Syria Bans iPhone, Protest App 69
Hugh Pickens writes "BBC reports that with 4,000 people killed in Syria since March, the government has banned the iPhone and threatened confiscation and prosecution for anyone found with an iPhone as the government tries to control information getting out of the country. Most international media have been banned from Syria since the uprising began, so footage of the violent crackdown has primarily come from activists filming material themselves and posting it on the internet. A mobile app for the iPhone called Souria Wa Bas (which roughly translates as 'Syria and That's All') covers the actions of opposition groups, including the Local Coordination Committees which claim to have members across the country and includes links for news, videos, and a map of opposition hot spots. The app's creators say they produced Souria Wa Bas to counter regime accounts of the opposition's activities. 'Under the fast-moving events in Syria and the deliberate attempts to distort the facts by some. We have compiled the most important Syrian news sources available,' say creators of the app at the Apple store."
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
"..when do we send some freedom their way?"
When they find some incredibly large oil deposits.
Re: (Score:3)
So cynical and yet so funny...
Re: (Score:1)
And yet so true.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Also, the reason there is no Western intervention in Syria like there was in Libya was that Russia & China have openly opposed
lies, lies, and horse shit (Score:5, Informative)
Tunisia, Egypt, and Morocco have not 'become Islamic theocracies'. Egypt RIGHT NOW is having mass demonstrations where the MILITARY is beating the shit out of protestors and killing people. OUR ALLY IN THE WAR ON TERROR EGYPTIAN MILITARY.
besides, what the fuck do you think democracy is? its voting. if they want to vote in a bunch of theocratic illiterates, why shouldn't they be able to? thats what we in the US did in 2000 and 2004.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The MB isn't theocrats. They're the Egyptian equivalent of the Republican party. Elections have consequences, let's see how they do before we get nervous about the boogeyman.
Re: (Score:1)
The MB isn't theocrats. They're the Egyptian equivalent of the Republican party.
So... they're theocrats.
Re:So... (Score:4, Informative)
The Justice and Development party is not pushing for a theocracy, they're less extreme than the Republican party in the US. Yes, they'd like their new democracies to reflect Islamic values, just as most Americans want the US to reflect Christian values. Heck, Tunisia's new electoral winners, the Ennahda party, won't even ban alcohol. You're falling for the FUD.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So... (Score:5, Funny)
If France had taken that attitude in 1776 Americans would be speaking English now.
and we wouldn't have had Vietnam (Score:3)
If france had withdrawn from it's colonies, we wouldn't have had the French-Indochina war, the battle at Dien Ben Phu, and the Vietnam War.
there also would have been no Algerian-French war.
also there would have been no Napoleon, and his mass invasion of Russia.
there might have been no mass cadres of Communists from all over the world coming to France to study, and then spreading their bullshit over the earth like in Cambodia.
all in all, if France had taken care of it's own business in 1776 instead of trying
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, cause certainly the minority suppressions, sexism and xenophobia of all of these native cultures is superior to that of France. You might want to take a look at the practices of these indigenous cultures before the Europeans got there, and after they left before you decide that they were worse off under French rule. Just off hand the Khmer Rouge comes to mind in Cambodia,
So basically the absence of French Colonialism doesn't equal the absence of war, it just means that no Europeans would have been kil
Re:So... (Score:4, Interesting)
When we discover a valuable mineral deposit we can't get from a less war-torn nation. Why don't we send some freedom to the FARC occupied territories of northern Columbia, ending the cocaine trade forever? Because it would cost $100 billion and 100,000 US Soldier lives.
Freedom is really damn expensive, as it turns out. Ask the British, WWII nearly bankrupted their country, and we still had to write off most of the debt we loaned them.
Freedom used to be a lot cheaper. You can grow a full replacement army of humans every 15-20 years, but Tanks, Jets, Bombers, Aircraft Carriers etc have to be purchased with Gold and Gold Equivalents. When they break you can't just send them to the hospital for a few weeks before going back to the front lines. Machines need a whole additional set of parts, logistics and mechanics that you have to pay for.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
My, you guys are almost as good at history as you are at geography. http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Britain_makes_final_World_War_II_debt_payments [wikinews.org]
Re:So... (Score:4, Informative)
We wrote off the $31 billion (half a trillion dollars in today's money) we loaned to you during WW2, then loaned you some more money.
To clarify:
What we wrote off: The $31 Billion freebie [wikipedia.org]
What you guys actually paid back:The $4.33 Billion Loan [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
We wrote off the $31 billion (half a trillion dollars in today's money) we loaned to you during WW2, then loaned you some more money.
This is not entirely correct. The "money written off" was actually supplies and war material from USA and Canada sent to Britain. Britain paid in kind by effectively handing over export rights to the commonwealth, reverse lend-lease transfers, giving away basing rights and let's not forget Roosevelts initial plan - carrying the battle against the Nazis so you wouldn't have to.
Re: (Score:2)
Britan paid Canada back at the same time they paid the US back for their 50 year loan; their loan amount to Canada was much smaller (~$20 million a year). The US got some concessions but the $31 billion was aid much like we gave Israel, Iran or Iraq in the second half of the last century, we didn't expect to get it back, but we were able to twist your arm a little for some lunch money on a few things in return ;)
Re: (Score:2)
You've referred twice to the writing off of loans. This was a grant, not a loan, therefore it's complete nonsense to refer to writing it off.
Re: (Score:3)
Steve Jobs (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
WTF?! I wish I had mod points so I could mod you -1 Tasteless
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't strike me as tateless. Seems to fulfill the definition of irony.
Now if someone had posted a happy post-bloodshed pictures of Syrian children eating ice cream cones and claimed it was irony I would strongly object! Although Ernest A. Hamwi, an American of Syrian descent, invented the ice cream cone, ice cream cones have nothing to do with revolutions or protest (except for the gelato riots of 1908) - thus no irony.
However, to be fair, if I take the long view that mentioning Steve Jobs is going to be
Re: (Score:1)
Ironically creator of iPhone had Syrian blood.
Not ironic, and not accurate. He was of Syrian decent, but he had Jewish, not Syrian, blood.
You, I take it, have nothing but racist blood?
Jobs vs Assad (Score:5, Interesting)
logical (Score:3, Informative)
This is logical conclusion of any government - complete take over all powers and destruction of all liberties. Not that there were huge number of liberties in Syria to begin with, but it's the same trend with all governments.
Re: (Score:2)
Out of curiosity, what logic leads to that conclusion?
Ban it! (Score:3)
Yeah, 'cause, you know, the only way you can send information out of a country is through a country-specific, iphone-only app?
Maybe they would be better (Score:1)
Maybe they would be better off banning guns instead
(No, the 2nd amendment doesn't apply in Syria)
Still not enough to boost Nokia sales! (Score:1)
Nice try Assad.
Let me make this easier for all of us (Score:1, Interesting)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Syria_Oil_Map.gif
There.
And now lets go and help those poor people there.
Why ban the phone? (Score:2)
Just force their telecom companies to turn off the service..
( ya, i know wifi exists too, but in practical terms it would squelch them )
Re: (Score:3)
Worked so well for Egypt, right?
Re: (Score:2)
i don't think Egypt actually killed phone service, but instead tried to block various types of access.
Killing the service does it all in one fell swoop, and its done at the carrier level so it would be impossible to get around it.
Re: (Score:2)
One of the countries that got tossed in Arab Spring shut down their access at the carrier level, I remember- I thought it was Egypt.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, sure, try to ban something in the US that makes some big company a buttload of money. Just try.
Don't worry, your iPhones are safe. Apple sure is too big to fail.
Just a misspelling (Score:2)
Curious (Score:1)
And after the revolution? (Score:1)
Classic dictator overreach (Score:2)
Dissident makes iPhone app about pro-democracy news, Syrian dictator responds by banning all iPhones. Also because it has cameras that can be used to post videos to the site.
Did anyone else read that as "Siri bans iPhone"? (Score:1)
I was quite confused for a moment.
Port the app (Score:1)
Cue Android port in 3...2...1...
The disadvantage of the iPhone (Score:2)
Corporate Freedom Fighters? (Score:2)
given that big companies have so much influence over US (and indeed western) politics, i wonder how long until Apple brings this to the courts - perhaps the powers that be in Syria have links to other phone manufacturers?
i'd laugh if Apple sued Syria('s government) into nonexistence over banning the iPhone... money talks louder than protesters.