, because you apparently require me to beat you over the head with it
"The funniest thing about this whole encounter is that you really aren't capable of understanding what you're doing and why it makes you look so pathetic."
Also, doesn't calling me "childish" while denouncing me for "name calling" make you a hypocrite?
Yes, hypocrite, yes it does.
One last thing
"You've only scored points in your own head, everyone else here can not only see that I've played you for a fool by getting you to admit who you are"
No douche, you made me dig up one of my old accounts, you're really not too bright are you?. You honestly think some made up fucking handle is "who I really am"? How can you be that stupid? No, the only thing you've proven is that you'll lie to support your point, which is what I wanted from you all along.
Thanks for doing exactly what I wanted, now I'm giving you permission to reply, which you will do because I told you to and you can't help yourself, you're my bitch.
Oh, you'll try to act like it's not me telling you to post, but that's because you're a liar and it embarrasses you to be my bitch.
Whoops, that should be du jour, of course. ;-)
This should read "is not by direct election." I was attempting to say that the Council of Guardians and Assembly of Experts are not beholden to a particular constituency.
That is understandable, you take the cynical view. I do the same. Still, it seems that keeping nukes around but telling other nations they can't have nukes is more of an issue and more real than your predicted future.
It's not like a government would lie and keep a few around anyway. Or keep the tech and materials around. The same incentives that inspire Iran and North Korea to flout Nuke-treaties apply to the US government too.
It'd be nice to stand up and at least pretend to take a few steps back from the brink.
Blar.
I am quite confident that the majority of citizens and ESPECIALLY the leadership, do not want to blow themselves up.
Blar.