Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Iran Cuts Internet Access and Threatens Telegram Following Mass Protests (bbc.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the three-day-protests dept.

Long-time Slashdot reader cold fjord writes: As seething discontent has boiled over in Iran leading to mass protests, protesters have taken to the streets and social media to register their discontent... The government has been closing schools and shutting down transportation.

Now, as mass protests in Iran go into their third day there are reports that internet access is being cut in cities with protests occurring. Social media has been a tool for documenting the protests and brutal crackdowns against them. Iran previously cut off internet access during the Green Movement protests following the 2009 elections. At the same time the Iranian government is cutting internet access they have called on Telegram, reportedly used by more than 40 million Iranians, to close the channels used by protesters. Telegram is now closing channels used by the protesters while Telegram itself may be shut down in Iran.

9 of 156 comments (clear)

  1. Watch Iran and ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... Brexit and learn, America!

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  2. Iran Cuts Internet Access and Threatens Telegram by Hognoxious · · Score: 5, Funny

    Threatens telegram? Something like this:

    Stop rioting stop if you don't there'll be bother stop
    END OF MESSAGE 53 LETTERS 17 CENTS

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  3. Leave them alone by FeelGood314 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Iran was once a democracy until they elected the "wrong" leader and America and Britain fixed it by putting in the Shah. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    As long as the rank and file soldiers and police don't feel that the internal turmoil in Iran won't be exploited by outside forces they likely will tolerate peaceful protests. There is a good chance the Iranian leadership won't order any kind of crack down for fear the police won't obey them. If the rest of the worlds leaders can resist opening their mouths there is a good chance Iran can be another success story like Tunisia.

    1. Re:Leave them alone by cold+fjord · · Score: 4, Informative

      Leave them alone . . . . Iran was once a democracy until they elected the "wrong" leader and America and Britain fixed it by putting in the Shah. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Unfortunately your history is a bit off. The Shah was in power before the Prime Minister's coup, and was in power after the British & American counter-coup. You may note this section of the Wikipedia article:

      Execution of Operation Ajax
      The official pretext for the start of the coup was Mossadegh's decree to dissolve Parliament, giving himself and his cabinet complete power to rule, while effectively stripping the Shah of his powers.[10][11][12] It resulted in him being accused of giving himself "total and dictatorial powers."

      The "pretext" has the "unfortunate" quality of being true and understated in Wikipedia. The Prime Minister overthrew the Iranian democratic government, and effectively the Shah who then fled the country. The Prime Minister took the power of ruling by decree, in other words a dictator. After a quick look it appears that the Wikipedia article fails to mention that there was a fraudulent election staged to justify all of this. The Time magazine article that I saw on it mentioned that Iran's Prime Minister received a higher percentage vote than either Hitler or Stalin received in their elections. I wonder what the Farsi word for chutzpah is? Anyway, the counter-coup restore the Shah to power, it wasn't what put him in power to begin with.

      As long as the rank and file soldiers and police don't feel that the internal turmoil in Iran won't be exploited by outside forces they likely will tolerate peaceful protests. There is a good chance the Iranian leadership won't order any kind of crack down for fear the police won't obey them. If the rest of the worlds leaders can resist opening their mouths there is a good chance Iran can be another success story like Tunisia.

      We can expect the Iranian government to be at least as violent as they were in 2009 when they unleashed the Revolutionary Guards, Basij paramilitary units, and Lebas Shakhsi paramilitaries on the Green Movement protesters. Those forces are loyal to the Iranian revolutionary Islamist regime as are willing to attack civilians in the streets to maintain the regime.

      It appears to be starting now.

      Two reportedly killed after Iranian forces 'open fire on protestors' as demonstrations continue for third day

      Two people are understood to have been killed after Iranian security forces reportedly opened fire on anti-government demonstrators on Saturday as the largest protests seen in the country since 2009 continued for a third day. ...

      There is no knowing how this will turn out, but it may turn quite bloody. The Iranian revolutionary Islamist government won't go down peacefully.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    2. Re:Leave them alone by ilguido · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Leave them alone . . . . Iran was once a democracy until they elected the "wrong" leader and America and Britain fixed it by putting in the Shah. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Unfortunately your history is a bit off. The Shah was in power before the Prime Minister's coup, and was in power after the British & American counter-coup. You may note this section of the Wikipedia article:

      Execution of Operation Ajax The official pretext for the start of the coup was Mossadegh's decree to dissolve Parliament, giving himself and his cabinet complete power to rule, while effectively stripping the Shah of his powers.[10][11][12] It resulted in him being accused of giving himself "total and dictatorial powers."

      The "pretext" has the "unfortunate" quality of being true and understated in Wikipedia. The Prime Minister overthrew the Iranian democratic government, and effectively the Shah who then fled the country. The Prime Minister took the power of ruling by decree, in other words a dictator. After a quick look it appears that the Wikipedia article fails to mention that there was a fraudulent election staged to justify all of this. The Time magazine article that I saw on it mentioned that Iran's Prime Minister received a higher percentage vote than either Hitler or Stalin received in their elections. I wonder what the Farsi word for chutzpah is? Anyway, the counter-coup restore the Shah to power, it wasn't what put him in power to begin with.

      Almost true, that is completely false. From the same wikipedia article:

      the Shah began to take an increasingly active role in politics. He quickly organized the Iran Constituent Assembly to amend the constitution to increase his powers. He established the Senate of Iran which had been a part of the Constitution of 1906 but had never been convened. The Shah had the right to appoint half the senators and he chose men sympathetic to his aims. Mossadegh thought this increase in the Shah's political power was not democratic; he believed that the Shah should "reign, but not rule" in a manner similar to Europe's constitutional monarchies. Led by Mossadegh, political parties and opponents of the Shah's policies banded together to form a coalition known as the National Front. Oil nationalization was a major policy goal for the party.
      By 1951, the National Front had won majority seats for the popularly elected Majlis (Parliament of Iran).

      Basically the Shah created an upper house of the Parliament that was completely loyal to him, then a lot of people in Iran got upset for this fact and finally they elected Mossadegh who opposed that novelty. That's also why he was thinking of dissolving the Parliament: the unelected Shah controlled the upper house through unlected members. That was not very democratic to the eyes of Mossadegh and many Iranians alike.
      The real problem, though, was the oil nationalization part. That got the US and UK to act: you can butcher your people all you want (like Saudi Arabia and Bahrain do), but don't touch our precious! End of story.

      Then again, the majority of the people in Iran, like in every Middle East country, is made up of islamist blockheads, so, even if the ayatollah gets deposed, the end result would not be better (and probably much worse). But that's not what matters to the U.S.

  4. Re:It only takes one generation for freedom to die by harperska · · Score: 5, Interesting

    North Korea won't fall until China lets it.

  5. Mesh networking by hackwrench · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Mesh networks implemented properly are much harder to shut down.

  6. The MSM in the West not reporting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While the corrupted Iranian regime cutting access to the Net for fear that the protest will spread, the Western MSM is cooperating with the Iranian regime by doing everything they can to SUPPRESS THE NEWS !

    Do we need 'mass media' when it is part of a censorship cartel?

  7. Re:CNN viewers know nothing about this. by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Informative

    You know it's been going on since the 27/28th right? CNN reported nothing on it until yesterday. It was covered heavily in SEA media(JP, S.Korea, and Singapore) in both local and english dailies though. They have a point, these are major protests and it took CNN 2 days or call it 3 days before they reported on it, but they were talking damn near non-stop on all of their channels about that white truck. Hell it was the top thing on CNN while I was waiting for the train to pick me up on the 28th in Tokyo.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...