Slashdot Mirror
Iran Moves To End "Facebook Revolution"
We've had a few readers send in updates on the chaotic post-election situation in Iran. Twitter is providing better coverage than CNN at the moment. There are both tech and humanitarian angles to the story, as the two samples below illustrate. First, Hugh Pickens writes with a report from The Times (UK) that "the Iranian government is mounting a campaign to disrupt independent media organizations and Web sites that air doubts about the validity of the re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the nation's president. Reports from Tehran say that social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter were taken down after Mr Ahmadinejad claimed victory. SMS text messaging, a preferred medium of communication for young Iranians, has also been disabled. 'The blocking of access to foreign news media has been stepped up, according to Reporters Without Borders. 'The Internet is now very slow, like the mobile phone network. YouTube and Facebook are hard to access and pro-reform sites... are completely inaccessible.'" And reader momen abdullah sends in one of the more disturbing Ask Slashdots you are likely to see. "People, we need your urgent help in Iran. We are under attack by the government. They stole the election. And now are arresting everybody. They also filtered every sensitive Web page. But our problem is that they also block the SMS network and are scrambling satellite TVs. Please, can you help us to set up some sort of network using our home wireless access points? Can anybody show us a link on how to install small TV/radio stations? Any suggestion for setting up a network? Please tell us what to do or we are going to die in the a nuclear war between Iran and US." Update: 06/14 18:32 GMT by KD : Jim Cowie contributes a blog post from Renesys taking a closer look at the state of Iranian Internet transit, as seen in the aggregated global routing tables, and concluding that the story may not be as clear-cut as has been reported.
On one hand, we have the freedom and lives of millions of people. On the other hand we can help bring Twitter down. Tough choice...
I wonder what's really going on in Iran. Because this wreaks of propaganda.
seriously, wah...nuclear war, pollution, oppressive rule is all enabled by...guess who? GEEKS! You wanted gadgets and toys, and the spin offs have destroyed our planet and politics. Plastic wouldn't exist without you. Bombs wouldn't. Islamo-fascism wouldn't have the pull it does. Own it and weep.
Sometimes in some situations the only real answer is unyielding violence. Sure you can hedge on the bet that eventually enough old people will die off that Iran could become a free country but at the rate they can find new help... sometimes a peaceful revolution just isn't a realistic expectation.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
Leave. Now. While you still can.
Anybody want my mod points?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amateur_radio HAM Radio.
you are not smart politics-wise are you ? hardliners stole the election - they got 55%+ vote even in places that never voted for anyone except their ethnic candidates. election fraud has been committed. and now the government of ahmedinajad is trying to suppress discussion. thats it.
Read radical news here
That's right Mr. theocratic dictator. Go ahead and keep pushing down the relatively minor calls for reform and watch in horror as the demands for freedom and civil discourse grow more and more demanding, and more and more "extreme". This is how true democracies begin.
We got rid of our idiot leadership, now Iran looks to be doing the same.
(Bush was terrible by just about any measure - I'm an independent voter and have voted for Dems and Repubs)
If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
I heard at a talk that if the internet falls, the United States' military could not be mobilized. The situation in Iran sounds similar, but with the citizens. While the more liberal citizens are crying foul, the majority of the populace still supports the state. Religion has a disgusting influence on people.
Regardless of your political leanings, this is an opportunity to help out some folks in a country that is crying for help!
Computer to phone line. Dial up to a north american ISP. They'll have a hard time filtering web content through what shows up as a phone conversation. I'd be willing to pitch in for the bill, though I doubt many companies would charge for that. Someone set up a netzero account for these people or something, I only have $6.75 in my checking account (and no credit card). Either that, or http://www.i2p2.de/ for an encrypted tor-like connection.
http://osvideo.constantvzw.org/your-own-private-pirate-tv-station/
There are many documents available by torrent (check piratebay) on conducting insurgency. Sabotage, bombmaking, organizational structure to reduce infiltration, etc. A government that rules illegitimately does not deserve the acquiescence of its citizens. I understand there are already active insurgencies in Iran, and I'll bet an insurgency could get assistance from forces located in nations immediately to Iran's west and east. Tweets are great, but the government isn't going to change course until things start blowing up.
Does he really set policy?
Aren't all the presidential choices pre approved?
Will a different choice change any meaningful policies that might make a difference in Iran getting nuked?
Seems Iran needs another revolution, not just another figurehead.
Dey too eur jawbs!!
The extent of the fraud perpetrated is clearly intended to send a message. If the powers that be in Iran just wanted Ahmadinejad reelected, they could have done so subtly. Give him 45% or so in round 1, to Mousavi's 39%, and then have him win round 2 with 52% or so. People wouldn't like it, but it'd at least be believable.
No, by giving Ahmadinejad ~67% of the vote, even in Mousavi's hometown, they are very clearly sending a message to the people that their votes do not count. After such a high turnout, after so much enthusiasm, this is a clear move to disenfranchise the Iranian people, so that they don't even try to vote against the entrenched powers in the future.
I bought into this whole idea of helping out the dissident Iraqis who were trying to establish a democracy under Saddam. I supported President Bush's invasion of Iraq even though I knew the WMD was a crock because I thought the idea of kicking out a dictatorship and allowing a democracy to flourish was a good idea.
It turned out, after the invasion, that these people had little native support of their own and many people either liked Saddam or liked the Mullahs.
Having heard a bunch of leftists cry about how much better Saddam was for Iraq, and how wrong it was to actually try and get rid of a dictatorship, and seeing that the people on the ground really kinda liked their dictatorship, my ears for Iran are pretty deaf right now.
If the people of Iran want to get rid of their government, they can do it themselves. If the left wants to lament the death of democracy in Iraq, they can spare me the tears. They had no problem advocating tyranny in Iraq.
This is my sig.
Iranians are not organized (the people), you cannot expect to achieve anything until you get organized. Start building groups, decentralized cells that operate on their own without a centralized leadership. Read and learn! Most of the Iranian supporters of Mousavi are intelligent, that is your weapon. Learn about tactics, sabotage, etc., and gather supplies you will need. You cannot gather in groups and attack the police using the police's own tactics of large-scale street battles. You need insurgency, and sabotage. You are intelligent Iranians, you can get into employment and infiltrate agencies that no other Iranian can. The only way a government can be brought down is with an insurgency from within. Look at the Soviet collapse for an idea of how this is done. Most importantly, build international support, you cannot do this on your own. There are many organizations that would support a move towards democracy with supplies and money. Without the above, you cannot achieve anything except suffering for those who would most likely be wanting to help the cause.
Huh? [devShell.org]
If what is disrupted are specific sites, and not the whole internet, you can use it to get anonymous/encrypted communication with wherever you want.
In the other hand, tor sounds too much like Thor, and if Iranian government things you are of another religion you could be screwed.
Is it an attempt to silence rightful opposition to a fixed election or is it riot control to restore the peace after a democratic election? I mean, are there reports of election fraud or are we just unhappy with the result?
Surely there's other /.'ers out there willing to set up a proxy with Squid or something?
Let me know if this would be helpful and I will.
-- "...I'm a bad guy because I, well, I sing some rock-and-roll songs." M. Manson
From the Article:
"I'd say that there are probably a lot more people around the world pulling local content from Iran's providers right now, and that surge of demand is probably contributing to increased congestion and (perhaps) some of the route instability we see."
We've really outdone ourselves this time!
Yeah, building a bomb from instructions found on the Internet sounds like the start of a great Myth Busters episode. One in which Buster gets blown to hell again.
Remember kids, don't try this at home.
-- I have a private email server in my basement.
I think that what momen abdullah is asking can be achieved using ham radio. Look for PSK31 for low-bandwith digital communications. Maybe "truckers" in Iran are using CB radio? You can use that as well, maybe hack it a bit. Anyway, building a simple 80-100MHz FM band transmitter is very easy to build, just hook it into a power amplifier for better coverage.
Look at the first search result on google for "fm transmitter", this is what i found. seems easy enough to build with easily attainable components.
4Z5TX
On the third hand, it is time we start looking at opening up governance; getting rid of the systems which allow this sort of bullshit to happen. You can't steal an election if there are no elections and no leaders: http://metagovernment.org/wiki/Main_Page
I might suggest surrogate ssh tunneling. Have some volunteers with ssh servers in other countries to allow encrypted tunneling. The only thing is you want to arrange this setup discreetly and probably not on the normal ssh port. If this is too slow of an option to load the pages I would suggest using a text only browser that doesn't bother downloading images unless you specifically want to.
so facebook = erasebook?
I'm afraid if you want change, it has to come from within. The Iranian people will have to rise up and displace their government, by force if necessary. Chatting about it on the net won't help, and the US is not going to at all be interested in forcing change at this point. As with pretty much any real change in life, at has to come from within. If this really matters to the people of Iran, then they have the power to change it. You CAN overthrow a government, history has plenty of examples.
As for nuclear war, I wouldn't worry too much about that. The US isn't going to strike first, and Iran lacks the technology to deliver nuclear payloads to the US. Also, as a practical matter while Iranian leadership seems to be oppressive and such, they aren't insane. I'm sure they full and well understand what the US response to a nuclear attack would be, and nobody wants to be the ruler of a glass parking lot.
So I wouldn't worry about nuclear war, but I would worry about Iran becoming a whole lot more oppressive. If you are Iranian, the only real solution to that is to displace your government. Sorry, but that just seems to be the fact. They've made it quite clear they aren't interested in democratic change, and the president of the US isn't interested in starting another war that the military can't sustain, nor would the US population go along with it.
So if change matters, you'll have to do it yourselves, and yes it may be bloody. That or get out of the country, which is probably what I'd opt for. I'd like to think I could stand up and fight but realistically I'd just run away, I don't have the guts to be a revolutionary I think.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
--Thomas Jefferson, one of the founding fathers of the United States.
From the Topic "We've had a few readers send in updates on the chaotic post-election situation in Iran. Twitter is providing better coverage than CNN at the moment"
Fox News this morning and last night was talking about the same thing. They commented on how most other US news sources had little or nothing on the Iran election.
CNN, and MSNBC has the lowest ratings of any Cable/Network News channel in the US. They provide almost no news which is truthful or accurate. The print media, like the New York Times hide real news stories from the public.
Where I work, MSNBC, CNN and the New York Times are blocked.
When will the good citizens of the US follow Texas and just pull the plug on CNN, MSNBC, and the New York times.
Seriously? If this election is stolen, it will be the same as any other stolen election. If the US went in with Nukes every time a dictator faked Democracy, there wouldn't be any life left on Earth.
My Photography - http://ian-x.com
The Deathlings (comic) - http://thedeathlings.com
Maybe it's time to do something over there. If you don't like the government's deciding what you can and can't do, you have the option to change it. But you won't be able to do that on Twitter or any other on-line option. Physical action may be your only choice. As you have seen, the ones in power will stay there by any means necessary. It's your country, you solve the problem. That's what we did in America. If you don't want to act, you deserve what you get.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimized_Link_State_Routing_Protocol
http://www.olsr.org/
After the Kremlin exited Eastern Europe, the peoples of each nation in Eastern Europe rapidly established a genuine democracy and a free market. Except for Romania (where its people killed their dictator), there was no violence.
In Iran (and many other failed states), no external force is imposing the current brutal government on the Iranians. The folks running the government are Iranian. The president is Iranian. The secret police are Iranian. The thugs who will torture and kill democracy advocates are Iranian.
If the democracy advocates attempt to establish a genuine democracy in Iran, violence will occur. Why? A large percentage of the population supports the brutal government and will kill the democracy advocates.
Let us not merely condemn the Iranian government. We must condemn Iranian culture. Its product is the authoritarian state.
We should not intervene in the current crisis in Iran. If the overwhelming majority of Iranians (like the overwhelming majority of Poles) truly support democracy, human rights, and peace with Israel, then a liberal Western democracy will arise -- without any violence. Right now, the overwhelming majority clearly oppose the creation of a liberal Western democracy. The Iranians love a brutal Islamic theocracy.
The Iranians created this horrible society. It is none of our business unless they attempt to develop nuclear weapons. We in the West are morally justified in destroying the nuclear-weapons facilities.
Note that, 40 years ago, Vietnam suffered a worse fate (than the Iranians) at the hands of the Americans. They doused large areas of Vietnam with agent orange, poisoning both the land and the people. Yet, the Vietnamese do not channel their energies into seeking revenge (by, e. g., building a nuclear bomb) against the West. Rather, the Vietnamese are diligently modernizing their society. They will reach 1st-world status long before the Iranians.
Cultures are different. Vietnamese culture and Iranian culture are different. The Iranians bear 100% of the blame for the existence of a tyrannical government in Iran. We should condemn Iranian culture and its people.
We should send David Lettermen to Iran. If sending him there, does not resolve the world's problems with Iran, it will resolve the US problem of David Lettermen.
Mr Ahmadinejad credits his win to democratic methods perfected by George W. Bush. "We fully understand the international community's desires to see that Iran's democracy transparently works to the highest standards found in other nations. Mr Bush's work has been exemplary."
The "hanging chad" technique has been particularly effective. "Rounding up opposition voters, politicians and journalists named Chad and hanging them. In those cases where the opposition insurgent was not named Chad, we of course took care to change their names to Chad posthumously. Democratic procedures must not only be observed, they must be seen to be observed."
"I stand one hundred per cent behind my brother Mahmoud," said Supreme Leader Ali Khameini Rove of the Project for a New Iranian Century. "Occasionally with his mouth moving in time with the movements of my hand. Clever, isn't it?"
Mr Ahmadinejad has been condemned by some as a "lunatic redneck" and "a gibbering madman perilously close to the nuclear button." "These charges are most unfair. When I declaimed the necessity of obliterating and deleting the unnameable Zionist entity with cleansing atomic fire, it was implicit in these statements that we would need to reach a resolution to undertake such action through proper procedures of international diplomacy. Mr Bush's excellent work in decapitating Saddam Hussein's odious regime shows the way forward in this regard."
"We stand in solidarity with the Iranian people," said President-in-Exile Al Gore from his cave high in the mountains of Afghanistan. "For my own part, I will never give up the fight to take back America and Iran from the Republican counterrevolutionaries and will not rest until all Americans and Iranians breathe the free air of socialism ... what? Democrats elected? Huh, next you'll try telling me the President's black. You can't fool me! Back where you came from!"
http://rocknerd.co.uk
That is one option, it is however that of a completly mad dictator. A more human answer is that the goverment is afraid. Afraid that a closer more realistic faked result would spark revolution. Its soldiers might be willing to shoot on citizens if they think they represent a minority. If the are a majority, then things could be different. Think China vs Russia. The russian soldiers sided with the people recently, the chinese soldiers with their leaders. The reason? Simple, the russian soldiers knew the truth of who was winning the popularity contest.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Some ways to subvert the censorship.
1) anonymous web proxies that only accept inbound connections from Iran IP space.
2) TOR servers.
3) Ad-Hoc WiFi networks could be used to create a Mesh networks.
4) Multicast information, documents, video over the Mesh.
When did the left advocate Military non-intervention?
I see little support for non-interventionism from any part of the American political spectrum aside from Ron Paul and a few other voices than remain mostly unheard.
Read the article titled "The Ugly Side of Truth".
Please tell us what to do or we are going to die in the a nuclear war between Iran and US.
Look on the bright side, at least your 'net connections will automatically re-route around any local ground zeros.
I'm sorry to say to you, but you are f****d :-( Simply put - your government & religion leaders has hard control over military (both official and semi-official IRGC) and you don't have total-majority (80-90%) of population on your side, not speaking about military leaders. Your only chance to do bloody revolution, but how history teaches us, there is only a little chance that it will lead in long-term peaceful solution.
The Chaos Computer Club made a "FreedomStick" for journalists traveling to China to cover the Olympics. It includes software that automatically uses firefox+tor etc.. More Info Here: http://chinesewall.ccc.de/index-en.html
Hard time filtering a constantly on connection to the big satan when any mechanic can just plugin a headset and hear nothing but the noises modems make and no voices.
Iran is a dictatorship, it doesn't have to obey laws or niceties. Anyone who follows your advice is risking death if the iran goverment is really doing what people here are claiming it is doing.
The first victim of dictatorship is plausible deniability.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
...they take the clerics out of the system. The secular president is just a puppet of the clerics, even if he is a "reformer". What would politics be like in this country if all the candidates were hand-picked by televangelists? That's Iran. Until you fix that, it's pointless.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
What the fuck is wrong with you people? The person asked for a serious request on how to setup a AdHoc network, and you spout relatively petty bullshit?! Can anyone answer the person's question, or are you just going to use this is a soap box?
The injustice (committed by the Americans) in Vietnam occurred 10 years after the injustice in Iran. The injustice in Vietnam occurred over a 10-year period.
The Americans doused large areas of Vietnam with agent orange, poisoning both the land and the people. Yet, the Vietnamese do not channel their energies into seeking revenge (by, e. g., building a nuclear bomb) against the West. Rather, the Vietnamese are diligently modernizing their society. They will reach 1st-world status (i. e., a prosperous liberal Western democracy) long before the Iranians.
Cultures are different. Vietnamese culture and Iranian culture are different. The Iranians bear 100% of the blame for the existence of a tyrannical government in Iran. We should condemn Iranian culture and its people.
I actually found this line very intriguing. Is it really possible to set up an autonomous network using any sort of commodity wireless routers? It might be a not bad idea at all in a densely populated metropolis. Probably none come with the firmware allowing to do that, but there might be open firmware alternatives. So, 3 questions:
1. Is it technically possible to connect two wireless routers together to form a network?
2. Is there readily-available software needed to set up a centralized/hierarchical network in this way?
3. P2P?
Unfortunately, setting up large-scale adhoc networks with 802.11b/g hardware is kind of difficult. What you'll want to look at is what's called "wireless mesh networking". Mesh networking is basically the peer-to-peer of networks. The difficulty with using 802.11b/g for mesh networking is that 802.11 standard doesn't really include any concept of a mesh. There are two types of devices: access points and clients. Access points cannot communicate with other access points. It is however, possible for clients to communicate with other clients by switching to ad hoc networking mode. So your options are thus:
1) get a lot of people with 802.11g-capable computers to switch into ad hoc networking mode. This will allow them to connect to each other if the density is high enough (that is if there are enough people close enough). Unfortunately, the range is on the small side, so, unfortunately, this may not work that well. Part of the problem is that clients often have a lower broadcast strength than access points.
2) set up a specifically designed mesh network. To do mesh networking in infrastructure mode, there are going to be four different types of nodes which can be used. 1) AP nodes 2) Client-Client nodes 3) AP-Client nodes 4) Client nodes
AP nodes:
An ordinary wireless access point can act as a hub node.
Client-Client nodes:
There have to be two radios for each client-client node. Both will act as clients to other networks. You'll either need one computer with two wireless cards or two computers which are connected together using some other means (or, if you happen to have an access point which can be switched to client mode (which very few can) then you could use that as a client). You can connect the two computers using an ethernet hub, ethernet cross-over cable, null modem cable, or possibly firewire (although I've never done that). The computers should each by set to bridging mode. Basically, each client will connect to a different access point and they'll then serve to connect the two access points to each-other, bridging the networks. Generally these should be on different frequencies. Although there may be some circumstances where the same frequency can be used.
AP-Client nodes:
There have to be two radios for each AP-client node. One will work as a client to another access point and one will act as an access point for other nodes. Generally, this will mean one computer and one access point connected together by ethernet, but there are a few other ways to do it. The computer should be set into some form of bridging mode which differs some based on operating system. The two radios will always use different frequencies unless there's a long cable-run between them (opposite sides of a building or some such).
Now, you need to figure out how to put this together. You need at least an initial group of people to help build the network. And then you'll lay out a basic topology. You'll plot out the nodes you have available on a graph and then try to connect them together. Client-Client nodes can connect to two nodes, either AP nodes or AP-Client nodes using infrastructure mode or to other Client-Client nodes in ad hoc mode. AP nodes can have multiple Client-Client or AP-Client nodes connected to them. AP nodes cannot connect to other AP nodes unless both AP nodes have wireless bridging modes (very rare) and you can get them to work (even rarer). AP-Client nodes can connect to one AP node (infrastructure) or one Client-Client node (ad hoc) and can have multiple AP-Client or Client-Client nodes connected to them The Client nodes can be used only as stepping stones in an ad hoc connection. I.e. if two client-client nodes want to connect, but are two far from each other, you can put a Client node in between in ad hoc mode and it'll help them connect. This can be done with a string of client nodes.
You'll want to draw all this out on a map, and possibly rearrange equipment as needed to fill in the gaps. You'll also need to decide frequencies so
If you can't change the government; the public should join forces and wage war on the government to avoid such dicatorships.
The Iranian people will have to rise up and displace their government, by force if necessary.
Been there, done that. That's how we got the present situation. In 1979, Islamic militants overthrew the 2500 year old monarchy. Before, they had an oppressive right-wing monarchy. Now, they have an oppressive Islamic theocracy.
But we both know they're all noise to cover the same ol' non-stop war for power between two kinds of creep, who keep reappearing in Mexican history under different names: the "charismatic guerrilla" leader like Villa and Zapata, who always turn into sleazy dictators once they get power, and the plain old rich landlord elite, who start out as sleazy dictators and so don't have to pretend they're anything else from the get-go. If you live anywhere in the tropics, let's face it: those are your choices, always have been and always will be. Don't blame me, I just work here. - "Gary Bretcher", the "War Nerd".
im another fucking expert. i live next to iran, in a country which has the risk of becoming another iran itself. so, if you do not have a similar situation, either research first, or shut up and listen.
Read radical news here
they are saying election is stolen, because in azerbaijani parts of iran, ahmedinajad got 55%+ vote. never in iran's history ANYone other than an ethnic azerbaijani got that kind of vote there.
let me put it in american context - ahmedinajad getting 55% vote in azerbaijani parts of iran means barack obama getting 55%+ vote in any part of redneck midwest with little black population.
Read radical news here
I hope this article on DIY networking equipment/setup might be of help.
http://www.computerpoweruser.com/editorial/article.asp?article=articles%2Farchive%2Fc0204%2F48c04%2F48c04.asp
and here's one on setting up an encrypted phone network using asterisk and soft phones
http://chiralsoftware.com/asterisk-article/voip-sip-asterisk-configuration-part-1.jsp
good luck.
The war, if it comes (with Ahmadinejad, it is more *when* it comes) will be Israel taking out Iran's nuclear sites. Then Iran retaliates and it escalates. US could be pulled in.
So, US will not start a war, but it may just end up finishing it.
>> n the absence of an external interfering force (e. g., the army of the Soviet Union), the fate of a nation is determined by its people.
Wrong. An internal interfering force is even more able to determine a nation's fate. That's the nature of totalitarianism. It is naive in the extreme, and ethically deficient, to blithely assume that unarmed civilians can bring down a regime willing to slaughter its citizens to retain power.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
Never start a fight you can't win. That means two things - if you aren't stronger than your opponent, regroup, build support, and give yourself a fighting chance. Also - if you're still not stronger than your opponent, change the rules so you have the advantage. The British army outnumbered the Americans in the American Revolution, but the American's still won because they used unorthodox tactics.
Write your government asking them to not recognize Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as President of Iran. If they are on the UNSC, ask them to try to pass a resolution condemning Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and referring his actions to the ICC. Actually, just ask your country to condemn his actions in general and to try and get a UNGA resolution to do the same... And then see if they can get the UNGA do declare that his delegates to the UN are not able to represent his country, because he isn't the President of Iran...
Just because we're not in Iran, doesn't mean we can't cause problems for him...
MOD PARENT UP - he links relevant info.
Sorry to be so straight but your argument is bullshit and you look racist and pretty ignorant.
Iran had a dictatorship, supported by the United States, who killed everybody against the Sha, the US-fellow friend.
After the Islamists and Communists got sick of fucking US fucking their country (as most world does), they killed the Sha.
In this Kaos time, the Islamists took the control.
It's nothing about "their culture" it's about how the United States keeps on failing into making this world a safer place.
It's not only about culture, just read some history book before saying so stupid things.
Spain became a Socialist Republic in a democratic election, we had female vote, abort, and loads of other social benefits.After 3 years of war against Spanish, Italian and German fascists, we lost. We had 2 million volunteer soldiers, but we lost, because we had no external help at all against the fascists. UK and France said "oh, this is an internal affair, we can't do anything", that is translated into: we are so fucking terrified by the nazis that none of us is valiant enough to help you, guys.
We had 36 years of dictatorship without "external powers" after the Spanish Civil War finished, how did the fascists stand for so long?
Easy, jailing and killing people and not having External Pressure against it.
5% of population died in that war, 10% of population escaped from the country and another 5% was jailed for up to 20 years (most died in jail), just for being part of a union or simply for not going to the church.
Please, don't be so simplistic, the only dumb state I see around in the western world is the US, the only "democracy" where a president can stole an election (remember year 2000) and people just keeps on eating burgers.
At least Iranians strike on streets.
Who is more culturally democratic, then?
Learn a bit from the Iranians and try to help them, don't just say "the people has the government they deserve", or I'll keep on talking about Bushes.
- Lets say that both Canada and Mexico were recently annexed by Russia, how would the USA react? any chances that a russian-basher would be elected there? What if most modern medias were also owned by russia and were behind an information warfare to get the pro-russian candidate to win? Dont forget that in this scenario, Russia also was behind he overthrow of the only democratically-elected president USA ever had and installed a bloody tyran in the white house for 26 years who was himself overthrown by the current ruling party.
I am not saying that the iranian peoples are pure good, or that they made the best choice by staying pissed (the vietnam example says all) I am saying that they have good reasons to like the guy who defies USA and is on the way to modernise their country more than the guy whose main agenda is to align their country with the 'Great satan'. This said, why would it be so unbelievable that the guy actually won the election? His electoral base is the poor and rural folks, to whom he distributes oil money, and a lot of them are illiterate or do not have a phone line to answer for polls. Maybe the polls were just wrong - it has been known to happen.
If there really was electoral fraud, odds are we will see proofs at some point, then we will be justified to act. I was amused to see heads of states with dubious democratic record in their own country declare with certainty that there was fraud in Iran hours after their guy lost. I wish they were as reactive to global warming or recessions....
Still, i do think that media censorship is wrong and that as the geek crowd we should be concerned more with assisting the tech request to allow unblockable communications both for this event and the future ones. There will be plenty of time to argue about the politics later. I am personally much more interested in facts than opinions and with the communication blackout we are deprived of the facts. How about the creation of a geek task group aimed at preventing further media blackouts?
This is the best that could have happened to Iran. You see, if Mousavi won, he would have not been able to reform. There has been already a reformist as president. And nothing changed. There are few things to change Iran into a democracy. Or at least what we think of democracy in the western world, which is the best, but still far from being perfect. The things to change are mainly the control who can be candidate for elections. If more liberal candidate can be elected as expert, including non-clerics, then the guardians also will change, then there might be an opening for other reforms to get into a real democracy. But as long as the guardians control the candidates, nothing will change.
Let's see, if Mousavi was elected, would he change that? No the president does not have this power.
Now, what can make the things to change?
I believe in the latter point. And this is what is happening. There might be no more censorship than usual on Internet or SMS, and it would be due to just congestions. There might have been no fraud in the election... But Iranians are understanding they do not have to obey all the time the authority. And it has been like the even the days before the elections.
Despotism is when the people fear the government. Democracy is when the government fears the people.
The outcome of this current situation is not yet certain, at least in the short term (in the long term, revolutions are inevitable - remember what happened in Iran the last time).
But one thing is clear: If the USA or Israel had attacked Iran, as we have basically been anticipating for the past three to four years, then this would mever have happened. An external, immediate threat would have magnetized the country and unified it behind its nationalist leader. Remember Bush's approval rating the week after 9/11?
Contrast this with Iraq, whose oppressive regime has been eliminated by military force, and whose citizens are still engaged in a guerilla war with their "liberators".
Sometimes, things work out only if left alone.
Leave Ahmedinejad alone! Leave him alone! Pleeeaaase! His wife just left him, he's got two fucking kids! Bastards! Leave Ahmedinejad aloooone!
most people on here seem to knock twitter but as has been mentioned it is pretty much the only source for news right now. Follow updates on the #IranElection hashtag here: http://hashtags.org/tag/iranelection/messages For what it's worth I don't even use twitter, but it's times like this that I realise it kicks the ass of TV news for real-time coverage.
nt
So seriously, all you noob Iranians who want to resist but don't know how, stfu and get your head down. Petition for U.N. observers, or whatever else you need to do, but don't go Hollywood Hacker on anyone or you will be out in the cold for good.
if you dont want to help liberty loving, suppressed people around the world, SHUT THE FUCK UP and keep YOUR voice down. we didnt win modern social rights and values with the likes of you. if you wont help, get the fuck out of society to whatever mountain top you see fit.
Read radical news here
It's understandable you'd need to re-organize your fight, gather people to fight back and such.
In my view, if what you want is to set a communication means to *everyone* (Iranian) you can reach (organize), i'd say you can always get a few people and in a blink of eyes take over a transmitter for a National Radio or TV. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadcast_signal_intrusion),but hope those would have balls of steel (and i don't know but for sure there's a "government controlled" TV).
Second, i bet more into doing their game and get a few geek techs and disrupt *their own* communications, you know, you can't be the boss if you can't issue orders.
Dictatorship needs to be able to establish a chain of command or will disrupt its hierarchy.
It seems you're playing chess now...
election votes do not 'often surprise and disappoint' in places there is ethnic nationalism. ethnically nationalist populations vote, ETHNICALLY. thats what they have been doing in azerbaijani iran in the last 29 years. they AGAIN did the same. yet, somehow, ahmedinajad got 55%+ vote there too, JUST LIKE EVERYWHERE ELSE.
if you still cant realize what's going on, ask yourself how it is possible that a candidate can get consistently and UNIFORMLY 55% vote everywhere in a country. EVEN in hatemi backing tehran districts.
its also clear you have no idea of how middle east politics is. this is not america.
Read radical news here
This poor guy asks for help setting up an underground network, and all I see is a self-absorbed discussion about US and Iranian politics/history.
Mods- save your points for the technical discussions. I know I am.
after all, the USA sheeple are the one who NEVER complained when the Supreme Court eventually decided for them who the next president was gonna be in 2000.
I got permanently modded -1 because I dared to question Israel on
This thread contains lots of great perspectives on Ahmandinejad, election fraud, and the Iranian presidency. Unfortunately most of the world is missing the point.
I'd like to point that Ali Khamenei has been the supreme leader (dictator) of Iran for 20 years. During an EconTalk podcast on August 11 2008, expert Bruce Bueno de Mesquita comments that after interviewing over a dozen Iranian political specialists, his research concludes that Ahmandinejad is the 18th most powerful person in Iran.
The Iranian president is an important and powerful person in absolute terms. In relative terms it's a public relations office. So yes, election fraud was committed. Yes, their disinterest in concealing the fraud conveys the extent to which they believe it makes a difference.
However, everyone just take a deep breath, and understand that the electoral system and eligibility of candidates is up to the complete discretion of Ali Khamenei.
To respond to all of Iran's long-term goals would take up too much room and time. I would like to address the most obdurate ones, though. Before I start, however, I should state that to understand what Iran's particularly violent form of expansionism has encompassed as a movement and as a system of rule, we have to look at its historical context and development as a form of counter-productive politics that first arose in early twentieth-century Europe in response to rapid social upheaval, the devastation of World War I, and the Bolshevik Revolution. The underlying message is that there is no place in this country where we are safe from Iran's cronies, no place where we are not targeted for hatred and attack. Mercantalism and irreligionism are not synonymous. In fact, they are so frequently in opposition and so universally irreconcilable that there's something wrong with this picture. Too many emotions to count raced through my mind when I first realized that Iran's scribblings remain opaque to many observers who dismiss Iran on the basis of its treasonous accusations and general lunacy.
No matter how close it's come to making me lose all self-control, Iran won't be satisfied until it finds a way to plague our minds. Let me just say that I'm not a psychiatrist. Sometimes, though, I wish I were, so that I could better understand what makes organizations like Iran want to offer hatred with an intellectual gloss. Of course, no one of any intelligence believes that we should avoid personal responsibility. Iran doesn't care about accountability in our public systems -- sincerely an instructive warning for the future.
One argument Iran makes is that it is a martyr for freedom and a victim of deconstructionism. That's just plain nonsense. The truth is that it somehow manages to get away with spreading lies (it would sooner give up money, fame, power, and happiness than perform an unruly act), distortions (people don't mind having their communities turned into war zones), and misplaced idealism (racism is a noble goal). However, when I try to respond in kind, I get censored faster than you can say "uncontrovertibleness". It should be readily apparent that if the public perception is that in my speaking engagements, I have found in audience questions an alarming increase in concern about lame-brained licentious simpletons, then the time has come to drive off and disperse the delusional scum who trick academics into abandoning the principles of scientific inquiry. All that we have achieved may now be lost, if not in the bright flames of interdenominationalism, then in the dense smoke of the unscrupulous abominable stratagems promoted by slaphappy spivs. Let's just ignore Iran and see what it does. In the end, experience shows that it would be grossly premature for Iran to claim final victory.
Hello. My name is Junis. And I'm tweeting from my Commodore 64 that I brought with me from the neighbor country, my homeland, Afghanistan. Iran is a lovely place but I miss my chicken coop. There are not many videos here of Baywatch, so I download them. Tell Mr. Katz I miss his emails.
Can't we do something to help? Maybe set-up a server for them to communicate, have some extra ips at hand if anything gets blocked? I feel bad for these people, surely we should be doing something?
If they don't like the way he runs his gov't, why did they all vote for him?
They are monitoring phone calls, that is scary
As in heavy breathing on the other side of the line; now they have to take all communications and do them in person.
Videos stopped leaking out to the media sites after about a dozen or so got out showing the huge crowds chasing the police. Mankind should be grateful for video/camera cellphones, it will be the tool that will expose the next Tianeman Square.
The US just got done with one of the worst presidents in history, who was put in office TWICE (technicalities aside). Politicians talk a good game. Good politicians are masters at multitasking - that is, patting you on the back with one hand while stealing your money with the other. How do we know that Iran wasn't faced with a similar circumstance?
The following is reproduced from the Stratfor website (http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20090613_iran_text_mousavi_letter).
----------
Editor's Note: The text that follows is a translation of a letter by Iranian presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi on June 13, reported by TehranBureau.com. STRATFOR cannot confirm the authenticity of the letter.
"The reported results of the 10th Iranian presidential election are appalling. The people who witnessed the mixture of votes in long lineups know who they have voted for and observe the wizardry of I.R.I.B. (state-run TV and radio) and election officials. Now more than ever before they want to know how and by which officials this game plan has been designed. I object fully to the current procedures and obvious and abundant deviations from law on the day of election and alert people to not surrender to this dangerous plot. Dishonesty and corruption of officials as we have seen will only result in weakening the pillars of the Islamic Republic of Iran and empowers lies and dictatorships.
"I am obliged, due to my religious and national duties, to expose this dangerous plot and to explain its devastating effects on the future of Iran. I am concerned that the continuation of the current situation will transform all key members of this regime into fabulists in confrontation with the nation and seriously jeopardize them in this world and the next.
"I advise all officials to halt this agenda at once before it is too late, return to the rule of law and protect the nation's vote and know that deviation from law renders them illegitimate. They are aware better than anyone else that this country has been through a grand Islamic revolution and the least message of this revolution is that our nation is alert and will oppose anyone who aims to seize the power against the law.
"I use this chance to honor the emotions of the nation of Iran and remind them that Iran, this sacred being, belongs to them and not to the fraudulent. It is you who should stay alert. The traitors to the nation's vote have no fear if this house of Persians burns in flames. We will continue with our green wave of rationality that is inspired by our religious learnings and our love for prophet Mohammad and will confront the rampage of lies that has appeared and marked the image of our nation. However we will not allow our movement to become blind one.
"I thank every citizen who took part in spreading this green message by becoming a campaigner and all official and self organized campaigns, I insist that their presence is essential until we achieve results deserving of our country."
PASS IT AROUND accessing twitter from 148.233.239.24 Port:80 in tehran. you can avoid gov filters from here. spread to others
Actually, turn Tienanmen, the U.S. government and world intel agencies realized that if you really wanted to destabilize a government, you made sure the unkempt, disaffected masses HAD communications. Remember all the faxes coming out of China back then? I'd be willing to bet that British, American, Israelis and other interested countries are busting their humps making sure comms stay open so they can get the information out and allow Iranians the ability to organize.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
Could you please reiterate these insightful thoughts in a manner that would involve the subtle use of an automotive analogy?
It would undoubtedly ease my comprehension of the more refined details of your argument and would be gratefully appreciated.
WTFkly yours.
Me.
I will say that the British government in the 18th Century did seemingly piss off some of the worst kinds of people (from a public relations viewpoint): Taverns, Tea Houses, and Newspaper Publishers. When referring to tea houses, think of your local Starbucks and you get a kind of idea of how common they were in the 18th Century American Colonies of Brittan.
Still, I'd have to agree with you on calling the above AC poster on his B.S. There certainly was much more involved than a few tea merchants... and the involvement fiscally (and militarily) by the French certainly had a much stronger impact than anything the tea merchants of Venice may have had on American society.
This is a bit off-topic, but it irks me how often he is brought forward as an example.
Gandhi succeeded because he survived long enough to gain attention in the public life in England. The English public and politicians, having an interesting mix of acceptance for imperialism and notions of freedom, started rooting for Gandhi and applied pressure to pull the army back.
This means that Gandhi would NOT have lived if ANY of the following had taken place:
- England had a religious view that Indians were either somehow dirty, or cursed, or without value. In this case they wouldn't have bothered about the killing of anyone.
- English soldiers were regularly either a) drugged, b) undisciplined, c) disorganised. In each of these cases it's beyond likely that a local sergeant would have gotten fed up with his antics and killed him.
- He started blockading trains before he became too well-known to be killed
What if he won fairly?
Face it, we need a reason to hate the Iran so we can step on it when it goes out of line. What if the whole outcry is staged? I mean, why was there none in 2005 when he won the first time?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
This is exactly what it was created for.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Win an "argument?" Sorry. This is abuse...
"Democracy." It's just a slogan.
By taking out Saddam he destabilized the entire balance of power between Iraq and Iran. Saddam actually kept Iran in check and vice versa. The second Saddam was out of the picture Iran raised its head in defiance and started to chase them atoms... Saddam would not have let this happen. Bush Jr., aspiring to Bush Sr., thought it would be a good idea to do as Dad did and invade Iraq. And while we're at it, lets one up ol' Dad, and actually get rid of Saddam. Talk about family feuds...
The Slashdot crowd are so stupid with Regards to this Event.
I never imagined that you could be so stupid to believe the Zionist / US / British Propaganda about Iran.
Well maybe I am of a Older generation kind.
Time to stop reading Slashdot, it's only trash nowadays.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Then, after the Kremlin exited Eastern Europe in 1989, the peoples of each nation in Eastern Europe rapidly established a genuine democracy and a free market. Except for Romania (where its people killed their dictator), there was no violence.
That is how people act when they want freedom and free markets.
In 1979, after the Iranian people overthrow the despot whom the Americans supported, the Iranians immediately established a brutal, authoritarian theocracy.
That is how people act when they reject both freedom and free markets.
Cultures are different. Eastern-European culture and Iranian culture are different. The Iranians bear 100% of the blame for the existence of a tyrannical government in Iran. We should condemn Iranian culture and its people.
www.freenetproject.org
- a decentralized, anonymous, censorship resistant peer-to-peer software, designed for situations EXACTLY like the one you are expieriencing: Freenet is designed in a way which makes it impossible to block if used properly: In darknet mode, each connection between the peers is FULLY encrypted and therefore cannot be blocked by internet traffic analysis. You should read the description of "Darknet" on the website to understand it more.
It provides much of the functionality of the normal internet: The ability to post websites, so called freesites, the ability to write mail, "freemail", and anonymous forums, FMS.
The core feature of Freenet is it's censorship resistance: Content is distributed on all computers which participate. Once you have uploaded something, it is IMPOSSIBLE to delete it, it will still be available to everyone even if your computer is offline.
I am bewildered and gob smacked at the ignorance of people. Seriously.
Stating that the Iranian people are responsible for the government's actions is like stating that the American people are responsible for:
1) Killing hundreds and thousands of innocent people in Japan in WW2
2) Killing hundreds and thousands of innocent people in Vietnam
3) Killing hundreds and thousands of innocent people in Iraq
Not to mention all the future problems that the "American people" have created by breaking apart governments that needed to organically grow and change (after all, we didn't go from slavery to democracy overnight).
There needs to be a clear distinction between "the people" and the power-driven politicans (i.e. Bush or any other poltician, be it Stalin, Pol Pot or Ahmadinejad).
The people are always going to need to rebel and create civil wars (which in turn create revolutions). But its always very difficult and in some states very costly (depending on the military power of that country). A civil war in Iran would be a catastrophe like never seen before.
They definitely need help from the UN and the rest of the Western world or it could create even more tensions between the West and Middle East.
If the guy who asked for your help in setting up makeshift networks in Iran, is also able to read your replies, then it automatically follows that the government could, too.
That means, that while to some extent you might be helping the OP, it also means you're potentially providing the government with very critical pieces of information:-
a) What any would-be revolutionaries are possibly specifically doing, as far as setting up network infrastructure is concerned, and
b) By extension, how to snoop/counter it.
c) Potentially information (even if only email addresses) about the Iranian individuals who want to deploy the technology, and then use it for subversive purposes.
The other thing to consider is, whether or not getting rid of a new dictatorship there is worth it, even if you could. The most revolutions ever do is buy time, (yes, including the American one) and in the end, all you're really doing is making the world safe for corporations, since in any scenario where government doesn't hold power, they invariably do instead...and generally they do even where you have a national government.
The majority never end up permanently retaining power, for the simple reason that they don't want it. As long as said dictator doesn't start randomly killing people, and is also able to do a sufficiently competent administrative job, leave him where he is. Fewer people will probably end up dying, and in a part of the world like the Middle East, having a firmer than usual hand at the wheel isn't a bad thing anywayz.
Sadaam might have been a monster in a lot of ways, but he held Iraq together, and as someone else said, managed to keep Iran in check as well. The Arab states aren't places where behaving like a member of Amnesty International is good for either keeping a country together, or retaining office.
Please, can you help us to set up some sort of network using our home wireless access points? Can anybody show us a link on how to install small TV/radio stations? Any suggestion for setting up a network? Please tell us what to do or we are going to die in the a nuclear war between Iran and US.
Here's a great guide from an African organization:
http://wirelessafrica.meraka.org.za/wiki/index.php/DIY_Mesh_Guide
Good luck!
And, JM2C: I don't think either Barack or Mahmoud will fire the first nuke. Scary as it is, MAD is pretty stable. Think about how it would play out:
America strikes first:
1. Iran destroyed. (sorry to be so blunt, but it is a fact)
2. Global backlash against America.
3. America rapidly destabilizes economically (ie: much worse than now).
4. North Korea senses weakness and takes out Seoul (probably conventional, not nuclear).
And that's not considering anything else that would happen in the Middle East. For example, there's a good chance Israel would be destroyed. Barack understands that whole chain of events - it's not rocket science.
As for Mahmoud? Love him or hate him, think he's good, evil, or has his back against the wall -- regardless of any of that, he's fairly smart. You don't get to his position without having a fair bit of desire for power, and the mental capacity to figure out how to get it. If he strikes first, he loses everything he has built. He knows that.
So, build your mesh network, let's get to know each other through global social networks, and work together to stop the hatred and fear on both sides.
But don't sweat the nukes. It won't happen.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
I see that Acorn has set up offices in Iran.
This is what Tyranny looks like, not whether or not Ron Paul gets laughed at or if your movement is heckled because you guys chose, "Teabagging" as your rallying cry.
This is real tyranny. Not being mocked endlessly because your candidate of choice is hopelessly and helplessly trapped in the 1880's.
Grow up and stop polluting the Internet.
As for what we, the typical freedom loving west should do? If you've got the means, set up proxies. Make sure that Iranian dissidents can get their word out to the world. If you don't, pressure the Obama administration to look into the Iranian crackdown. The real story here isn't whether or not the election was dirty, the real story is the cover up.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
Yeah...Good luck on that "2nd NRA Patriot Revolution" armed with Glocks and a few AK-47 against Apache gunships and Predator drones.
That's gonna go real well. Where do you want your bloody smear buried after your remains have been squeegeed up?
...rebroadcasting the BBC & CNN over the Iranian jamming? If not, they should be.
"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
first, i'm very disappointed, angry, saddened, and frustrated by what has happened and what is now happening. i'd very much like to help, but besides setting up rogue dns servers, or distributing pre-filled hosts.txt files (both of which could easily be stopped, if they're not already), i have no clue what sort of advice to offer besides don't trust anyone, encrypt everything, and speak in whispers (online and off) until you're ready to pay for what you have to say.
second, should we really be offering advice in such a public place? if an iranian national can get to slashdot, so can iranian intelligence, or whoever it is that's actually imposing this oppression. there's not even any way to verify this person's identity, it could be some young iranian, supportive of the police state, trying to do his part to silence the dissenters.
no, i'm sorry, i think i'd have to say that we shouldn't be saying anything of any real value, besides "i'm sorry". i hope you are able to figure this out on your own. my only advice is to move slowly, quietly, and deliberately. and good luck.
not only is time travel possible, it's irrelevant.
Blame is irrelevant. Oppressed people are asking for help.
Tools and Information on fighting censorship:
http://www.internetfreedom.org/
http://www.pgp.com/
http://www.dl4all.com/internet/22383-5-best-tools-to-fight-internet-censorship.html
Also explore alternative means of communication.
They are not asking for tanks and missiles, only the means to express themselves. We know what the right thing to do is, the only question is whether we're up to it.
I am not in any sense a technical expert nor a master of cyber securty. Please, if anyone can offer further service, you know how much this can mean.
You know, it really is bad to see all this violence, however it warms my heart to see these young people fight for what is right. I'm not saying that the election was rigged or was not, but what I see are people who care, young people....
People who will stand up and fight for what is right and what they believe in. It's a lot more than I would expect to see out of anyone here in America.
The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
They have been referred to as part of the "axis of evil" by that insane cowboy the US used to call president. The US has a lot of nukes and the ability to deliver them and while the current president seems peaceful enough, they know that the US system is inherently unstable and another hawkish nutjob could be in the white house in 4 to 8 years.
They also are on bad terms with Isreal, along with every other country in the region. Isreal has more than enough nukes to wipe them out. There is no nuclear power in the region on their side and they feel threatened. Understandably too.
Isreal currently massacres Palestinians, has started wars with it's neighbours and has no problem launching attacks across borders when ever they want, for example into Lebanon. Basically, Iran has a nuclear power in their region which has shown time and again it has little respect for international law or vborders of other countries, who is allied with a super power which thinks it is international law and immune from prosecution and has little respect for other countries soverignty. No wonder they are frightened and angry.
So they figure that if they have nukes, they can hopefully make Isreal think twice before commit the next installment in the genocide and territory building they appear to be attempting. They can't take on the US, but they can put Isreal in check, or at least make themselves heard and taken seriously.
They know full well that nukes are only useful as a deterent. They also seem to think that the Middle East needs a balance of power. I would actually have more concern about some right wing Isreali nutjob starting a nuclear war than Iran.
This is an unpopular view among many in the west, I know, but attempting to understand their fears can lead to peace, which is what most of us want on both sides.
I don't therefore I'm not.
Uhm, not quite, not quite... This is oft-asserted by anti-Americans, but is not quite true. First of all, the man (Mohammad Mossadegh) was "elected" by the Iranian parliament (Majlis) — not "democratically" (by the people).
Yes, he was quite popular (yet another item in support of the GP's idea — about Iranians deserving of their government), but was a loon — giving media interviews in bed, for example. (Khm, was that why "300" pictured Persian ruler the way they did? Most unfair to the ancient king, BTW, but...)
And third, the CIA's action has, in all likelihood, prevented the appearance of the Soviet Army on the stage — which was exactly the point of the GP, who was now moderated down to oblivion by the same anti-Americans and victims of their propaganda. Even Iran's current and past misfortunes are better than the political repressions and economic degradation of becoming the 16th Soviet Socialist Republic would've entailed... Even without USSR appearing, Mossadegh's claiming "temporary" emergency powers foretold, what he had in mind for his country. One only needs to look at Syria and Egypt to realize, what fate did the British (and the CIA) helped Iran to avoid.
This was all obvious to most Americans at the time, BTW — when Socialism was still bad and Communism was still evil, and before the generations of victims of our education system worked their way through America-haters like that infamous "professor" from Chicago...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Most of the slash dot users do not show sympathy to the guys in Iran. Only a few have answered his question, others show their ego and ignorance. That is why Bush was able to rule USA.
http://www.arrl.net
Unless that is blocked as well, everything they need to know to setup radio equipment, slow scan TV stations, etc. Integrating with home wireless is the easy part, although not at all necessary for communications. Handful of components and a string of wire and they are good to go.
The 2000 and 2004 elections were hacked (although it wouldn't have mattered much who got in really). Slashdot is full of references to all of this and the blackbox voting stuff. Many threads on it. The US is in the same boat as Iran, we haven't had a legitimate election in who knows how long, but we have way too many order followers with guns and badges and authority who will shoot to kill anyone their superiors point them at, they don't give a shit. Not for one moment. They just don't care, just a job to them, mercenaries wrapped in flags shouting hoorah, getting all the urban insurrection warfare skills they need to come back home and do some more order following when the time is ripe.
Historically, police and military are the LAST ones to give up on a dictatorship, or decide to follow their conscious and fight against it and really be "for the people", that's the only way dictatorships stay in power, willing, armed and violent order followers. Usually they are the last to even admit they are part of it. Cognizant dissonance is a major part of that. They don't want to believe they are doing wrong, so they fail to see it, even when it is way past obvious to everyone else, and by then, inertia sets in, they fall back on "us versus them" and will still fight against the people. Then their organizational structure collapses, and most of them go rogue and predatory, because that's what they know, using violence to achieve goals. Right or wrong. This is by far and away the most common historical timeline with past empires and with all peoples.
Everyone knows this (who stops to think about it a little), that's why congress has been a paper tiger (they don't control any troops or weaponry, they have no real power anymore, we have executive orders and findings and directives and subagency bureaucratic edicts for the important things now) and we have an ongoing transition to a full bore big brother styled society that keeps getting solidified under the axis of the executive branch and wall street moneymen, who are the real power in the US today. They are using the "war on terror" bullshit to bring about "change", just like the last set of controlled puppets that brought us homeland security and the patriot act. Notice none of that has been repealed or scaled back. Notice the wars haven't ended. Notice it is the same amount of security theater as before..well, no, there's more of it now, not less. More cameras, more datamining, more all that stuff. Notice everyone is getting robbed blind to make wall street richer, we are now "in debt" to them for some reason. To the tune of trillions and counting.
We are paying those people to rip us off, plus to build the US into one large prison camp. No need for specialized camps much once the entire population is cowed enough and they have enough armed order followers spread around to keep everyone nervous and "pacified".
It certainly isn't the vote that is important, that is just political theater meant to keep up the illusion of some sort of representative democracy, along with that utterly phony left versus right political "party" charade. We have one political party, the globalist fascist party, the D and R constitute the two wings of that party. And the current tool is part of the controlled Chicago machine, crooks through and through, just with a good actor for their spokesman. Better than the last puppet actor in his TV soundbite skills, but still a tool and controlled. Who knows what they have on him for blackmail.
Darknets guys
http://msl1.mit.edu/ESD10/docs/darknet5.pdf
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/03/the-new-version-of-p2p.ars
http://msl1.mit.edu/ESD10/docs/darknet5.pdf
They are cheap, easy to roll out and use existing infrastructure. Roll one out to pro-democracy reformers, get a collection of people's actual votes, if possible on a signed petition (e-sig should be fine) then get that to the UN. While you may not trust us, the UN is watching this situation and good luck.
Love, Australia
Wait! Whats a sig?
No, it was because the Canadians and British landed with the USA on D-Day in Normandy and the Australians fought with the USA in the Pacific, and all three countries ever since.
If South Korea actually did something with the USA, or Japan, I'd be more receptive to them, but I think overall they have been shitty and ungrateful allies.
Finally, what is wrong with having an alliance with nations that have similar values? Why the fuck are we supposed to like people that aren't like us?
This is my sig.
There is only one thing to do at a point like this (where the election was so overtly stollen - as if Bush had one a 3rd term), and it does not (directly) involve SMS or re-establishing connections to popular communication/news sites.
I mean, seriously. Your country was just taken over, and you're up in arms about communications? You should be, literally, up in arms. AKA, "Revolution". Given Ahmadinejad history with such things as revolution, it's only natural that he'd take steps to shut out the most readily available communication methods for orchestrating one.
"Social networks" and SMS? Please. That is DANGEROUS. Using such things when the network si known to be dangerous - ie, in a "Krystal Knaght" type situation would likely occur after extended monitoring of said networks.
You are now "behind enemy lines", the enemy being your own government. Your networks need to be small and personal - composed of people you know and trust, and who are equally frearful as you. You need to use encryption pads and other mechanisms for passing communication; nothing that stands out or or anything traceable to its source, such as a wifi mesh or packet radio.
And most importantly, you need to take active action against your government. If public protests don't do the job, then consider a popular violent revolution, if there is support for such things. It either happens soon or it doesn't happen at all: the coup leaders will be quick to squash down on un-friendly sentiment and people will acclimate to the atmosphere of fear, becoming comfortable with their new malevolent dictatoriat.
In short, what you need is guns, lots of guns. They should be in fairly ready supply on your southern border; your fellow countrymen have been deporting them to Iraq for some time, and maybe some Kurds or Iraqis would be benevolent to reciprocate (albiet, in a more kind manner).
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
I'm an Iranian programmer. I voted for Mirhusein Moosavi (Ahmadinejad's main opponent, who was Iran's prime minister for 8 years until 1989), to prevent Ahmadinejad get elected once more and cause more trouble for my country and world. but they cheated in elections. I can say for sure that less than 4% of people I know have voted for Ahmadinejad. but they said he earned 64% for him and that's not true. all of elections candidates have doubts about the election, and asked the responsible organizations to cancel the election results. but they won't, because all of them are main supporters of Ahmadinejad.
Here in Iran people hate Ahmadinejad. we lost our SMS system since Thursday June 11 (and still down), our mobile networks were down on Friday and Saturday. total bandwidth usage of Iran's largest ISP has been reduced to 25% and this is not because people did not use it, it is because a shaping system that Iran telecommunications ministry is running on Iran's internet bandwidth. this has caused intense internet connection slowdown. they are filtering most news agency web sites, social networks, and are running DOS attacks on opponent web sites to make it even harder to access them. BBC Persian was filtered here for years, but now the BBC English website is filtered, Facebook, Youtube are filtered again (they had removed the filter some months ago).
Revolutionary Guards are in the streets, wearing SWAT-like guards and weapons, attacking and smashing ordinary people. people who want nothing but their votes' real results. this election is not valid. Ahmadinejad is not our president.
I agree with subamage. The Iranians are animals, programmed like an animal with instinct-based thought only.
Once you remove the secularists, the remaining Iranians can only "reason" to support a theocracy.
Iranians are vastly different from the Hungarians, the Vietnamese, the Japanese, etc. Those folks can think like human beings.
Hell. I will go out on a limb and say that even the Chinese are better than the Iranians. Millions of Chinese died in World War II, but they are not now trying to support terrorists killing Japanese in an act of religious revenge.
Christ. What the fuck is wrong with the Iranians? Their brains must be different from the brains of other homo sapiens. Ah. Maybe, that is the problem. Homo sapiens are not programmed by instinct. So, Iranians cannot be homo sapiens.
2/10, far too obvious.
Go back to Digg and practice some more.
Its dangerous, certainly. But.. people unwilling to assume risk probably shouldn't be protesting, let alone fighting, against an oppressive government.
I don't expect morality, equality, consistency, or justice from the law. I expect only legality.
The Soviet military had a lot to do with breaking the Nazis in WWII. That Military enjoyed the benefit of Lend lease, particularly in US Trucks.
The US wasn't in Italy by itself, there were two armies, as well as Mark Clark's there was Monty's Eight Army with British, Canadian, Australian and Indian troops.
In the West Operation Overlord was a joint US, British and Canadian venture with other Empire and Occupied Europe troops. The US side of it was not as well prepared as it could have been because they dismissed advice from the British regarding beach clearing techniques (cf Hobart's Funnies for example) and they thought they could get by on one dock.
Just to look at Operation Overlord British, Empire and Allied Occupied Europe troops numbered about 84,000 (or which nearly 62,00 were British). The US First Army had 73,000 men. The Royal Navy and RAF were also kind of involved.
The whole thing was an allied effort. The US couldn't have done it on its own, Britain and the Empire could hold the Nazis off, but couldn't liberate Europe, and without aid may have had to seek peace or starve, the Soviets had the manpower, but lend lease helped them get some breathing space and oncentrate their manufacturing effort, and thus they broke the German Army.
It was not the US alone however
They [Britain] lost 13 colonies. They did, however, retain all their other holdings in North America, hence the existence of Canada.
Hey! Don't blame us for that! There's certainly no need to remind people that we're responsible, either..
Sorry, couldn't resist!
The original plea generates a bunch of political flames, numerous uninformed and/or useless responses and some vague calls for the use of Ham Radio - A wikipedia entry?...what are they going to do, go into the electronics shop and purchase a Kenwood/Icom/Yaseu etc. walkie talkie? Get real people. The state is bashing heads and this is the best you can do? Contemplate your own lack of knowledge and its impact on you if the same occurred in your country. Before anyone starts recommending any "solutions" they should consider what a severe beating, long imprisonment, torture etc. would be like and the possibility that light-hearted advice might result in same. I feel genuine empathy for the Iranian people. My recommended solution to oppressed individuals is lay low and get out of the country when the possible.
Wifi computer networks can operate in ad-hoc which allows WiFi enabled devices to communicate directly with each other without needing an access point/base station. When operating in ad-hoc mode all wireless devices within range can be discovered and communicate in peer-to-peer fashion.
All wireless adapters on the ad-hoc network must use the same SSID and the same channel number. Ad hoc networks a great when needing to build a small, all-wireless LAN quickly. You can configure "add-hoc" network mode through the network configuration in Control panel.
Read the following for detailed descriptions of what to do.
Configuring an ad-hoc Wifi network with Windows XP
Configuring an ad-hoc Wifi network with Windows Vista
I didn't bother to read this, but Iran roxxxors! I hate facebook and anyone who wants to get rid of it is 100% compatible with me!
Get real friends!
That's gonna go real well
Yep, we really swept up Iraq and Afghanistan.
This is the same Iranian administration that our shithead president wants to speak face to face with. Yea. Let me know how that works out for you.
Most of the former soviet bloc countries in Eastern Europe now have a convertible currency, freedom of speech, freedom to leave the country, freedom to take their money or assets with them, freedom to elect new leaders, freedom of worship, membership of the EU... But apart from that, things have not changed at all.
Paul "Say no to feeping creaturism"
Re: setting up a hope network to access restricted sites in Iran: Simply sign up for an openvpn account and you'll bypass the government mandated isp filtering. strongvpn.com has the best openvpn service imo.
In Cuba, I believe they have been using a "sneakernet" to distribute information discreetly. It's high latency, but also high bandwidth and hard to detect or snoop. Another advantage: it's basically drag-and-drop simple.
1) Get a bunch of USB thumb drives
2) Put text files, photos, videos, or whatever on them
3) (Optional) Encrypt them
4) Pass them from person to person, copying them as needed
No transmissions to intercept, no technical expertise necessary. All you need is are the drives and a pair of sneakers to walk to your neighbor's house.
Not exactly ideal, but it has some advantages.
This is when a truly disconnected mesh network would have tremendous value; just buy a couple of truckloads of Meraki nodes and setup a really independent internet network...
Only needs POTS and modems. Works unless the government wants to shut down the whole land-line phone network.
Well, apparently, you only have to fool the majority of people for a little while.
I am currently in Nicaragua, came for a week-long stay for a regional Free Software encounter. I have been there just for a couple of days, but... Well, this is a country that became marxist in 1979 and went back to neoliberalism in 1989. I met several Nicaraguans during the last 10 years, and they mostly spoke very fondly about their Revolution. And now, that Frente Sandinista led by Daniel Ortega is back in power (although in a very different way, criticized by many of their hard-liners), people really feel hope for changing. There is much talk about the ALBA (the Venezuela-led Latin American Bolivarian Alternative), and... well, I am very surprised of what I see. For good.
"A transit shift of this magnitude may indicate that something (administrative, or physical) has affected Iran's connection to the submarine cables running east and west â" not a total outage, but some kind of significant impairment." well yea that sounds like an authoritative manipulation to me. Tensions mounting with both N.Korea and Iran (nevermind China for now), an borderline economic crisis, an over extended U.S. military in a war with no possible positive outcome except for the exploitation of a people and their natural resources (oh, and the positioning of a "true" democracy in the middle east that will never take form). Meanwhile U.S. politicians can barely appease their sensationalist media, let alone the citizens, who all want something for nothing, even if it means taking from the person next to them. I consider myself a pretty rational and calm individual. I served honorably in the U.S. military, I went to college and have a good paying job and a comfortable life. Am I the irrational one to say that that I feel stuck in a leaderless situation, part of a hopelessly flawed system of systems that is doomed to fail and spiraling out of any form of regulation or control? Am I wrong to think that reform alone cannot fix a fundamental flaw in the various infrastructures that make up our country? Am I the only one that sees mass panic growing in a nation full of self-serving ignorant hedonists, who would like nothing more than to pretend like 'this' (or that) isn't happening? Perhaps I should just post some pictures of cute fluffy animals, watch my favorite tv shows on-demand, spend more money on entertainment, food and libations, regurgitate my superficial knowledge of the issues as seen on tv, dance and sing and skip because tomorrow is a bright, new day. Or maybe I can quasi-involve myself by commenting on threads, blogging, twitting, and texting with others. Maybe the best form of involvement for me, as a member of a mass crowd, is to speculate, raise suspicion, form unsubstantiated opinions and present them as fact, get others riled up, scare people, so I don't feel alone and become the 1 in 10 pseudo-expert who doesn't agree -- after all, building a platform on sensational conjecture, in opposition to mainstream sensationalism, is truely the American way (as evidence from this sensational conjecture). (I really hope someone detects my sarcasm)
Why did slashdot decide to stop giving karma for "funny"? GP is a prime example of why that policy distorts the rating system.
Let me guess... you're not actually a member of the military, and by "we" you mean "some other poor sap". Sure, why not. We only spent a trillion freakin' dollars on Iraq, and got thousands of our people killed... and put the new government firmly under control of... yes, Iran. And Iran only has like 6x the population of Iraq, so sure... why don't "we" go right ahead and invade there too? And we can just sort of conquer the entire rest of the "radical Islamic Middle East" as a sort of sideline.
The capacity for some folks to advocate for spending other people's money, and getting other people killed, for the sake of feeling more manly, never ceases to amaze me.
...ahmedinajad getting 55% vote in azerbaijani parts of iran means barack obama getting 55%+ vote in any part of redneck midwest with little black population.
In /my/ midwestern redneck state, he did at least get more than 50%. (Indiana)
May IRAN Live Long :)
Hey, here's a seemingly simple answer. Check out Opera Unite:
http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/an-introduction-to-opera-unite/
From what I understand, it basically runs a web server when you run Opera. One of the applications is a chat app. So anyone in Iran that's trying to organize could potentially use this. It is alpha quality so maybe save the chat pages locally from time to time. I have yet to try it, but it might just work. Good luck!