What is Digg?Sponsored by Microsoft
Microsoft responds to the headlines. view!
microsoft.com/everybodysbusiness - Read our developers' points of view on the headlines making news.
46 Comments
- ivanmarsh, on 11/08/2009, -1/+18I just love how it's the 70'-80's all over again. I do like how the headline says "foreign journalists" and then the first line in the article explains that only one of the journalists was foreign... not that it really matters.
- lemur, on 11/08/2009, -1/+17It's gonna be alright; we love Iranians regardless of oppressive regime
- peaceninja, on 11/08/2009, -0/+14This is America speaking, I am sorry for Paris Hilton.
- GregLoire, on 11/08/2009, -0/+12"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." - John F. Kennedy
- Atario, on 11/08/2009, -2/+10Stick it to the man, Iranians. Keep fighting the good fight.
- mehrdotcom, on 11/08/2009, -4/+12I'm an Iranian. I'm sorry for all these troubles this government has made.
- Intervene, on 11/08/2009, -0/+5Digg is so slow
TEHRAN, Iran — Iranian authorities have released three journalists who were among more than 100 people arrested during pro-government and opposition street demonstrations this week, the country's official news agency reported.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5 ... - GorfTron, on 11/08/2009, -2/+7The hummus made it all ok.
- hamidious, on 11/08/2009, -0/+3The first sign of a good news article is the accuracy of the headline.
This article is spewing propaganda and inaccuracy from the first paragraph. "Three journalists, one of them foreign, were arrested at Wednesday’s mass demonstrations in Tehran by a regime determined to suppress all independent sources of information."
The wannabe "news reporter" should learn to report "facts" and leave the interpretation to the reader. Maybe, just maybe there's a reason the arrests were made, but the journalist was eager to write his assumption that Iran just wanted to silence journalism & free speech. Even if the assumption was true, it shows lack of professionalism.
Great reading material for Fox News fans. - GorfTron, on 11/08/2009, -0/+2Fine, *****-em then.
- mitikomon, on 11/08/2009, -0/+2hummus is for Arabs. unfortunately it's not one of our dishes.
- Ymeg, on 11/08/2009, -1/+3how do we know they aren't spies?
- Chakat, on 11/08/2009, -0/+2How do we know you're not a spy?
- edd17, on 11/08/2009, -0/+2The side of the Iranians, not the oppressive regime they happen to find themselves under?
- omega09, on 11/08/2009, -0/+2Iranians don't have hummus, that's Arabs
- quaxon, on 11/08/2009, -0/+2The sad thing is all the leaders still refer to themselves as the great revolutionaries.
- MaIeki, on 11/08/2009, -0/+2As an Iranian, I gotta say it's a pity! sorry the government here have some mental issues. but FYI Iran differs from the government. we are good people that won't do things like this. we are the people who would risk our lives to get these innocent people out of Basij's filthy hands.
- tehknotte, on 11/08/2009, -0/+2WTF!
- spoon088, on 11/08/2009, -1/+2Quit being an Uncle Tom for something you didn't do ass.
- omega09, on 11/08/2009, -0/+1The Times Online = Fox News reporting
- frcc, on 11/08/2009, -2/+3American journalists are safe. All they have to do is run the government provided copy of the news through a word processor and print the story.
- BerateBirthers, on 11/08/2009, -0/+1The Iranian regime: revolution is allowed only when WE do it.
Do as I say, don't say what I do. Typical. - kd1s, on 11/08/2009, -0/+1What I find interesting is that he protests are still going on almost six months after the elections.
Iran is at a crossroads. The students (E.g. those under 30 years of age.) weren't around during the revolutionary times in Iran. And they chafe at the religious edicts pushed forward by the Supreme Leader.
If you look at the cities in Iran they're as modern and westernized as any in Europe or the U.S. (Or parts of India these days).
Western dress, satellite dishes galore, cell phones, computers, all things the government really can't control. - novenator, on 11/08/2009, -0/+1The Iranian regime just keeps getting more and more extreme. Shutting down freedom is ultimately self-defeating.
- fragMasterFlash, on 11/08/2009, -2/+3Make hashish, not atomic weapons.
- norwegianlegion, on 11/08/2009, -0/+1...Bush?
- MaIeki, on 11/08/2009, -0/+1I just said as an Iranian , so I meant the Iranian government :) and I have no idea how you came to your conclusion buddy ;)
- lemur, on 11/10/2009, -0/+1Um yeah so the tabouleh makes it all ok
- darkwing81, on 11/08/2009, -1/+2google false dilemma fallacy
- mrcoderga, on 11/08/2009, -0/+1 Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs R. Nicholas Burns said the administration was "taking a page from the playbook" on Ukraine and Georgia. Un-named administration officials were reported as saying the State Department was also studying dozens of proposals for spending $3 million in the coming year "for the benefit of Iranians living inside Iran" including broadcast activities, Internet programs and "working with people inside Iran" on advancing political activities there.
Undersecretary of Defence for Policy Douglas Feith quotes a high level government policy memorandum written after September 11, 2001, stating that the United States should "[c]apitalize on our strong suit, which is not finding a few hundred terrorists in caves in Afghanistan, but in the vastness of our military and humanitarian resources, which can strengthen the opposition forces in terrorist-supporting states." The memorandum outlined a list of military actions to be undertaken against some of these states. Undersecretary Feith and Gen. Wesley Clark confirmed that Iran is on this list.
http://ipsnorthamerica.net/news.php?idnews=1446 - LeepII, on 11/08/2009, -2/+3Paid pentagon propaganda, buried.
- Johnagain, on 11/08/2009, -2/+2And Jane Fonda.
- BerateBirthers, on 11/08/2009, -1/+1By arresting those guys? Who's side are you on?
- zaferk, on 11/08/2009, -2/+2Never met an 'Iranian' on digg that wasn't self-hating.
- BerateBirthers, on 11/08/2009, -0/+0@edd17: well, Atario's comment isn't clear. It could truly be read either way.
- BerateBirthers, on 11/08/2009, -2/+1Sounds like the US the last eight years.
- mrcoderga, on 11/08/2009, -3/+2"the government here"
Where is "here"?
Do you work in Washington DC?
Because you guys, whoever you are, and wherever you are, also told us that Iran doesn't let you guys speak out against your government.
You seem pretty confident that you won't get caught on Digg. Surprisingly confident. As if you knew there was no way in hell you would get caught.
I think you really work in Washington. I think you get paid by my taxes. Which means you need to tell me the truth, as I, the citizen of the US, am your employer.
If I find out you are working for my Dept of Defense and targeting me, then I am going to target you back, buddy. - BerateBirthers, on 11/08/2009, -1/+0Or, we can talk with them and negotiate. Which is Obama's strategy.
- Ravage172, on 11/08/2009, -2/+1I want to know why we have to be involved in anything over there - seriously!
We don't like them. They don't like us.
They don't want our system of Government, they don't want our Christianity, they don't want our Corporations, and they don't want our (lack of) moral / spiritual direction. They don't like the freedom we extend to women, they don't like the fact we don't practice Sharia Law, and they don't like the fact that their Civilization stalled while Western Civilization modernized.
So why do we insist on sticking our noses in a place where we're not wanted?
Oil - thats why.
Most of you aren't old enough to remember when John F. Kennedy committed this nation to putting a man on the moon. Why don't we have leaders today who have the intestinal fortitude and strength of character to recognize, point out, and act on the fact that oil dependency is probably the single greatest threat our Nation faces?
I, for one, would vote for any President, regardless of Party, who committed our Nation to the task of taking America off the Oil energy standard.
And before you nay sayers get started, no, I do not know which direction we should go in. But I'll bet every check I will ever earn for the rest of my life on American enginuity and know-how to solve that problem. - inactive, on 11/08/2009, -3/+2I'm tired of reading about Iran. I almost thought we (as a country - the US) were going to say something about their most recent elections, with all the accusations and evidence of rigging. Maybe even try to make a difference over there. But we haven't. So when can we just pave all of it into a giant Wal-Mart parking lot already?
- Ravage172, on 11/08/2009, -2/+1Not to mention the fact that Hannity was probably only hours away from being detained by the Obama Regime until even the alphabet news agencies called them on it.
- mrcoderga, on 11/08/2009, -4/+2Apparently the only Iranians that repressive Iran allows to comment on Digg, are the Iranians that criticize their own government.
Huh.
So, either Iran is not really repressive, or it is repressive and these are not the Iranians they claim to be on Digg.
Oh, wait, what's this:
Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs R. Nicholas Burns said the administration was "taking a page from the playbook" on Ukraine and Georgia. Un-named administration officials were reported as saying the State Department was also studying dozens of proposals for spending $3 million in the coming year "for the benefit of Iranians living inside Iran" including broadcast activities, Internet programs and "working with people inside Iran" on advancing political activities there.
Undersecretary of Defence for Policy Douglas Feith quotes a high level government policy memorandum written after September 11, 2001, stating that the United States should "[c]apitalize on our strong suit, which is not finding a few hundred terrorists in caves in Afghanistan, but in the vastness of our military and humanitarian resources, which can strengthen the opposition forces in terrorist-supporting states." The memorandum outlined a list of military actions to be undertaken against some of these states. Undersecretary Feith and Gen. Wesley Clark confirmed that Iran is on this list.
http://ipsnorthamerica.net/news.php?idnews=1446 - QQQQUUUU, on 11/08/2009, -4/+1People on Digg like to complain about how iran violates peoples civil rights. So my question is do you want the us to invaid and put in a goverment with civil rights for everyone? If not? why complain and do nothing? if yes then do not complain about the war and its cost
- InactiveUser, on 11/08/2009, -4/+1Put a lid on the clerics hiding behind religion as power and half the issue would be solved. Who is really in charge in that nation? The church or the government as its front man. Reminds me of Rome..
- BerateBirthers, on 11/08/2009, -3/+0And George Bush.
But we have Obama now to make things up. - Barackalypse, on 11/08/2009, -8/+2Wait, is this the same Iran that Obama thinks can be expected to follow through on any nuclear treaty he signs with them (assuming that negotiations that have been going on for the last 5 years actually result in any agreement)? Does anyone see a contradiction here? And no, I don't think we should invade them.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is