Iran Developing 'Halal' Domestic Intranet 248
An anonymous reader writes "The WSJ reports that Iran is beginning a crackdown on Internet use by its citizens, creating new blocks against foreign content and stepping up surveillance of browsing habits. Internet cafes in Iran have 15 days to set up security cameras and start collecting information on customers, and people are finding it increasingly difficult to use social networking sites. The new restrictions are likely being implemented now to head off dissent and protests about the upcoming parliamentary elections. According to the article, 'The network slowdown likely heralds the arrival of an initiative Iran has been readying—a "halal" domestic intranet that it has said will insulate its citizens from Western ideology and un-Islamic culture, and eventually replace the Internet. This week's slowdown came amid tests of the Iranian intranet, according to domestic media reports that cited a spokesman for a union of computer-systems firms. He said the intranet is set to go live within a few weeks.'"
Re:Iran continues its death spiral... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Iran continues its death spiral... (Score:2, Informative)
Why is Iran doing this to itself?
Because the theocrats are in control. The Mullahs, if you will.
Behave yourself, the sanctions will come off, and we can all get along. Aggressive posturing, locking your people off from the world, and developing variants of nuclear technology best able to produce weapons grade material... what is the point of all this?
The point is, as with all despotic regimes, control of "their people." There's a major flaw here in failing to take into the lengths to which a despotic regime (theocrat or not) will go to in holding on to power and eliminating dissent. Iran is following in the long line of despots before them - Castro, Kim Jong Il, Mao, Pol Pot, Genghis Khan, Stalin, Lenin, and of course the one they revere most, Mohammed.
This isn't to say that there aren't good people who happen to be Muslim in the world, or even to say that most Muslims are violent. But Mohammed created a religion that divides the world into "us" and "not-us" (dar al-Islam and dar al-Harb) with a primary mode of interaction consisting of antagonism and violence, and that's the perspective by which the Iranian theocrats view anyone who isn't of their particular sect of Islam.
Re:Come on, elrous0 (Score:1, Informative)
The phase is more commonly "for all intents and purposes".
Re:Atheism (Score:4, Informative)
"Religion" in this context is just a means of control; you can't do that because God says so, you must do this because God says so and you can't question God's word so get off Facebook. I'm willing to bet that the Mullahs won't restrict themselves to this "halal" Irannet, no, they'll need to be able to check on all that corrupting, un-islamic content to make sure it's still out there and all corrupty - you know, for the good of the people.
Religion is a tool, it can be used for good or evil, help people or harm them, but in general when people in power get hold of it they move firmly into the "harm" category.
Re:Okay, that's the U.S. But what about Iran? (Score:5, Informative)
why is Iran an enemy of the US?
Might have something to do with this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_Iran [wikipedia.org]
Also, this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax [wikipedia.org]
This too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Revolution [wikipedia.org]
Re:Okay, that's the U.S. But what about Iran? (Score:5, Informative)
Did you read a wikipedia article three months ago while half asleep, or is this some sort of elaborate troll? You're going to need to cite your theories. The Palestinians never migrated anywhere, they're the de-facto indiginous people of the region. If I said that the Aborigines migrated to Melbourne from Singapore after the British colonized Australia, my statement would be about as factual as yours. The Palestinians were part of the Ottoman empire and had inhabited the region for the last 1000+ years.
What on earth is this about "we'd rather not have [Israel] take over the middle east" -- the reason Israel is armed to the teeth is because the whole region rejects british imperialism and they would have pushed the jews back out long ago if they didn't have western backing (foreign aid + arms deals) to stay in the area. The jews were attacked as soon as they set foot in the region, this isn't a new thing, and they were aware they weren't wanted there. Go check out "The British Empire in Colour", there's some great original footage of jewish immigrants building forts on their newly settled land to protect themselves from the locals. It looks like something out of a British Colonists vs American Indians documentary. The Palestinians didn't want them there to begin with, and still don't want them there. The British were the ones with the bright idea to agree to displacing the locals and letting westerners colonize the area. Somehow the US got dragged in to it.