Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
Published on Saturday, June 20, 2009 by CommonDreams.org
The Revolution Will Be Tweeted: Activism in the Age of User Generated Content
The images coming out of the aftermath of the stolen election in Iran
have ranged from inspiring to horrifying. Photos and videos depict
streets flooded with hundreds of thousands of demonstrators. There
also are the visual results of such bold acts—those beaten and
bloodied being tended to by their compatriots. With professional
journalists sidelined by Iranian officials, much of this media is
being produced by amateur journalists and distributed via the
internet. Despite the extraordinary measures taken by the Iranian
government to restrict information flow, grassroots communications
continue. Cell phone service is cut, the movement of international
journalists is restricted, and internet sites are blocked. Yet the
pictures, videos and blog reports keep coming. Each a testament to
the power of mixing human will with advanced technology.
Iranian oppositionists have been able to do this through a variety of innovative tactics. One is the use of internet proxies. These proxies allow internet users in Iran to connect to friendly computers through out the world in order to post information to the web. In addition, the social networking site, Twitter, has also proven extraordinarily valuable. Twitter allows users to post mini-blogs of up to 140 characters, called “Tweets.” Updates about demonstrations, news from the streets and links to photos and videos have all tweeted their way past government censors. Twitter is, unlike say Facebook, decentralized. Each individual Twitter site is connected to a network of other sites. Users can post without ever going to a central Twitter home page.
Ok, so why hasn’t the Iranian government just turned off the internet completely? The answer was provided on a recent edition of All Things Considered—since there is such a high level of internet use by all sectors of Iranian society, turning it off would bring everything to a standstill. A kind of digital general strike. This is the social power that opposition organizers are leveraging. The actions of the censors are just minor roadblocks. In the end, Ahmadinejad needs the internet as much as the protesters do.
The street protests in Iran are not the first international events to use the internet to globalize struggles. Youtube video releases introduced the world to the recent G20 demonstrations in London and the anarchist-led uprisings in Greece. Viewers could watch the dignified speech of Tony Benn in Trafalgar Square or the successful anarchist arson of the main Christmas tree in Athens. Internet resources have become fundamental not only to the new globalized economy, but also to social protest.
Cyber-protest had a powerful beginning. In 1999, WTO protestors in Seattle used the internet to release updates and to project on the ground actions to the world. Strategically placed video cameras brought internet viewers into the streets of Seattle to witness running battles between police and demonstrators. A network of de-centralized alternative media sources developed out of this event, including the Indymedia network. These networks, designed specifically for the purposes of publishing user generated content, are meant to circumvent mainstream media sources. They have become a main source for communication amongst activists. Today, mainstream developers such as You Tube, Facebook and Twitter have adapted many of these innovations and are presenting corporate-owned user-directed mass alternatives.
There may, however, be a downside to all this information sharing. This came to head during the recent student takeovers in New York City, of The New School and New York University. Internet organizing certainly played a useful role in the moments leading to the occupation and the organization of solidarity demonstrations during the events. However, live streams from inside both occupations revealed internal debates and the unpreparedness of some of the occupiers. In one instance, a New School occupier, returning to his dorms for a shower, used You Tube to share a summary of the occupiers’ debates about defending themselves against the police. Foes in the administration and the New York Police Department were one click away from this information. A communications strategy for activists that carefully considers the potential audiences of their electronic media is clearly needed. Not all exposure is necessarily desired.
In the end, there is still no substitute for good old face-to-face organizing. Yet, it is comforting to know that when the time comes to organize, a world of sympathizers is just an upload away. So, readers might take some time out to send a tweet out to a pro-democracy demonstrator in Iran or even upload a video of your latest protest. The world awaits you.
Iranian oppositionists have been able to do this through a variety of innovative tactics. One is the use of internet proxies. These proxies allow internet users in Iran to connect to friendly computers through out the world in order to post information to the web. In addition, the social networking site, Twitter, has also proven extraordinarily valuable. Twitter allows users to post mini-blogs of up to 140 characters, called “Tweets.” Updates about demonstrations, news from the streets and links to photos and videos have all tweeted their way past government censors. Twitter is, unlike say Facebook, decentralized. Each individual Twitter site is connected to a network of other sites. Users can post without ever going to a central Twitter home page.
Ok, so why hasn’t the Iranian government just turned off the internet completely? The answer was provided on a recent edition of All Things Considered—since there is such a high level of internet use by all sectors of Iranian society, turning it off would bring everything to a standstill. A kind of digital general strike. This is the social power that opposition organizers are leveraging. The actions of the censors are just minor roadblocks. In the end, Ahmadinejad needs the internet as much as the protesters do.
The street protests in Iran are not the first international events to use the internet to globalize struggles. Youtube video releases introduced the world to the recent G20 demonstrations in London and the anarchist-led uprisings in Greece. Viewers could watch the dignified speech of Tony Benn in Trafalgar Square or the successful anarchist arson of the main Christmas tree in Athens. Internet resources have become fundamental not only to the new globalized economy, but also to social protest.
Cyber-protest had a powerful beginning. In 1999, WTO protestors in Seattle used the internet to release updates and to project on the ground actions to the world. Strategically placed video cameras brought internet viewers into the streets of Seattle to witness running battles between police and demonstrators. A network of de-centralized alternative media sources developed out of this event, including the Indymedia network. These networks, designed specifically for the purposes of publishing user generated content, are meant to circumvent mainstream media sources. They have become a main source for communication amongst activists. Today, mainstream developers such as You Tube, Facebook and Twitter have adapted many of these innovations and are presenting corporate-owned user-directed mass alternatives.
There may, however, be a downside to all this information sharing. This came to head during the recent student takeovers in New York City, of The New School and New York University. Internet organizing certainly played a useful role in the moments leading to the occupation and the organization of solidarity demonstrations during the events. However, live streams from inside both occupations revealed internal debates and the unpreparedness of some of the occupiers. In one instance, a New School occupier, returning to his dorms for a shower, used You Tube to share a summary of the occupiers’ debates about defending themselves against the police. Foes in the administration and the New York Police Department were one click away from this information. A communications strategy for activists that carefully considers the potential audiences of their electronic media is clearly needed. Not all exposure is necessarily desired.
In the end, there is still no substitute for good old face-to-face organizing. Yet, it is comforting to know that when the time comes to organize, a world of sympathizers is just an upload away. So, readers might take some time out to send a tweet out to a pro-democracy demonstrator in Iran or even upload a video of your latest protest. The world awaits you.
42 Comments so far
Show AllHere is a link to an article showing Ahmadinejad polling ahead of Mousavi 34% to 14% with obviously many people undecided.
It was published by Terror Free Tomorrow and conducted between May 11th and May 20th by the Rockefeller Brothers Foundation.
I am not sure of the reliability of the RBF of course but at least the poll gives results outside the the US propaganda model.
Good article explaining some of the nuances that have been lost in the haranguing back and forth.
And to all of you Counterpunchers, a more nuanced approach will get more people to listen to your side. I had to track this down myself to support your theory.
Passion is fine but links and data go a long way.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/based-on-terror-free-tomo_b_215423.html
somebody above tried to post a link to a washington post article, not exactly sure which one it is, but i suspect it's an article from several weeks ago demonstrating that pre-election polling showed mousavi being routed by the incumbent.
in short, any statement affirming that the election was "stolen" is already a lie and propaganda piece. which means almost every piece in the MSM.
for a summary of anti-iranian destabilization efforts by the US, see Paul Craig Robert's article at counterpunch from yesterday, all from mainstream sources and official declarations. the US is already de facto at war w/iran; what else would you call efforts to destabilize (overthrow) a foreign gov't?
one might also consider what social milieu is twittering away in iran. what % of the population has access to the internet? & crap like twitter?
when the entirety of the MSM jumps on some bandwagon (a la WMD's in iraq), it's a safe bet something nefarious is afoot.
The Mossad & CIA are potentiating Iran's unrest via the net.
Extreme Motivation
Absolute Means
And They've been waiting for this Golden Opportunity.
Mousavi will be appointed Foreign Minister to appease, defuse this Tempest in The Desert.
Much of it natural, but not all.
It will be presented as a predicating
factor in Israel's Attack on Iran-
An Illicit, Rogue Nuclear Regime, Yee Ha, Bombs Away.
Yeah right. No internet site or blog will bring a revolution. It hasn't worked before and it won't work now. Revolution will come when people are united, not divided. In Iran, people are united. Too bad the USA can't come close.
I'm not sure if I should laugh, cry, or die of embarrassment.
Geopolitics are all about tweeting! and they are already porting it to game consoles!
http://www.joystiq.com/2009/06/01/facebook-on-xbox-live-what-it-is-and-what-it-isnt/#continued
Think of the possibilities - Wii Revolution!
Oh yeah, 160 character messages and crappy cell phone videos from random, anonymous sources are all I need to make sense out of any situation.
It's child's play to fake by even a small group of people who know what they are doing. The car chases though new york you see in the movies are filmed in Vancouver or Detroit even the throngs of people are digital creations. Down sample the production video a few times, upload it to YouTube and presto, instant street protests....Or 1941 Nazi storm troopers shooting up a kindergarten pageant in 2009.
But it gets better, legitimate unrest provides the perfect cover for fictional events that never happened .... that's the problem with crowdware.
Governments, all over the world, are recording their citizens, via CCTV. This is a pretty much a reality.
With cheap digital camera recording, citizens can also make recordings, of their governments.
In fact, some governments are coming up with various laws restricting video recordings and picture taking by citizens.
Think about it.
rfloh-
Right here in the good ole USA we have the not at all ominously sounding 'Critical Infrastructure Protection' law which is part of the Patriot Act and is used against people like Greg Palast to bully them into not just univestigating but bars them from taking pictures of facilities that pollute and destroy.
Of course the areas are on google maps or you can release approved photos but any and all corporations will now be protected by this law.
Does Coca-cola supply energy drinks for the troops? Well you can't get them to clean up their act. Any corporation can now buy this protection from the government.
The mob is suing the government for copyright infringement for stealing their idea.
Rham Emanuel says to "faggedaboudit".
Meow-
Tru dat! Video is not reliably real anymore. I believe that in some court cases video is not viewed as 100% reliable(pun intended) because technology now has the ability to tamper undetectably with reality.
Let's call these people what they are afraid to appropriately call themselves. They are 'twits' 'twittering' or as Colbert said on a morning show, 'twatting'.
By the way, does anyone know that when Facebook is sold to a corp if you will be able to erase your info or transfer it? My guess would be just from a basic marketing model that they would not just give up this information. My theory is that all this information is getting recorded somewhere and they are just waiting for the most opportune time to go public.
Indeed, video is not reliable anymore.
It is not reliable when it shows a police officer making an unprovoked assault against Ian Tomlinson, during the G20 protests. Staged.
Oh wait.
rfloh-
What is happening with that? Any prosecution?
The IPCC (Independent Police Complaints Commission) is still conducting an inquiry.
Look on the UK Guardian site for how the IPCC handled the case before the footage of the video was released on the Guardian site, and draw your own conclusions.
Twitter twits rigging the system.
http://pagereboot.com/
Also, Hummingbird.
If the lamestream media is hyping Twitter, then it's as fake as Anderson Cooper interviewing Christiane Amanpour.
Oh I get it the USA which just announced an increase in Cyberwarfare use and funding is not capable of playing the Web like a grand piano. Righttttt !!!!!!!!
So since most of the web shuttling goes through the USA and since USA technology is so crude the USA could not possibly tinker with Iranian phones and websitwes.
Lets see reasonable people support Mousavi the mass murderer who lost a possibly valid election enough that they will throw bombs and set fires and generally run amock.
That is the best way to reform ------- not it is the best way to end up in hell with Iraq and Afghanistan under USA abuse.
Glenn-
I see analogies to our latest election. Many people know that Mousavi(Obama) is not that much better than Ack(don't even bother trying to spell his name)ajad (McCain) but he puts a better face on the Iranian people and that is no small matter because at this point diplomacy is all they have.
I appreciate your analysis but I would choose to believe that the Iranian people are smart and savvy enough to know what manipulation looks like. I am sure there would feedback from many tech savvy Iranians and expatriates concerned about this.
How does millions of Iranian people taking to the streets good PR for the US state? Maybe to get a covert coup but seeing how cool the Iranians are on utube does not seem like good PR for an invasion or military strikes.
I think it exposes more the need for the soft road of diplomacy.
Do you really think the Iranians voted overwhelmingly against Mousavi? Seems unlikely. I think this is more about fair elections than the similarities between the candidates.
Of course you can make a case for negative US involvement anywhere on the planet that you see unrest of any kind.
I don't think it is fair to defend your theory with the bad guys do bad things argument.
That Bush announced many millions specifically appropiated for destabilizing Iran is public record.I understand this funding ended like on the day of the elections.
That the CIA supports Sunni terrorists orginating in Baluchistan, documented by NBC or CBS (sorry, I know the facts but do not possess a steel trap of a mind).
BBC news on my local radio reported Iranians calling into their call in program to say that the Voice of America and BBC Persia were encouraging demonstrations( I mean what do you expect VOC is a pure propaganda tool).
If anyone reads the hour by hour description of Kermit Roosevelt's planning and implementing of the 1953 "popular uprising" they will be stunned at the similarities of both "popular uprisings".
And I posted on CD at least one week before the elections, after reading of surge in CIA sponsored Sunni terrorist bombings in southeast Iran, that the game plan was :
Israel to Obama, we will not nuke Tehran if you destabilize Iran.
Of course many of the demonstrators are sincere idealists and it is mostly the USA paid provocatuers that are creating the violence..
I got it straight from an FBI agent ( in the FBI office) that he posed, at Vietnam anti war rallies, as a college professor and acted as an agent provocatuer. Now who could be so naive as to think that the USA would not practice the same methods in this situation?.
Lets see the CIA funds Sunni terrorist bombings in Iran but it does not agitate the protests?
There is no evidence that the elections were invalid. I can understand why people would not vote for a man like Mousavi who presided over the executions of 30,000 jailed political prisoners, would you?
Glenn-
I see that your opinion is well informed but again, I think the Iranian people are more sophisticated than that. We know very well here in the states for example who the agitators are and what the protests are really about.
There are many Iranians who know the play by play of the 1953 uprising as well. Why wouldn't they raise a flag?
I have to take exception at the nuking Iran idea though. Sounds really far fetched.
Of course we are all aware of the infiltration of organization by government agents.
While I appreciate your point of view it seems like you are just throwing stuff against the wall and trying to get it to stick.
Of course an American media organization would support an election recall in a seemingly lopsided victory where their were millions of paper ballots and the outcome was announced so readily. Not to mention what the exit polling was showing.
I don't feel like doing research on Mousavi but by you own logic, then there would be not much difference between the candidates and the Iranians would have the same intel you are privy too, so I think you would have to explain why Khomeni would want to destabilize his own country and martyr his people?
As if the Arab world needs more of a reason to hate Israel. Come on now. You can throw around info all you want but I give Khomeni more credit than that and there is no way that Obama would give a green light to Israel nuking Iran, I don't think Europe would stand for it.
But I am sure you will try and prove me wrong. Opportunity and motive do not a crime make. It is up to the accuser to bring some relevant facts.
Agent provocateurs do not get millions of people in the streets. That is a spontaneous uprising.
The nuke accusation comes from the Dec.2009 deadline Netanawho(sp?) gave Obama to solve the Iranian nuke "problem".
There is only one effective military means of destroying Iran's uranium enrichment program.
Mousavi being no better than Ahamadinejad is echoed by the Irainian authoress of the stoning article on CD Saturday.
You lost me in reference to Kohemeni???
Agent provocatures are only the instigators of violence, media and communications arouses the masses. Of course many of the protests are sincere idealists which is most common in manipulated movements( look at the Republicans and Democrats).
But I do not understand how someone whos presided over tens of thousands of executions can bring about a moral change. Is he a born again Islamist?
Very informative article. Your observation that governments cannot shut down the internet or they cripple themselves is crucial. Hopefully, the opponents of the Tehran regime will realize that they can just get off the streets whenever the regime mobilizes its goons and regroup for other actions that will continue to keep up the pressure without undue risk of death and injury. Perhaps rolling strikes or hit-and-run demos.
I do find it surprising that so many commenters are caught up in the old 20th century delusion that the US is behind the uprising. People can and do act on their own in their own countries without being told what to do by outsiders. And contrary to what someone said above, corporate entities like youtube or twitter are not going to shut themselves down to protect an existing power structure, and even if they did, another corporation somewhere else on the planet would be happy to fill such a profitable void.
Yes they do revolt on their own but the millions of USA dollars spent specifically to destabilize Iran and the CIA funded Sunni bombers in Iran might lead to one to draw another conclusion.
China seems to do a very good job of controling the web and blocking sites and information.
Besides what zmann said, shutting down communication between computers, is not as easy as you, and others ranting against computers, seem to think. Not without incurring economic costs.
It is essentially a race, a competition. Governments are trying to come up with various methods to control and censor communication via computers. Others, for various motivations, are trying to come up with various methods to get around the censorship.
One suggestion to the anti technology people here, and to all on CD actually: read up on the concept of "darknets", and the software program, "Freenet". The goal of Freenet is freedom of communication, specifically to deal with governments who want to restrict internet communication.
China has a lot of pull with big corporations, that's why. "You wanna do business here? We block what we want." Iran has no such pull.
Let's find here a reason to keep Net neutrality in our respective countries.
Certain aspects of the Net lend themselves towards decentered use, but some lend themselves to extreme centralization as well. Search and filtering applications, cryptology, and back-doors in software can be used by tyrants too.
Attempts to curtail Net freedoms have come from several sources:
--- Reduced regulation of ownership in ANY medium
--- Private attempts to charge content producers
--- Gov't "Net-Nanny"-style filters
--- Outdated intellectual property laws (lots to work out here)
--- Spamming and jamming search engines
--- Jamming and blocking sites
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/14/AR2009061401757.html?nav=rss_opinion/c...
Try this link for what seems to refelct another version of reality than that offered by the author.
The central issue is decentralized communication. The other thingy,reinforcing the PR model that Iranian protest equates stolen election, is handled with such a laissez faire approach, I wonder why this goes unchallenged? Maybe because it is the chic topic for early Summer, and reasserting the election was stolen is what all the orthodox are doing these days?
Apart from this, the message is anytime you use the internet and or communication, but especially international, you should expect your 'subversive' activities are being tracked. The author's pondering why Iranian big bro wouldn't shutdown the chatter/twitter is reflected in the last paragraph where big bro monitored traffic at New School. (Aha, they are monitoring, better be careful?)
Let's no forget today well-paid private contractors (ngos?) intercept traffic minus the bureaucratic constraints of government. Think database built around impulsive twitters.
Another point, one which I don't think the author is really cognitive of, is the author's willful comparison between an alleged twitter revolution in Iran and her desire to control domestic activism. And that's a real insight into leftist orthodoxy and its willful acceptance of the chic Iranian PR model (or Barack Obama model for that matter).
Another point is the amount of traffic MSM channels are pumping out and the author's lack of attention to it. The low-info format still dominates the message and, unfortunately, left orthodoxy reinforces the status quo dichotomy.
Last. The loose associations also reinforces the notion ngo, community organizing is a powerful tool as a catalyst but also for control of democratic revolutions (even when experts reassure us ngo and community organizing are not instrumental in any of the color revolutions... because that would imply they are infiltrated, or more accurately, left orthodoxy is exploited to carry out covert ops without even knowing it....and that's a totally unacceptable accusation.)
chuk-
Right on. I am not geek but it seems like Twitter can be monitored through a centralized data base.
Maybe activist should consider developing their own language, maybe even Klingon.
Congratulations, SPUSA, for prematurely falling on your own sword. Nicely done. You make a valid, even if overly obvious and redundant point about the wonders of new technology in organizing and mobilizing. It was also a wonderful advertisement. I hope the party's getting a cut.
Here's a newsflash, comrade. Iran may not have been able to cut the internet, but you forgot that the corporate entities can cut their own services down completely. While they're not doing so in the Iranian situation, do you think they'll be so generous if this were a leftist "revolt"?
I guess I should be grateful to the Iranin protesters for revealing some deep schisms in the already too-small American left.
" Iran may not have been able to cut the internet, but you forgot that the corporate entities can cut their own services down completely. While they're not doing so in the Iranian situation, do you think they'll be so generous if this were a leftist "revolt"?
Exactly, exactly, exactly.
And what do the corporations expect from this corporately-twittered unrest? Gee. Can't imagine.
Skip-
Right on.
This new technology and form of communication, will not of course go down the same road of state propaganda and corporate control because gosh darn it, people are so damn hopeful this time.
Until you get a vibrant and alternative media and take back the public squares you can tweet till your thumbs turn blue.
Where is the country now after the WTO? After 911? After Katrina?
Even more scared, more afraid. Just as divided as before and now with a charismatic leader like Obama, not as desperate.
But we still have the Patriot Act. It is still impossible to protest. Just as the writer has pointed out, the video of the WTO was used by the state to observe the protesters and develop even more sophisticated crowd control measures.
Sure, you have a much larger and informed 'activist class' but it is mostly just that. It is now cool to be an activist. My god, you are in front of a computer all day and connected to all of your comrades via i-pod twenty four seven so something important must be happening. You might even be able to joinObama's legion of community activists.
I love the socialist platform but I am tired of looking at PR articles around the net about how this new technology is going to save us.
What we need is a large and mobilized citizenry which can flood our representatives with phone calls and emails and that can actually affect elections.
This would have to be a broad based movement that includes people from all walks of life.
Sure, being able to see what is happening on the street of Iran is great but this points too one of the hypocrisies and shortcomings of the so-called 'activist class'.
You can go to almost any city or wealthy town in this country and mobilize people to support causes in Iraq or Africa even, which are well and good, but try to organize around the causes of the poor in the city or town 10-20 miles away and good luck.
"Isn't that what social workers are for". They will say or at least think.
Those people of color are just not that exotic enough. Rap and reggaeton are not as cool as Rai or afro-cuban rhythms.
It is not in the 'activist class' interest to support their own countries poor and minorities. They would be out of jobs because a true revolution would take place.
Don't get me wrong, I admire people who take stands and work towards a more peaceful and just society wherever it may be. But let's be honest. Change is not going to come because of Twitter. It is going to happen because people are awake enough and organized enough in very large numbers so that the power structure is shaken and begins a true and honest dialogue with the American People.
This will only happen with a moderate but strong platform, a spiritual evolved people, and lastly with the organization tools of theinternets.
We cannot put the cart before the horse and any small measures we might take right now are just band-aids on a deep laceration.
I applaud the work of all activists, especially those in Appalachia right now risking their neck to bring attention to the affects of strip-mining and I think this case proves my point very well.
Without access to the media we are swimming against the tide. In order to overcome the control of mass media we need to rewrite the narrative of our modern situation on a grand scale. And tweets does not that make.
To paraphrase Erich Fromm. We do not need a new technology, we need a renewed sense of responsibility and purpose.
To paraphrase Yoda, too unorganized are we, try harder we must.
First you say we need a renewed sense of responsibility and purpose, then you say we need organization, as if organization is the end. I would say responsibility/purpose should be the end, not organization. The reason is evident in what these are, responsibility/purpose are a human attribute, and organization is something external, something built. Notice what happens when we place the emphasis on each of the two ideas: a.) With responsibility/purpose people are empowered and will naturally seek/build organization. b.) With organization, and lacking responsibility/purpose, what are we but marching hammers? This is what they have on the right, organization without responsibility/purpose, a self-perpetuating war machine enslaving people. We want to emancipate, enlighten and empower ourselves, with responsibility/purpose, etc.
Being a huge Fromm fan, I'd extend that to say that what we need is some fucking political literacy in this country. I never thought that this would be the issue that broke me from politics. I'm 46, wildly overeducated, working as a floor drone for some private shitbag corporation that is basically spying on my own people, and my prospects have long since passed me by. I'm tired, and even the handful of places I considered a refuge from the expansion of Locke's madness have completely run off the reservation. Don't know why this one hurts so much, but it does.
For you young ones that still have some juice to throw into the grinder (sorry for mixing my metaphors), this electronic organizing bullshit is not the answer--unless you're trying to surrender your autonomy. In short, don't trust anyone with enough money to start a large-audience website.
Skip-
Right on. It is systematic. Universities are chicken-head turnstiles. I am straight street and mostly self taught and without real world experience to enact what you have learned it tends to go right over the dome and stays elusive theory.
Glad to see another Fromm fan on here. I wish I could find the exact quote.
Stay strong my friend. Once people realize Obama is not down with the cause there will be a backlash.
I think now we have to mobilize on platforms and wait for the Obama effect to subside.
Media access is key. I am afraid that this new anti hate speech rhetoric on the MSM might lead to more violation of free speech rights. Pretty soon you wont be able to yell "fire" in a crowded fire station.
Keep strong my friend and be wise. The bastards don't win in the end but only if we are super strong and super smart.
The head of Twitter was on Colbert I think and for the life of me I have yet to see a bigger a-hole. Facebook is already being sold off as I am sure you know. Too late for any of you who think they can just erase all of that personal information.
I look at this new 'activist class' as a new outgrowth of Chomsky's 'political class'. The managers (geeks) who are deeply indoctrinated (from toddlers now) in the promise of the internets.
Man, I can't wait to hear the next evolution, I am sure it will be along the lines of "Being John Malkovich" where we will have the ability to infiltrate our leaders bodies and control the situation.
Many people don't understand the difference between science-fiction and technology. I am reminded of one of the Freddy Krueger movies where a kid goes into the dream, a role-player, you know the type and exclaims, "I am a wizard" and Freddy of course laughs and lops his head off.
This is not some x-box kids, we are flesh and bone.
I saw the Twitter kid on Oprah one time (I think that was the fellow, anyway) and I wouldn't call him an a**hole, but more of a clueless child.
During the interview, they kept asking him, "So, what's Twitter good for?", "Who uses it?", and questions like that.
All he could answer is: "You can stay in touch with your friends".
Maybe he was too nervous being on live T.V. with millions of people watching (this was Oprah's Friday show), but more than likely he's really just that lame and silly. Tweets? Twitter? Good grief!! Where are the adults, when you need one?
Get out there in the streets, talk to people, start a group.
Write letters, make phone calls to decision makers.
That's the best way to organize!! And . . . it works.
Did not get past first sentence.
I have yet to see any evidence of the election being stolen.
1) Undeniably USA is meddling in Iran
2) Undeniably USA is mostly interested in the wealth and geopolitical position of Iran and its people.
3) Undeniably Mousavi in general is no better than Ahamadinejad.
4)Undeniably a stable Iran is better than a civil war.
5) Undeniably their is a huge USA propaganda campaign supporting the demonstrators.
There were two major complaints about the Iranian election from what I've read. The first, which has been widely confirmed, was that during the election, cell phone/text messaging was turned off throughout much of the country, deliberately abotaging Ahmadinejad's opponents who were using that technology to turn out voters and send updates. The second, which I dhave not seen confirmed (and since Iran is controlling the press so very hard, it would be difficult to) is that the usual mobile polling stations were restricted to police stations instead of hospitals, schools, and libraries, and many ballot boxes were taken to military bases, which apparently is not the usual course for Iranian elections, leading to speculation of vote-rigging. Also, the government did not post vote breakdowns by district for much longer than they normally do, again fueling suspicions of vote-rigging.
Should get past first sentences:
1. US meddling in Iran requires centralized action, and so won't create popular demonstration. Think coup and violence: they are easier from without.
2. The US interest does not mean Iran is democratic, only that the US is not, terribly.
3. Mousavi - if this is a Coke or Pepsi thing, let's hear why.
4. Surely the American threat motivates centralized power in Iran as elsewhere. But centralized thuggery fuels the propaganda and arms destabilization. Blind centralization does not improve security.
5. The US press would support Martians against Iran. That says nothing about the demonstrators.
Would that there were between the Devil in Washington and the Devil in Teheran a single safe road for Iranians.
bardamu 2:03 ------
1) The 1953 USA overthrow of Irans first democratically elected President involved almost an identical playbook orchestrated by Kermit Roosevelt planned and paid for "popular uprising".
Also blowing up shrines tends to propel masses anywhere in the world into violence, remember the reaction of "a team of men in black" blowing up the Golden Mosque of Sammarra? Well shrines are being blown up in Iran now.
ABC(or NBC) has reported on the CIA supported Sunni terrorists originating out of Baluchistan.
2) How democratic Iran is not the point, the point is violent destabilization and the death and destruction of Iranians by USA design.
3) I am freakin dumbfounded how anybody ( not you in Particular) could believe, in the light of 1 million, needlessly dead Iraqs and the horror of the Burqa War in Afghanistan and the USA support for the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians could even imagine, especially considering the full court USA Media Propaghanda Blitz, that the USA is not a major instigator of the destabilization.
4) There are many posters giving links to the informations on the hundreds Millions
appropiated publically for the destabilization of Iran.
5)Mousavi is described as no better than Ahmadinejad in an CD article today by the Iranian women who is afraid of being stoned in Iran. Plus if you google Mousavi executions you will learn he presided over the executions of thirty thousand jailed Political prisoners, It would take a George Bush to be worse than that.
6)Peace is always a better road than violence.
Glenn-
Sounds reasonable but is their evidence? Is their at least an article or website that would support this theory?
You should have actually read the article instead off jumping off on the knee-jerk rant. I'm not saying you're wrong but there was another point to be made here. You just missed some tactics and strategy you might need to use in the coming years.
Actually I read the article after my comments and the reading affirmed that the whole article was not worth reading and in no way would it cause my comments to be characterized as kneejerk( that would be true if there was something of substance contradicting my statements).
Usually anybody willing to spout such unabashed propaganda has nothing else worth knowing or that which is not obivious to say.
Go ahead and bury your head in the sand.
Moondoggy : I give up. What does the article have to offer besides:
Internet; organizational tool, duh.
Do not tell police what you are doing, duh