Iranian Crackdown Goes Global
An anonymous reader writes "Tehran's leadership faces its biggest crisis since it first came to power in 1979, as Iranians at home and abroad attack its legitimacy in the wake of June's allegedly rigged presidential vote. An opposition effort, the 'Green Movement,' is gaining a global following of regular Iranians who say they never previously considered themselves activists. The regime has been cracking down hard at home. And now, a Wall Street Journal investigation shows, it is extending that crackdown to Iranians abroad as well. Part of the effort involves tracking the Facebook, Twitter and YouTube activity of Iranians around the world, and identifying them at opposition protests abroad. People who criticize Iran's regime online or in public demonstrations are facing threats intended to silence them."
I know this sounds odd, but it makes we want to get a million people who are not Iranians and put enough information on our Facebook pages to at least slow the Iranian govt. down, by making them wade through it.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
the best thing to do is to wait it out. this is the first time that the new generation is old enough to get involved in politics, and they made a very strong statement. over 70% of the country is under 30 due to the iran-iraq war, which basically wiped out a whole generation. this government is a legacy outdated establishment that is totally incompatible with Iran. The country was run by a foreign minority of non-Persians who used religion to control a country of children. Well, the kids grew up and they will rebel. Iran has a strong history and culture, and is too mature to put up with this crap for much longer.
My name is M. Ahmadinejad, Jr. I think Iran and it's Government are extremely corrupt, anti-Islamic, and a horrible place. The Iranian people deserve better than the lying cheating sack of shits that run the government - especially, the Mullahs - at least that's what my Dad told me.
It's NOT me! It's the meds! I'm on 1000mg of Fukitol.
called iRan
When Iran cracked down on their citizens last time, during this summer's protests, Western companies such as Siemens and Nokia provided them the technology to do this.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124562668777335653.html
I also highly doubt they're building massive databases with worldwide surveillance on Iranian citizens -- for the purposes of going after their relatives within Iran -- with their own home-brew technologies.
This takes some scary stuff some Iranian University students could not simply hash together -- things like deep-packet inspection of all internet traffic and massive data-mining algorithms in the scope of millions upon millions of megabytes.
What all this obsession about who actually won the Iranian presidential vote masks is IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO IS PRESIDENT OF IRAN. Sorry for the all caps but that really needs emphasis. The Supreme Leader holds all control over foreign policy decisions, security and so forth even nuclear power/weapons. I mean come on you can't even run for President of Iran with out approval of the Supreme Leader. Ahmadinejad only has control over domestic policy and even then as long as the Supreme Leader approves. He is there as a bargaining chip, if he attracts too much heat internationally or domestically he will be thrown under the Revolutionary bus so that the Ayatolla can find someone else to implement his policies.
every anarchist is a baffled dictator. Benito_Mussolini
The invasion of Iraq may have helped a little in that way. As you said, many Iranians were extremely worried that the US would use Iraq as a stopping point to invade their country. What's more, they saw a demonstration of the US's true power, that an army which could hold them at bay (remember the Iran-Iraq war) was swept aside in a matter of weeks. As you said, there was heavy propaganda related to this at home and abroad.
Ok however, the threat didn't materialize. The US stayed in Iraq and did nothing towards Iran. Even when there were some fluff ups over things like a boat supposedly drifting in to Iranian waters, nothing happened.
What something like that does is cause people to question the propaganda. They start to say "You know, maybe the US really isn't bad like they are saying, they haven't made a move towards Iran at all." The government keeps the propaganda going, and yet the propaganda shows an increasing disconnect with reality. The US elects a new leader that tries to engage them in discourse and still the propaganda continues.
Then of course there's the blatantly rigged election and what does the US do? Nothing militarily, and the citizens speak up in support for Iran.
That kind of stuff can lead to people really questioning the government line. The US quite clearly has the ability to crush their military and destroy their cities if they wish, yet there has been no move to do so. That tells them that what they've been hearing is not the truth.
By 'earn it' do you mean 'achieve it through struggle'? If yes, does that mean that every country that achieved democracy peacefully has no pride in their liberty? Also, does 'pride in liberty' affect some property of a democracy, like its stability? I'm asking because there are lots of examples of countries which did not have to struggle for liberty (Canada, for example), or whose people suffered during history but not because of a struggle for liberty (like Japan) and now enjoy stable, inclusive democracies. These countries have pride in their liberty (depending on how you define it). I don't think bloody revolution is the only path to democracy.
What I appreciate about this situation is that the Iranian people are standing up for them selves. Makes me want to help them. Something along the lines of supporting a justified patriot.
Standing up for themselves like they did in 1953 or in 1979?
It's meaningless to be glad that "the Iranian people are standing up for them selves" without looking at why they're doing it and how Iran got there. The Iranian people had a secular, democratically elected government and the CIA overthrew it because the Brits were unhappy that their oil fields got nationalized. Iran is arguably a virulently anti-western throwback because of 30 years of sanctions slowly strangling the country.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
The GP was a little of in the value of liberty, but he's on the right track.
While your example, Canada, didn't struggle to have liberty, they did earn it. As a people, they got together and chose to live in a free, open nation. Put another way, no one gave it to them. Which is the problem with Iraq. The US (my home) is trying to give it to them. That doesn't take away from the value of any such liberty, but it does bring into question the staying power of it.
While I don't agree that the majority of Iranians support their government, a large enough minority does to make a quick transition to some type of truly representative governing impossible without violence.
What I absolutely agree with is the idea that the US, the UN and everyone else needs to stay out of the way and not become a distraction or 'common enemy'. The greatest good we can do in America is to be less dependent on oil, lowering the price. Right now a little bit of isolationism would help force them to get their own house in order. In time.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
How is this bigot not modded troll/flamebait?
To turn a blind eye to murder due to the victims ideology, race, or religion is reprehensible.
Imagine the year is 1941:
A few attacks on individuals, especially those who hail from an enemy culture and religion , are not nearly enough to bother with invading Germany. Real Americans aren't Jews and don't care what happens to them any more than we'd care if some thoughtful soul was murdering Japs.
Does the above seem any different?
there were two schools of thought in iran since the 1979 revolution:
1. its a democracy. the whole supreme leader bs is just for window dressing
2. its a theocracy. the whole elections bs is just to appease the crowds
this central crisis in the iranian government seems to have been resolved in june 2009, with iran going the theocratic route, which is the substance of your comment
but its actually going a third route: military dictatorship, with the supreme leadership bs as window dressing AND the elections bs as crowd appeasement
the supreme leader is actually now hostage of the elite revolutionary guard, he has no real power. ahmadinejad is an old hand of the revolutionary guard. watch the next leader of iran to be handpicked from the revolutionary guard and "elected" by the people and "approved" by the ayatollah. now, the whole of the complex iranian government apparatus is under their sway and influence. the central unanswered schism between theocracy and democracy in the previous complex government arrangement has meant someone had to fill the power vacuum, and it has been filled: by the military
either way, the crowd appeasement obviously isn't working. the people of iran are pissed, and as in any country where the will of the people is not addressed, the government's illegitimacy grows over time, as the agenda of the government and the agenda of the common man grow further apart. this will reach a breaking point. could take years or decades, with plenty of suffering during that time. throw in nuclear weapons for fun
but until such time as iran falls yet again into revolution due to not being a democracy, iran is now a military dictatorship. not officially of course. much like north korea is officially the DEMOCRATIC people's republic of korea. yeah, north korea is a democracy (roll's eyes)
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
When in the last century has the US actually tried not interfering with *anything*?
Right now we are doing exactly that, bending over backwards in fact to say just about nothing about the protests or questioning whatsoever the legitimacy of the current regime in Iran.
And what does it get us? The exact same rhetoric they have always used. When U.S. involvement they complain about is imaginary continuing to not get involved can hardly stop the complaints. Back in WW2 the soviet line is we were causing the potato famine by dropping evil U.S. Potato Bugs from Colorado on the fields. In reality they had stripped away all sorts of trees which meant the birds moved out which meant bugs flourished...
You can never appease a chronic complainer. You can only stop the complaining.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Argh! Fuck off already. This Ron Paulian junk pisses me off more than anything. People who didn't know shit about Iran just a couple of years ago by learning one fact about Iran's history think they know what Iranians think of west.
The coup is FUCKING FORGOTTEN, amerite?! The real people of Iran have always blamed it almost exclusively on Britain and Ayatollah Kashani; US was and is considered a mere agent of the British perpetrators. Regardless, all of this is gone and past history. We don't hold never-ending grudges.
The current regime and it's "President" Ahmadinejad are followers of the same ideologies as Ayatollah Kashani.
We are not virulently Anti-American. I remember when Iraq was attacked people on buses and cabs talked about how lucky Iraqis are that they are getting rid of Saddam and we're stuck with the shitty regime. They wished US attacked Iran instead, yes that might seem unbelievable to followers of his majesty Ron Paul. Of course that wish changed when bombs started going off on a daily bases, US decided to stay and everything went to hell. That is basically one of the reasons Iran helped with making Iraq unstable to avoid any such wishes by people to get real.
You should turn the TV off, get off the couch and take a trip to Iran to understand how Iranians not only not hate, but most of them like Americans.
And lastly on sanctions, again nobody blames US. Khomeini has a famous quote that kinda translates to "US can't do shit to us". Well, the current state of Iran shows that he was very wrong, and we blame him for this mess. He created an enemy and the enemy acted like one.
You said "arguably", so here's the argument.
There is absolutely no evidence that the election was rigged. Ahaminejad is very popular and has previously won election with big margins.
There is circumstantial evidence, and then there's the way the Ahaminejad and his supporters have acted. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth. This regime seems to be like the ZANU PF in Zimbabwe. Violent, mad, megalomaniacs.
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
Respectfully, I think justification for Iran's nuclear program is a crock of shit. Iran has roughly 10% of the world's total proven petroleum reserves. Iran is the world's fourth largest oil producer and is OPEC's second-largest producer after Saudi Arabia. At 2006 rates of production, Iran's oil reserves would last 98 years if no new oil was found.
Their problem is that Iran has one of the most inefficient economies in the world. It has a large public sector, with an estimated 60% of the economy directly controlled and centrally planned by the state. The combined budgets of the religious foundations [Bonyads] are said to make up as much as half that of the central government. Combination of price controls and subsidies, particularly on food and energy, continues to weigh down the economy, and contraband, administrative controls, widespread corruption, and other rigidities undermine the potential for private sector-led growth. High oil prices in recent years have enabled Iran to amass nearly US$ 97 billion in foreign exchange reserves. Yet this increased revenue has not eased economic hardships, which include double-digit unemployment and inflation. References [1] [2]
I would suggest that Iran has every opportunity in the world of becoming a prosperous, modern nation if they simply reformed and diversified their economy over the next 50 years. Nuclear power is the last thing they need right now. Once they achieve a modern, diversified, efficient economy, energy technologies will have advanced to the point that there will be a number of options they will be able to take advantage of, such as enhanced oil recovery techniques. Even now, there may exist other options they don't appear to have considered, such a tidal/wave/thermalcline power from the Persian Gulf or perhaps geothermal, solar or wind energy production.
In my opinion this mad rush to develop nuclear technology makes no sense from an energy perspective, when their top priority should be economic reform. In just a few short years, if they went at that goal with the same determination that they pursue nuclear technology now, the Iranian people could enjoy prosperity and a bright future rather than the double-digit inflation they suffer now.