Is any of this reaching regular Iranians?

Discussion in 'Iran' started by Unregistered, Jun 25, 2009.

  1. I know there's a ton of information here and other places giving advice to the protesters, but can anyone verify just how many people in Iran are getting the info? Sure, if you're savvy enough to look for information about how to hide your online identity and organize protests, you'll find it, but what about the people who just turn on the computer and give up when they see they only get 3 bytes a second? And what about older citizens or other potential reformists who don't even bother looking for an outside news source? It seems like they're the innocent victims most likely to unknowingly perpetuate trouble by falling for propaganda and outing protesters and defending the false righteousness of the regime. Is there anything people inside or outside of Iran can do to make information (the TRUTH) widespread enough that everyone can see it whether they want to or not? In my opinion, that is your definite key to victory.
  2. Lynx Member

    ~ 4% of the visitors are connecting from the iranian net space, taking into consideration that many are / should be proxied, you can easily double that figure.
  3. Okay, but that doesn't mean anything if this site only gets 100 hits a day (hyperbole). I ask all this because it seems like the general public opinion in Iran is still pretty divided, and people unaware of their own triumphs continue to lose hope when they really shouldn't.
  4. The regime is doing a great job of spreading misinformation. It's turning people against each other as people have nothing else to go by and some of their reports are convincing. The best thing for Anon to do is infiltrate IRIB, IRNA and PressTV to stop them from spreading misinfo.
  5. Easier said than done. That sounds like something Iranians will have to take care of on the ground. Supply (or flood) them with false information that they'll be tempted to broadcast in hopes of a backfire, or, more directly, destroy/sabotage/remove their ability to broadcast in the first place. Then there's always the safer option of spreading true information on your own through homemade newsletters/bulletins/broadcasts. Maybe some pirate radio if you think you can get away with it.
  6. atmasabr Member

    They heard about Obama's speech the other day.
  7. Cattypuss Member

    Well then, if they heard about Obama's speech, that will tell them the outside world knows exactlywhat is going on inside that unhappy nation. Here in Australia our national networks broadcasted mobile phone footage of the regimes revolutionary guard goons, bashing people unconscious, with reports from an hysterical girl that they were throwing people off bridges. What are world leaders doing about this barbaric regime? To date all they have done is to 'tut tut tut' about the whole affair and wring their hands in indignation. What is that fat overblown entity known as the UN doing? A big fat nothing! It's time decent governments co-ordinated their efforts in dealing with recalistrant regimes - especially dangerous ones that brutalise their own citizens.

    As a westerner I am ashamed of what we have become in the past few decades - we have simply lost our nerve. Our enemies know it too. Certainly we don't have leaders like those of the past. Leaders like Churchill and Roosevelt. Those guys had what it takes to inspire a nation to rally against evil. Especially England, when it's back was against the wall with the Nazi blockade of their shipping lanes and their cities at the mercy of the German Luftwaffe. Briton was on her own for two years - Americans didn't enter the war until late 1941 with the bombing of Pearl Harbour.

    The danger now for Iranian protestors is this:

    Today America has lost three of it's entertainment icons. Farrah Fawcett, Michael Jackson and Jeff Goldblum. Knowing America (and even my own country for that matter), our media will obsess for days over the deaths of these people. And as much as the passing of these three people matter. Iran and it's people's courageous battle to free itself from tyranny will simply fade from the news.......that is how shallow we have become.
  8. Jeff Goldblum isn't dead.. the reports are false.. change that to Ed McMahon, Farrah Fawcet, and Michael Jackson.

    The WHO doesn't change the fact that what you said is true -- the situation in Iran is gonna be fighting to get time under the spotlight because the media will be dealing with the deaths of these people.
  9. Dangerous-Boy Member

    I really don't understand how MJ dying takes over all coverage instead of the iranian protests. Even the socialist BBC are reporting more about the celebreties than on iran which is far more important.
  10. Cattypuss Member

    Sadly, I understand perfectly - our media use these distractions in order to avoid the harsh realities that beset this world. They are addicted to the media cycle - and as a society, so are we. The West dangerously ignored the rise of Hitler for years....and 50 million people payed a terrible price for it. We are pandering to despotic regimes so that we can continue living our comfortable lives undistracted. We are in effect asleep at the wheel. While we continue with our daily work, attend barbecues, holidays, buying the latest plasma TV's, the leaders of these countries are cemeting their hold over their beleagured populaces and extending their influences on other nations. Unless we wake up to ourselves we will see a repeat of 65 years ago. It isn't helping that our politicans lack intestinal fortitide either.
  11. atmasabr Member

    Now that's a little unfair. We (or more accurately, our parents and grandparents) weren't so great back then, either. Roosevelt and Churchill may have had what it takes, but they both also had nations whose people did not want to get involved. Churchill was in opposition for a long time: Neville Chamberlain's appeasement prevailed. I mean you don't get much more irresolute than that. That was a disaster. And yes, Americans were divided on (and I think more against than for) entering WW-II until Pearl Harbor.

    We are not dealing with a World War situation here. We are not dealing with a genocide. And the way the West is dealing with Iran's brutal crackdown here is not through appeasement.
  12. Cattypuss Member

    In some aspects you are right - these days we have become pretty much expert at ignoring genocide. Cambodia and Rwanda have come to signify how utterly useless the UN has become since the slaughter of european Jews. The Iranian government my not be engaging in wholesale genocide. However, the gross misuse of it's youth during the Iraq/Iran war comes pretty close. This regime demands utter compliance to it's ideology or else you will see yourself inside one of their feared prisons. Many who enter are never seen by their families again. And although the West is not dealing with Iran through appeasement - it is not cutting off the lifelines that keep that miserable religious (and I use the term religious loosely) theoracy in power either. Unfortunately our intentions are honourable - but countries like Russia & China constantly undermine our efforts to give people the tools of self determination. Of course they have their own nefarious agenda when it comes to the gee, I wonder what that could be? Leaders like Mugabe, Kim il Jong and the Burmese Junta must be laughing themselves silly.

  13. Dangerous-Boy Member

    well, look at the backlash of invading Iraq. the Iraqis hated the US for liberating them. It was a great recruiting tool for al queda. US did even get the spoils. All the oil went to Red China. Red China basically funded the war, and the US lost focus in afghanistan, drained the economy, and kept the bible thumpers in power.

    I suppose it did get Obama elected though. now the US can get highspeed rail....if it had the money.:cool: not to mention pay back red china.

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins