Iran blocks Facebook

[Revy]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090524/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_facebook

TEHRAN, Iran – Iran's decision to block access to Facebook — less than three weeks before nationwide elections — drew sharp criticism Sunday from a reformist opposition hoping to mobilize the youth vote and unseat President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
The decision, critics said, forces Iranians to rely on state-run media and other government sources ahead of the June 12 election.
It also appeared to be a direct strike at the youth vote that could pose challenges to Ahmadinejad's re-election bid.
More than half of Iran's population was born after the 1979 Islamic Revolution and young voters make up a huge bloc — which helped former reformist President Mohammad Khatami to back-to-back victories in 1997 and 2001 but failed to rally strongly behind Ahmadinejad's opponent, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, four years ago.
Young voters are now strongly courted by the main reformist candidate, Mir Hossein Mousavi, as the possible swing factor.
"Every single media outlet that is seen as competition for Ahmadinejad is at risk of being closed," said Shahab Tabatabaei, a top aide for Mousavi, the leading reformist candidate. "Placing limits on the competition is the top priority of the government."
Tabatabaei said the Facebook block was "a swift reaction" to a major pro-Mousavi rally Saturday in a Tehran sports stadium that included an appearance by Khatami and many young people waving green banners and scarves — the symbolic color of the Mousavi campaign.
Iranian authorities often block specific Web sites and blogs considered critical of the Islamic regime, but critics of the latest decision said the loss of Facebook — and possibly other Web sites popular with reformists — means Iranians must rely on the government for information.
"Facebook is one of the only independent sources that the Iranian youth could use to communicate," said Mohammed Ali Abtahi, a former vice president and now adviser to another pro-reform candidate, Mahdi Karroubi, a former parliament speaker.
During the last presidential race in 2005, information about rallies and campaign updates were sent by text message. In recent years, political blogs by Iranians in the country and abroad have grown sharply. Newcomers such as Twitter also are gaining in popularity.
Iranian officials did not comment on the reported block, but Facebook criticized the decision.
"We are disappointed to learn of reports that users in Iran may not have access to Facebook, especially at a time when voters are turning to the Internet as a source of information about election candidates and their positions," Elizabeth Linder, a spokeswoman for Facebook, said in an e-mailed statement following questions from The Associated Press.
"It is always a shame when a country's cultural and political concerns lead to limits being placed on the opportunity for sharing and expression that the Internet provides," she wrote.
Linder said the company generally does not give out details on the number of users in a given country, and could not say how many members Facebook has in Iran.

Mir Hossein Mousavi: his ideas and campaign (VIDEO) (http://irannegah.com/Video.aspx?id=1162)

[Revy]

Weekly Worker (http://www.cpgb.org.uk/worker/770/leader.html)


Leader remains supreme

The farce called Iran’s presidential election will be contested by four principal contenders, writes Yassamine Mather


Many western governments are pinning their hopes on the election in Iran of a more ‘moderate’ president and the US has delayed any negotiations until after the June 12 poll. Barack Obama, speaking on May 18, said he expected international talks with Iran - which would involve six countries, including the United States - to begin shortly after the elections.
Inside Iran, however, there seems to be little enthusiasm for this farce beyond the ruling circles. Most Iranians are well aware that the president, like all other ‘elected officials’ in the Islamic Republic of Iran, wields limited power. Iran’s supreme religious leader - currently ayatollah Ali Khamenei - is not just a figurehead, but the head of state and ‘guardian of the nation’.
The Iranian constitution calls for the Council of Guardians to be composed of six Islamic jurists “conscious of the present needs and the issues of the day” to be appointed by the supreme leader of Iran, and another six jurists “specialising in different areas of law, to be elected by the majlis [parliament] from among the Muslim jurists nominated by the Head of the Judicial Power”, who, in turn, is also appointed by the supreme leader.1
The preamble to the constitution is clear about the authority of the religious leader, the faqih. According to article 5, “The faqih is the just and pious jurist who is recognised by the majority of the people at any period as best qualified to lead the nation.” Articles 108 to 112 specify his qualifications and duties. The duties include making numerous appointments: jurists to the Council of Guardians; the chief judges of the judicial branch; the chief of staff of the armed forces; the commander of the Pasdaran (Islamic Revolutionary Guards); his personal representatives on the supreme defence council; and the commanders of the army, air force and navy, following their nomination by the supreme defence council. The faqih is also authorised to approve candidates for presidential elections. In addition, he is empowered to dismiss the president.2
If all this were not enough, the supreme leader often expresses his opinion about every aspect of the social, political and economic affairs of the country. During presidential and parliamentary elections he regularly declares his preferences, dismissing candidates and promoting his favourites. Modesty becomes our supreme leader - and he has chosen the appropriate name for his office’s website: www.leader.ir (http://www.leader.ir) (‘ir’ being the web suffix for Iran).
So let us be clear: contrary to the claims of the apologists of the Islamic Republic, a country where an unelected cleric monopolises executive, judicial and military power cannot be considered democratic by any stretch of imagination, and the forthcoming presidential elections are no more than a diversion, a hoax - indeed a mockery of an electoral process. Most Iranians will treat the whole thing with the contempt it deserves. However, as the British and world media will spend a lot of time and effort on this issue, it is necessary to deconstruct the electoral process and the candidates.
Every four years Iran goes through the process of electing a president. Although some women registered as candidates in the 2001 and 2005 presidential elections, they were later barred from running in the final contest - the constitution is clear that the president is chosen from “men” (the Arabic word rajol is used).
The unelected Council of Guardians has the role of ‘interpreting’ the constitution - including the gender of rajol! In the past it claimed that the absence of female candidates was due to their failure to meet minimum “standards”. It has been pointed out that these standards must be pretty low - after all, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was accepted as a candidate! There is speculation that this time the Council of Guardians might approve the candidacy of a rightwing conservative woman, Rafat Bayat. Of course, even if this happens, one can be sure that she is not going to be elected. Thirty years after Margaret Thatcher came to power, Iran’s rightwing clerics will show that they are rather less versatile than that bastion of British reactionary politics, the Conservative Party.
The four major candidates are Ahmadinejad, the incumbent; Mehdi Karroubi, a former Islamic majles speaker; Mir Hossein Mousavi, who was prime minister during the 1980s; and Mohsen Rezai, a former commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard. Previous presidential campaigns have yielded surprise results, precisely because in the structures of the religious state the presidency is not that significant. In previous elections neither Mohammed Khatami nor Ahmadinejad were considered front runners beforehand.

Mir Hossein Mousavi

Mousavi is supposed to be the best placed candidate for the ‘reformist’ wing of the Islamic Republic. Ayatollah Khatami, the last ‘reformist’ president, withdrew from the elections in his favour.

Mousavi is a painter and architect who served as the fifth and last prime minister of Iran from 1981 until 1989, when the post was abolished. He is apparently in favour of the ‘free flow of information’ and is well ahead of other candidates in using ‘modern’ election tactics. He appeared with his wife, Zahra Rahnavard, holding hands at the election registration commission’s offices.

However, before anyone gets too excited about the prospect of a Mousavi presidency, it is worth remembering that he was prime minister during the worst period of repression when thousands of socialists and communists were slaughtered, between 1981 and 1988. It is therefore ironic that the man many look forward to putting on trial for the mass execution of communist political prisoners has chosen a Fedayeen song, Zemestoun, for his election campaign. Even some of the apologists of the regime agree that this a rather unfortunate choice. Mousavi’s campaign colour is Islamic green!

Ayatollah Karroubi

Mehdi Karroubi, leader of the ‘reformist’ National Confidence Party, is a former speaker of the Iranian parliament and the only cleric amongst the front runners, whose slogan is the rather unoriginal ‘Change’.
Like Mousavi, he criticises Ahmadinejad for ‘damaging the country’s relations with the international community’, and his priority is ‘reducing tension with the west’, but, unlike Mousavi, he is not seeking support from the ‘principlist’ conservatives. He was the conservative faction’s main candidate in 2005 and speaker of the majles during Mohammad Khatami’s presidency. His main supporters include Ata’ollah Mohajerani, who was minister of culture and Islamic guidance during Khatami’s first term.
There is a lot of hype about the ‘reformist era’. For most Iranians, however, ‘reforms’ centred around subordinating the country to the stringent economic measures demanded by the International Monetary Fund. As Darya Homan pointed out last week, “During this period of ‘liberalisation’, political writers such as Mohammad Jafar Pouyandeh and Mohammad Mokhatari were brutally murdered - their bodies were later found in Tehran’s suburbs.”3
Karroubi is quoted as saying: “Ahmadinejad’s claim that the holocaust never took place has offered considerable service to Israel. Such comments only serve to antagonise the west and help the rest of the world to support the Israeli regime”4
Commander Mohsen Rezai

Just to make sure the military are not forgotten in this election, a former commander of the fascist Islamic Revolutionary Guards is also standing as a presidential candidate.
For 17 years he was chief commander of this militia and is currently the secretary of the Expediency Discernment Council of Iran. Some believe his nomination serves only one purpose: to remind Iranians that they could get a president even more rightwing than Ahmadinejad. Rezai is currently on Interpol’s official ‘wanted’ list for “crimes against life and health, hooliganism, vandalism and damage” related to the current human rights situation in Iran and a 1994 bombing in Argentina. In November 2006, an international warrant was issued for the arrest of Rezai in connection with the July 18 1994 suicide bombing of the AMIA Jewish cultural centre in Buenos Aires, when 85 people were killed.5
However, even this conservative agrees with the general consensus that Ahmadinejad’s presidency has been a ‘disaster for Iran’. He accuses the current president of pushing the Islamic republic to the edge of a “precipice”.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Last but not least, there is Ahmadinejad himself. He is considered the favourite, not because of his popularity - most people agree that he has been a disaster in all spheres, failing to fulfil every single one of his 2005 election promises. He is denying he ever made some of them, prompting websites and newspapers associated with the reformist faction to make available audio and video quotes from four years ago.
However, Ahmadinejad, the last of the four to announce his candidacy, has a major ally - not just in the shape of the 12th Shia Imam (the one who disappeared down a well a few centuries ago), but in a contemporary self-appointed imam, the faqih. Ayatollah Khamenei has used every opportunity to support the current president and attack his opponents.
On May 14, the supreme leader said that blaming Ahmadinejad for unsuccessful policy, particularly in the economic sphere, was “unfair”. Referring to the president, he said: “We should elect someone who lives in a simple and modest way ... who is pained by the suffering of his people.”
Then on May 18, concerned that sections of the conservative ‘principlists’ have declared their support for Moussavi, Khamenei urged the Iranian people not to elect a candidate who might adopt a pro-west stance: “Be careful in your choice. Do not allow those who come into office through the people’s votes to surrender to our enemies and make the nation lose its dignity ... it would be a catastrophe for Iran if a candidate who thinks about endearing himself to some western or international arrogant power is elected next month.” Iranians should not vote for those who would want to “flatter the bullying western powers in order to gain a position in the international arena.”6
The world is now familiar with Ahmadinejad’s holocaust-denying statements. However, more worrying is the consensus amongst the other candidates that political capital should not be made of Ahmadinejad’s blunders. According to Rezai, “The holocaust was a historic question which should be left out of the political lexicon. Denying or proving it has nothing do with us”; while in Mir-Hossein Mousavi’s view “The holocaust is not Iran’s issue.”
In other words, they might share Ahmadinejad’s racist views, but do not want to talk about such a sensitive issue.
Potatogate

Over the last few weeks the Ahmadinejad government has distributed free potatoes in different cities. This has coincided with the arrival of the president for “visits unrelated to the elections”.
Several politicians have criticised Ahmadinejad for wasting public money on blatant electioneering. Iranian officials say there was an excess of potatoes and the government did not want to see them go to waste. Several bloggers have referred to “Potatogate” and cartoonist Nik Ahang has depicted the incident with the caption, “Potatoes say to Ahmadinejad: we support you.”
As well as bribery, various other manipulative measures have been taken. For example, the pro-reformist newspaper Yas-e Now was shut down only a day after it had reappeared. The move came as Saeed Mortazavi, prosecutor general, announced he had ordered the ban pending an appeal against the decision to allow the paper to be published after its banning for six years. The single issue of Yas-e Now that saw the light of day featured the lead headline, “Khatami, Mousavi for Iran”.
But never mind - now Iranians have a new publication they can buy. Less than a month before the elections, Moussavi has launched his own newspaper, Kalameh Sabz (‘Green Word’). No-one expects it to last much longer.
However, the supreme leader is well known for his pragmatism (some would say opportunism) and if all else fails and he decides that Ahmadinejad has lost too much ground amongst the principlist conservatives, it will not be beyond him to change his public statements and switch his support to whoever is the most likely ‘stop Ahmadinejad’ candidate.
But Khamenei is confident that, irrespective of the election results, no significant change in Iran’s domestic or foreign policy can come about unless it is agreed by him and by the Council of Guardians under his control.
None of this will stop leftwing apologists for this repressive, reactionary regime to claim that Iran’s 10th presidential election is proof of its blossoming democracy.

[Yazman]

lol, its only facebook. They'll get it back.

It really won't have that much of an effect, seriously. This is like the big uproar over Conan O'Brien supposedly being responsible for the outcome of an election in Finland.

[Bitter Ashes]

Lets all shed a tear for Rupert Murdoch's latest buisness venture being banned in Iran. I'm unsure which side to take really. I dislike censorship enormously, while any opportunity to give Murdoch a kicking is so appealing. Descions descions.

[bcbm]

I think the people claiming its just facebook or seeing it as a slight to Murdoch are missing the larger picture. In the past few years and especially recent months in Greece, Moldova and elsewhere new communication technologies like myspace, facebook, twitter, etc have played a major part in organizing and mobilizing people, particularly in more repressive states. This is a move clearly aimed at stifling one form of communication dissident Iranian youths are using to oppose the current state of affairs and should be roundly condemned by the left.

[Yazman]

I think the people claiming its just facebook or seeing it as a slight to Murdoch are missing the larger picture. In the past few years and especially recent months in Greece, Moldova and elsewhere new communication technologies like myspace, facebook, twitter, etc have played a major part in organizing and mobilizing people, particularly in more repressive states. This is a move clearly aimed at stifling one form of communication dissident Iranian youths are using to oppose the current state of affairs and should be roundly condemned by the left.

I think you're really overestimating the usefulness of one site. They still have internet access, there's plenty of other places they can go.

[benhur]

It's a good move. Facebook and myspace are crap anyway.

[bcbm]

I think you're really overestimating the usefulness of one site. They still have internet access, there's plenty of other places they can go.

Facebook is a common resource used by many students and young people in general; there aren't really any other sites comparable in popularity besides myspace and I'd say Facebook still beats that out. Again, it isn't just the usefulness of one site but the larger picture of what banning the site represents.

[Pawn Power]

It's a good move. Facebook and myspace are crap anyway.

Censorship is good now?

***

And I agree with bcbm, I think we are underestimating the usefulness of these new technologies and that this is a part of a larger move by the state to hinder communication between agitators. If it isn't so important, as some are saying, then why go through the trouble of banning it?

[Pogue]

It's a good move. Facebook and myspace are crap anyway.

Mother of mercy...could you please justify this?

[Stranger Than Paradise]

I don't understand how some people laugh this off. Why should anyone have power over how we communicate with people on our computers.

[Yazman]

Facebook is a common resource used by many students and young people in general; there aren't really any other sites comparable in popularity besides myspace and I'd say Facebook still beats that out. Again, it isn't just the usefulness of one site but the larger picture of what banning the site represents.

Mind you I am a fierce opponent of censorship, and what I've said in here needs to be distinguished from anybody who has praised the censorship of facebook.

What I am saying, however, is that I think people are putting waaayyy too much faith into the influence of Facebook. I don't believe for a second that a candidate could be a pivotal part of an electoral campaign based on its influence, and I really don't think its that significant.

The problem remains, however, that the Iranian government saw fit to censor the internet. Which I am opposed to completely.

[h0m0revolutionary]

I'll expand on this if anyone wishes. But in short there is a percise reason this has been done.

Elections are due to be held on June 12th and latest polls indicate a victory for the Reformist faction (dubbed by Iranian workers as the Mullahs with smiles'). Currently the theorcracy is dominated by the Conservative faction (under Ahmadinejad) and they know that the Reformist faction (the forerunner of which is Mir-Hossein Mousavi, the former Iranian Prime Minister) is most popular amungst Iranian Youth (the reformist faction regually come into conflict with the workers and leftist groups in the universities for example).

As a result the reformist faction is popular on youth social-netowkring sites such as facebook and the ruling mullahs, wishing to impede even the limited reforms the reformist faction offers, have banned it accordingly. (Probably only while the election campaigns are underway to be honest, but still..)

To be honest though banning facebook or not, the whole election is a sham. All parties except the two factions of the ruling party are exiled. It's a tyranny, the best thing qwe can do is ignore their little petty squabbles and minor differences and support the organic and volatile workers movement in Iran that holds real potential in ousting the theocratic regime.

[Dimentio]

I think there is a power struggle inside Iran. Some clerics support the centrists, while some of them support the hardliners. Nevertheless, this particular violation by the Iranian state was quite mild (even western governments like Sweden has closed down websites and even banned them).

Iran's government treats workers, women and some ethnic and religious minorities like crap. To then get upset over a one-day ban of facebook which was directed from the supporters of that tool Ahmadinejad to the supporters of that other tool Mosavi is really quite much.

But Benhur's transformation from a western chauvinist to a MIM;ite-ish thirdworldist is really the most comic feature in this thread.

http://www.lund.se/upload/Gymnasieskolor/Polhemskolan/Bilder/weathervain2.jpg