How people feel one way or another about Iran is one thing (personally, I don't see that making war with them over nuclear weapons which they don't really seem to have and are not likely to develop for years is such a good idea), but this article in the Khaleej Times made me grateful that I can blog about anything I damn well choose:

Khaleej Times Online  >> News >> MIDDLE EAST
Iran mulls death penalty for Internet crimes
(AFP)

2 July 2008

TEHERAN - Iran's parliament is set to debate a draft bill which could see the death penalty used for those deemed to promote corruption, prostitution and apostasy on the Internet, reports said on Wednesday.

MPs on Wednesday voted to discuss as a priority the draft bill which seeks to "toughen punishment for harming mental security in society," the ISNA news agency said.

The text lists a wide range of crimes such rape and armed robbery for which the death penalty is already applicable. The crime of apostasy (the act of leaving a religion, in this case Islam) is also already punishable by death.

However, the draft bill also includes "establishing weblogs and sites promoting corruption, prostitution and apostasy", which is a new addition to crimes punishable by death.

Those convicted of these crimes "should be punished as "mohareb' (enemy of God) and "corrupt on the earth'," the text says.

Under Iranian law the standard punishments for these two crimes are "hanging, amputation of the right hand and then the left foot as well as exile."

The bill -- which is yet to be debated by lawmakers -- also stipulates that the punishment handed out in these cases "cannot be commuted, suspended or changed".

Internet is widely used in Iran despite restrictions on access and the blocking of thousands of websites with a sexual content or deemed as insulting religious sanctities and promoting political dissent.

Blogging is also very popular among cyber-savvy young Iranians, some openly discussing their private lives or criticising the system.

Human rights groups have accused Iran of making excessive use of the death penalty but Teheran insists it is an effective deterrent that is carried out only after an exhaustive judicial process.

The number of executions soared last year to 317 amid a campaign which the authorities said was aimed at improving security in society, and was sharply up on 2006 figures when Amnesty International recorded 177 executions.

All legislation in Iran has to be rubber-stamped by a conservative clerical watchdog before it is written into law. The Guardians Council vets bills to see if they are in line with the constitution and Islamic law.

The most I feel about these idiots is pity.

Under The LobsterScope

Recently somebody posted an "Open letter to Linfar," which could only be considered a letter in this digital age. However, whether or not the drivel should have been considered a letter or not is not the point of this diary.

The diarists decries Linfar's sense of honesty and belief that an Obama election is the best thing we can do at this point. They forget the fact that Linfar once supported Hillary. They forget the fact that as Democrats we should ALL want to avoid a McCain Presidency... they probably forget a few other things as well but I'll leave that be.

The central question in their diary is why does Linfar (and others) doubt the purity of their intentions.

The question in my diary is this: Who else, aside from Linfar and myself, doubt the purity of their intentions?

Look, I am all for informed discussion on the issues and am fine with reasonable criticism of our nominee. I am also okay with former Hillary supporters who are getting on board, but are hesitant or lack enthusiasm for the nominee. I respect the fact that not everyone feels the way I feel about Barack Obama and I respect the fact that many are disappointed, for many different reasons, that Hillary did not win the nomination.

None of those people are who this diary is aimed at though.

This diary is a shout-out to the people who post the same comment over and over again.

This diary is a shout-out to the people who like to use the phrase "flip-flop" and other Republican buzz words to describe
our nominee.

Thats right, this diary is a shout-out to the trolls.

If the blogs on the campaign websites are an indicator for the state of the race, the Clinton campaign is in dire straits.

From the start the Obama campaign has been better integrated with the web, but the current activity-level on the two candidate websites is strikingly different.

Whether it's a lack of funding, or simply lack of good news, the blog-page on Hillary's website is not updated very frequently. But the few entries on the blog that are made generate a fraction of the comments posted on Barack's website

How do we hold the line on civility and respectful discourse?

It is a tough thing to discuss. It is the achilles heel of open blogs. Censorship goes against the very idea of this new form of media, but these forums are also vulnerable to a sort of playground rules mentallity.

When a concerted group of rough elbowed advocates show up and start posting and voting up mean spirited comments, the entire community is assaulted, but what can you do about it without coming down in some sort of heavy handed way?

I'll make this short. I'm in search for co-bloggers/co-authors for my political blog: Reliable Politics. I'm not the best blogger out there and I need people to help revamp the site editorially. I need bloggers who can give OBJECTIVE and UNBIASED opinions on race, Democrat or Republican. I'm not asking for daily updates, only periodical updates to keep the site relatively up-to-date and informative and to a certain level, interesting.

So, anyone want to help out a fellow blogger?

E-mail me at RJGajadhar@aol.com if you have any question or want to help out.

Could our "liberal" political leaders finally STAND FOR SOMETHING?  With Democrats like these, who needs Republicans???  

When the country is desperate for change, isn't it time for leaders who will... er... LEAD US there?  From the War in Iraq to universal health care to SCHIP to immigrant rights --- why can't we have leaders who believe in something and help persuade the nation, rather than pandering.  

Check out this great cartoon about the spineless pessimists and pragmatists standing in the way of a better future.  

Brought to you from the folks at the Movement Vision Lab

Someone once told me, "We have to meet people where they're at --- but we don't have to leave them there."  Same with the country.

Someone recently told me that powerful ideas make us uncomfortable enough to re-think what we thought.  In the political sphere, an idea isn't the same as a critique.  Pointing out the income gap is not an idea.  Arguing that the income gap is due to structural racism and the solution is affirmative action -- that's an idea.  Caps on carbon emissions, Social Security, a path to legalization, civil unions, universal health care -- these are all ideas that at one point or another have rubbed up against the status quo, made our nation uncomfortable and provoked change.  

It makes me think of new clothes.  The world has changed and the old threads of the New Deal or the Civil Rights Movement just don't fit the same anymore.  Or in many cases, cozy though they might be, our old ideas are worn and tattered in the face of new economic and social realities.  On the other hand, we can't keep accepting the straight jacket of Right-wing, savage-market ideology.  It's time for change.  

Unfortunately, in the wardrobe of new ideas, progressive advocates are pretty much naked. That's not to say we have no ideas whatsoever or that we can't come up with more -- but very plainly that we don't have a comprehensive and coherent, shared vision for the future to offer a nation desperate for change.

Too often as progressives, we're clear about what we're against but not what we're for.  And when we do focus on positive change, it's often in small, incremental steps.  Where do we talk about our long-term, ultimate vision for the future we want?  HERE!

The Movement Vision Lab aims to shake us out of our lazy comfort with the unchallenged orthodoxy of existing ideas and help us struggle together in search of bold and dynamic new ideas.  There are plenty of websites and blogs focused on what's wrong with politics and society today.  The Movement Vision Lab is where we all come to talk about solutions -- to trade and try on different ideas and develop our shared, alternative vision for the future.

Do you remember the story of the emperor who had no clothes?  It wasn't other elite members of the royal court who pointed it out, was it?  Political chatter today is dominated by the same elites who got us into this situation by following polls rather than leading with ideas.  And blogs and online media are often dangerously divorced from the real communities who are clamoring for change.   There's a sense that, if we just get some really smart people in the room, they can figure this vision thing out -- even if they've never experienced any of the problems their trying to solve or implemented a single idea in their lifetimes.  Maybe if we're looking for new ideas, we should start looking in new places.

The Movement Vision Lab amplifies the voices of grassroots leaders and organizers working in real communities across the United States.  These leaders not only have first-hand experience with the problems facing our society but also practical and innovative solutions that are grounded in the everyday realities of the communities where they live and work.  While these leaders -- and in particular leaders of color -- are often the most excluded from political discourse, their ideas and vision are what we need most.  

Each week on the Movement Vision Lab blog, we will ask community organizers and leaders to reflect on provocative questions about the future and offer their visionary ideas in response. This week, we're asking:  What is our vision for corporations, unions and the future of business?  We have four essays from Saru Jayaraman (Restaurant Opportunities Center of New York), Donald Cohen (Center on Policy Initiatives), Sarita Gupta (Jobs with Justice) and Omar Freilla (Green Worker Cooperatives).  We also have podcasts with Denise Perry (Power U Center for Social Change), Andy Stern (SEIU) and Burt Lauderdale (Kentuckians for the Commonwealth).  We urge you to comment and join in the discussion.  

Also check out the Idea Lab where you can search hundreds of concrete solutions for the future -- and add your ideas and resources, too.  Each week, we'll be adding new ideas and new features to the site so check back often.

Through the Movement Vision Lab Blog, Idea Lab and more, we promise to make you uncomfortable -- and to inspire, engage and energize you as well!