Iran May Shut Down Internet During Election 234
daveschroeder writes "'The Iranian government might block private access to the Internet for the general legislative election on March 14, two Iranian news outlets reported Monday. In 2006, the authorities banned download speeds on private computers faster than 128 kilobytes per second. The government also uses sophisticated filtering equipment to block hundreds of Web sites and blogs that it considers religiously or politically inappropriate. Many bloggers have been jailed in the past years, and dozens of Web sites have been shut down.' It would appear that Iran's own government is more a threat to the nation's internet connectivity than the fragility of the undersea cable network."
Some info (Score:1, Informative)
Re:A few more notes: time for perspective? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Absolutely atrocious. (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/02/us/politics/02obama.html [nytimes.com]
As well as a speech he made last week that I cannot find online at the moment. He said 'greatly reduce' at first, then alluded that the US should eliminate them to 'lead the way'.
Then again, posting truth gets you modded as Flamebait around here.
-1: horseshit (Score:5, Informative)
This is bullshit. Hillary has been prowar, except when campaigning. The Clinton administration had a couple war efforts. Obama's foreign policy guy is Brzezinski, who isn't specifically anti-war. Only when it's a terrible, terrible idea.
Can we not mod up baseless political bullshit from either side? Thanks.
Re:A few more notes: time for perspective? (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.historyguy.com/no-fly_zone_war.html [historyguy.com]
WMDs were found in Iraq, "although not of a militarily significant capability" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction [wikipedia.org]
Why invade Iran? There are other options.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_bomb [wikipedia.org]
Someone needs to be in the mideast to oppose the Iran theocracy. Replacing a secular dictator with a pro-US secular democracy would be nice long term, if it works out that way...
What's the big deal? (Score:3, Informative)
They make contradictory claims about why, but in the end, it is a one day inconvenience for internet users. The most sinister reason I can think of for them wanting to shut it down is to prevent riots caused by posts alleging election improprieties (real or imagined). Really sinister.
Am I missing something? What's the big deal?
Re:A few more notes: time for perspective? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:A few more notes: time for perspective? (Score:4, Informative)
Need we go over why the United Nations is an unreliable source here?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil-for-Food_Programme#Abuse [wikipedia.org]
How long was it going on? We don't know, but it makes anything the UN says regarding Iraq highly suspect.
Re:A few more notes: time for perspective? (Score:2, Informative)