hmmmm. i don't know. :(

it's been popping up on my posts lately.

I decided to use Skype to try and talk to Iranians first hand last night. I would randomly call them and talked to 4 or 5 people in Tehran and in other parts of Iran for a good while. Many were eager to share information. Among other things things they all said that they really do feel a revolution is on hand, and they think the protests will last (all were Mousavi supported, I tried, but unsuccessfully located an Ahmadenijad supporter). It was 9:10 AM in Iran and the rallies were already beginning. They also said that while it was reported that there was one official death, there were really multiple casualties. This is really becoming an information war. SMS is down, phone service is very weak, internet is very slow, and most websites are shut down, even western news sources like CNN and BBC. One interesting thing that happened was that one person accused me of being "one of them," because apparently the bisaaj and the government are tracking IPs and trying to identify revolutionaries. I showed him my aryan looking face on webcam, and all was well. Anyways, just thought it was interesting and cool that if you want to talk to some people first hand, in the middle of a revolution, you can hop on Skype and give people a call (what a world we live in today). Surprised some news agencies haven't picked up on this handy tool for eyewitness reports and used it instead of speculating.

Looks like it might be something with your Firefox.

That's neat!

that's frigging awesome. not knowing anything about skype - how did you find those people?

Is Grand Ayatollah Montazeri really Martin Scorcese?

You can search users by country. After that you have to try to find someone who will accept your call. I just had another nice, 30 minute conversation with another Iranian. He told me that things are a bit calmer today, but the rallies are going on. They are doing a "recount," but how can anyone trust a recount when it is conducted by the same people? Like in the pictures, he once too was a student and said that once he and the students were demonstrating against the poor quality of food in the University, and the bisaaj came in with plain clothes, tricked them into allowing them access to the dormitories, and attacked them. Amazing stuff you will learn if you chat to people from around the globe on Skype. Becoming a great and educational hobby.

Of course, just like calling anyone else randomly you have no way of knowing how much bullshit you're being fed nor what agenda the person on the other end might have.

aaaah

this is very true. it's much like any interaction with any other human being in that regard - and why i try to minimize my interactions with other human beings in general.

A couple of points are in order here I think
1) We have something majorly in common there
2) I'd put the over/under on somehow pointing out the dichotomy of us both saying that while posting of our own free will on an internet message board at about 7.

Naturally we both understand the distinction about point two but unless they're warded off by my prediction, you know someone will do it.

:lol:

Very true. Then again, I might have overstated my desire to avoid interaction with other human beings slightly. Or perhaps I should modify it to say "avoid extraneous interaction" or "avoid interaction with those that are not immediate family or on the short-list of 5 approved friends whenever possible" or something. Although I guess that's not to say that I wouldn't ever - I did meet up with Lathum multiple times, and AlanT and his wife once, so it's not like I'll NEVER socialize - it's just not something I'm comfortable doing or that I will do more than ohhh...maybe once a month.

And I think more people than you give them credit for would understand the distinction that we draw and the way in that we don't consider this "interaction" because it's completely under-our-control and through an intermediary.

In real life if somebody corners you, you are stuck. On the internet if somebody corners you, you can just pretend that you walked away until you're ready to deal with it or it passes.

Twitter reports are coming in stating that opposition crowds are moving in on the TV/radio station. Details are still sketchy at this point.

I'd venture to guess that statistically youre more likely to hit a Mousavi supporter on Skype than the pro gov't. simply based on advanced technology usage amongst the supporters.

Warning: This is NOT for the faint of heart. It's a video of a protester following a stabbing.

YouTube - koshte esfahan 25 3 88

Interesting new info from Huffington Post via CNN blog. U.S. State Department is working with Twitter to make sure communication lines remain open for opposition.

Anderson Cooper 360: Blog Archive - State Department to Twitter: Keep Iranian tweets coming « - Blogs from CNN.com

And when he says a video of a protestor being stabbed to death, he means a video of an Iranian man with some sort of unknown injury that has him bleeding from the mouth and seemingly unconscious while a bunch of people are crowded around and seemingly (by my perception) trying to find a way to help him.

dunno why the state department is getting involved. that can only be a negative. twitter was doing just fine keeping the tweets flowing out of Iran beforehand, and it was to their benefit to do so, as it was raising their global profile. but now you're just giving the hard-liners in Iran a reason to portray it as us meddling.

bbc.co.uk went green

They aren't meddling. They specifically note that they haven't communicated with anyone to get any information. They only are ensuring that the open communication between each other and the outside world can continue. It's a small, but significant clarification.

wouldn't it be better if they just kept quiet though is my point - instead of giving the iranian hard-liners any ammo

Again MBBF posts some new "fact", has "evidence" to "support" it, is called out that it is just completely false, and ignores being called out.

I love it.

I posted exactly what was posted on the NIAC blog. They said it was a stabbing victim. My apologies that the death wasn't portrayed exactly as advertised. I suppose it's more important to mock MBBF than to recognize the significance of this man's death on video. If so, have at it.

Oh, this old excuse from you again...

If you have a source that actually explains what this is, it seems wise to post that when you post the video. The video has no context and does not portray what is going on.

It is horrible, but part of what frustrates me as I follow this is the vast amounts of just completely false information getting passed around. The internet is a dangerous thing imo. When people start believing just anything posted here, as they seem to do more and more these days, that leads us down to a dangerous path.

I was following the twitter stuff a bit yesterday. I had to stop. It was full of just complete rampant speculation.

That's why I use here. But now this is twice that you have posted media that supposedly is one thing, but clearly appears to be something different. I want information on this situation - but I want it to be credible. I'll take delayed, accurately news over swift, flawed news any day.

Dola: And the goal is not to mock you. The goal is to hopefully have you be a more responsible poster so that your passion can actually be useful rather than a bunch of BS like it is now.

I've been talking to a lot of different people from around the globe in the past few years (mostly for work). My programmer is originally from Pakistan (moved 6 months ago to the UK) and it is always fascinating to here him talk. Nothing like the stereotypes our media has for people in these countries. He's educated and up-to-date on the news of the world. Was actually a journalist at one time but had his life threatened when he wrote a negative piece about some local politicians.

Despite the issues our country has, we sometimes forget how awesome we have it.

John Judis echoes my concerns:

The media has been absolutely horrible for this. CNN is the only one I know of that has anyone on the ground in Iran and their reporting still didn't get the attention that an event like this deserves. Fox News had more space on their homepage dedicated to David Letterman than this. The blogs and Twitter may not always be reliable, but they are pulling out more information from this than any so-called journalists.

To be honest though, I question the wisdom of any organization putting people on the ground in situations like this.

Risk/reward on that is really out of whack afaic, and I say that as a former journalist who would almost certainly have jumped at a chance like that. But that's seems like a combination of bravado, lack of appreciation of one's own mortality, & a grossly overinflated sense of self-importance. If you can disseminate reasonably reliable information without putting a bullseye on the forehead of a reporter, by all means do so.

I believe they had someone there to report on the election before this took place. It's Amanpour so I'm guessing she blends in a little better than most Western journalists. Journalists will always put themselves in danger to report on stories. It's an unfortunate occurence but part of the job.

They also don't need boots on the ground to get the story. I'm also critical of the lack of attention this is receiving. I mean when a joke Letterman made is getting more attention than a public uproar in one of the most powerful countries in the Middle East, it should be bigger news.

Actually, the treason comments in the past involved military actions we were a part of, not a revolution going on in a different country.

Fair enough, I thought that was part of what you meant to criticize (as opposed to just being a phrasing).


I think that's a certain amount of reality setting in. Reality is that there's little the viewing public expects us (at the nation/governmental level) to do to genuinely have an influence in Iran and that by & large the viewing public gives less than two shits what ultimately happens there as at most it's the better of two bad choices and the difference in the impact on American lives is likely to be marginal.

I mean, look at the tenor of our own following of it in this thread. Surely I'm not the only person who picked up on the whole spectator sport vibe of it. I'm not criticizing really, I'm just saying that a lot of our own discussion (and we're actually ahead of the general population in terms of being able to have reasonably intelligent conversation about it) reminded me of threads about at least World Cup qualifiers or something. It was interesting to a point & we'll keep up with it to avoid dealing with our own mundane personal routines but it wasn't really life-changing like an FSU-Miami game or OU-Texas or Cowboys-Redskins.

I guess what I'm getting at is that if you want to rail against something, rail against our society or whatever, just seems unreasonable to blame the media for trying to give people info (or gossip or coverage or whatever) about things they find most interesting.

I understand that part, but most of the news doesn't have an effect on me. I mean if someone raises my taxes, that's big news. But what I see on TV news now is Heidi and Spencer. That shit has no impact on me either. At least with Iran I'm witnessing something that could potentially be in the history books someday.

I think it's just the sad realization I'm coming to that most people care more about what Paris Hilton had for lunch than what is going on in the world. All it's going to take now is a pretty white girl to go missing before this story gets thrown on the back burners.

Okay, I get where you're coming from then. The difference there I think is that I reached that conclusion a loooong time ago (oddly enough while working my ass off as a radio news director).

I don't think that's odd - I bet you learnt the hard way that an injury to Georgia's 3rd string RB was probably more in line with most of your audience's information desires than those darn-fancy foreigners. :D

Actually, I discovered that charity bake sales & obituaries were of far greater interest than local politics, corruption, or even tax increases.

I think the "problem" with the MSM is that the "educated" public has moved online. These educated individuals are using less main-stream sources for their news and thus the mainstream audience gets exponentially dumber. And as the MSM gets dumber, the educated stop going to them for news and the cycle gets worse.

Two big developments overnight as blogged on Huffington Post. Emergency meeting of Assembly of Experts is called. Also, reports are leaking out that military may not be cracking down on protesters. It appears the religious police are the main ones provoking violence at this point...........

If they are really meeting to talk about removing Khameni, then that is potentially a bombshell.

I'm not saying it changes the make-up of Iran dramatically, but it has to be seen as at least a minor "victory" for a potential revolution.

I noticed a reporter mention that they may be trying to bluff Khameni into booting Ahmini as well and changing the election results. That's certainly possible.

Looks like the leaders are working to find the right scapegoat to fall. Which, I think, is smarter for them than to start cracking skulls in a major way.

Note that Rafsanjani was the president of Iran from 1989 to 1997. He lost to Ahmadinejad in the 2005 elections, and they really aren't the best of buddies. They've been sniping each other from afar, with Ahmadinejad calling Rafsanjani's presidency a corrupt one.

His election in '07 to the Assembly of Experts was seen as a blow to Ahmadinejad's supporters.

Six footballers have green armbands on for their World Cup Qualifying match against South Korea.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | New protests over Iran elections

If anything, this is a move to force Kahmenei to dennounce Ahmadinejad's election victory.

Yup.

I think given the situation where it is, this is potentially a very smart move. If you can find a big enough scapegoat, you can maybe come out without a full-blown revolution.

That being said - forcing their hand like this at least weakens them a bit.

+1

Not really sure how reliable the source, but interesting read on other happenings in Iran politics on this election.

Asia Times Online :: Middle East News, Iraq, Iran current affairs

love to see them actually get a fair election.


shit - i'd really love to see them appeal to the international community and get UN vote monitors in there like they do in African countries as such. That'd be a huge step. Not sure it will come to that, but that'd be best-case.

In today's articles, several sites were discussing this move by the world community. The comments from Tehran were that the move to make all accounts appear to be in Tehran really slowed down the crackdown on people who were in Tehran and were sending out messages. Amazing how something that simple threw the scent off many of the people posting within Tehran.