Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 199 posts

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#171

Post by nec4b »

eigenket wrote: post #138
throw10920 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You both are actively lying. I'm not talking about Tyler Kay, I'm talking about Wayne O’Rourke, whose tweets did not advocate for murder at all, let alone “set fire to all the fucking hotels full of the bastards”. Not once did I mention Tyler. That's something you fabricated to deceive and mislead. It's people like you that enable authoritarianism around the world by gaslighting others and justifying suppression of s…

Oh, that guy posted "Today was a terror attack by a Muslim...heads must roll" which again sounds like a call to violence to me. Sorry I picked the wrong guy calling for racial violence, my mistake.

I'm curious, what do you think "heads must roll" means? Is English your first language?

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#172

Post by hippich »

avodonosov wrote: post #162
hippich wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't find it easily now, but it was Zerkalo reporting on yet another person returning to Belarus caught at the Poland border. The conclusion was that despite not being subscribed to one of the "terrorists channel" (for readers not from Belarus - news channels, that are posting news not in favor of the state), mere opening such channel will cache images from such channel locally. When authorities grab the phone, th…

If you find the source in the coming days, while the HN thread is not yet blocked for posting - please share. I'd like to be aware of facts like this. Question. If you read Belarusian news, have you noticed that tut.by, being a quite decent, balanced news site in, say, 2013, 2014, in last years of its existence, maybe 2018, 2019, 2020 was quickly degrading, somewhere towards the Radio of the Thousand Hills? Deliberat…

quick search failed me at finding actual news article, here are recommendations for both Telegram and Viber regarding cached media files - https://news.zerkalo.io/life/69371.html

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#173

Post by fsckboy »

Hizonner wrote: post #165
fsckboy wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you internet searched "how do you dispose of a body" and then a body is discoved having been disposed of, and you are suspected in the killing, that evidence is introduced at your trial, and a jury will be influenced by it, even though all you did was visit and read the site. That evidence will be even more damning if the page you visited described a particular method that was seen in the case in question. This wo…

... and yet it is not illegal to do that search. You will not be fined, imprisoned, or whatever, for doing the search . The fact that something can, in some circumstances, be evidence doesn't mean it's a crime , and the distinction is absolutely critical in the context we're dealing with here.

all of the evidence taken together is what convicts you of a crime. People have been convicted of murder where no body was ever found. You can't point to any piece of the evidence that was used to convict and say "well that was not a crime, so leave it out". My explanation here of how evidence is used in court in gaining convictions is more accurate and realistic than the distinction you are are trying to make.

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#174

Post by Hizonner »

fsckboy wrote: post #173
Hizonner wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... and yet it is not illegal to do that search. You will not be fined, imprisoned, or whatever, for doing the search . The fact that something can, in some circumstances, be evidence doesn't mean it's a crime , and the distinction is absolutely critical in the context we're dealing with here.

all of the evidence taken together is what convicts you of a crime. People have been convicted of murder where no body was ever found. You can't point to any piece of the evidence that was used to convict and say "well that was not a crime, so leave it out". My explanation here of how evidence is used in court in gaining convictions is more accurate and realistic than the distinction you are are trying to make.

This started with somebody snarkily asking what the US fine was for just visiting a "forbidden" Web site, in the context of a Brazilian court order applying a large fine for just visiting Xitter. Not visiting Xitter in the course of planning a murder, not visiting Xitter in the context of sedition or whatever, just visiting any content on Xitter for any reason whatsoever.

It's pretty clear that this person thought there were such penalties, but in fact the US has absolutely nothing analogous. No order remotely like that would be issued in the US, because it's so obviously unconstitutional. If some third-tier hick judge did issue such an order, it would be overturned on appeal. If it were issued by the Supreme Court (and, no, not even the current Supreme Court would do that), all hell would break loose throughout the political system. It'd be a constitutional crisis. There are no such fines in the US. The US does lots of things wrong, but this is one of the areas the US tends to get right.

You're dredging up unrelated scenarios involving not-even-hypothetically-existent crimes that nobody was talking about. This is not about trying to use Web site visits to set somebody up for some crime they didn't commit, or even for some crime they did commit. Your weird scenario about, I don't know, being wrongfully charged with something else because your Web history somehow made somebody think you'd done it, is completely out of left field. The issue is entirely whether there's a penalty for visiting a Web site, and what you're talking about is totally irrelevant. And the hypothetical you seem to be trying to spin sounds less like being convicted of murder when there's no body, and more like being convicted of murder when the victim is known to be alive.

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#175

Post by eigenket »

nec4b wrote: post #171
eigenket wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, that guy posted "Today was a terror attack by a Muslim...heads must roll" which again sounds like a call to violence to me. Sorry I picked the wrong guy calling for racial violence, my mistake.

I'm curious, what do you think "heads must roll" means? Is English your first language?

Heads must roll has two meanings to me

1. The original meaning is that people must be killed.

2. The more common meaning these days is that people must be punished in some less dramatic way (usually fired).

It is typical of racists to use phrases with double meanings like this. The idea ia that when their words are quoted back at them they can attempt to avoid consequences by claiming they intended the other meaning.

I am a native English speaker.

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#176

Post by throw10920 »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #159
throw10920 wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I got the wrong guy because you weren't specific That doesn't make it any less of a lie - you said something factually false about the person I was referring to. You also made an assumption that you knew could be false in order to push a political agenda and deceive others. > Almost always is not the same as always. This is grasping for straws, and has the tyrannical premise of "guilty until proven innocent" behind…

Dude, cool your jets. The site guidelines call for you to assume good faith; you are failing at that. While you're at it, look up the definition of "lie". It doesn't mean "made a mistake out of confusion".

You're right, I should be better about assuming good faith - I'd say that at this point there's at least some evidence that the user is not acting in good faith, but it's still pretty tenuous, and I wasn't acting that way to begin with. Thank you for calling that out.

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#177

Post by defrost »

bufferoverflow wrote: post #111
defrost wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're left of the US centre (not global, US). Not "far left", not "very far left", and not "very, very far left".

Ok, you failed to show a single article with the right-wing perspective. How are they not far-left again?

I failed at nothing, I simply don't follow your orders .. perhaps try your "commands" on your dogs and|or children and see if you fare better.

As for NPR they have only a slight to moderate bias in story selection to the left and they report news not apply Fox | Sky News level spin to it.

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#178

Post by quotz »

aguaviva wrote: post #132
riehwvfbk wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh, they significantly sanitized their website following all the media attention. Now it does say it's all about medical supplies. However, one can't sanitize the entire Internet. Here's a page that mentions that Razom funds drones: https://dobro.ua/member/operator/bf-razom-dlia-ukrayiny/ But in any case, my question stands. Let's say a US citizen donated to a fund that supplied drones to Russia. Said drones do not…

Good catch. It seems the U.S. organization did provide funds for military drones for Ukraine, at least for a certain time after 2016. Not that there's anything wrong with that, of course. Sounds like a perfectly wholesome thing to do, in fact, given the situation Ukraine has been facing since 2014. Whether it continued to do so by the time of her donation (in late 2023) -- being as Razom does seem to have shifted its…

At first I believed it was trumped up charges, but now I realize theres more to the story. We went from ukrainian charity, to they provided funds for military drones in 2016. And the western media is not reporting this of course. Its as much propaganda as the russian media...

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#179

Post by quotz »

arp242 wrote: post #41
quotz wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If he was from the balkans his reason was definitely false and he just didnt wanna work at your place. We dont have that here, especially not for leaders not from our countries

Like I said, I don't recall exactly where he was from and can't be bothered to look it up, because it doesn't matter. But just because most people from location X don't have opinion Y, doesn't mean some don't. Either way, I certainly don't think he was making stuff up. He could have left at any time without any reason. We weren't holding him captive.

I reread your comment now I apologize. He was afraid of not getting arrested in Russia, rather then in his home country in the balkans. My bad.

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#180

Post by Moorko »

Dibby053 wrote: post #83

Buried under the rest of the article is this, since some people only do headlines I'll copy it here for visibility: >Shanbehzadeh was sentenced to five years for alleged pro-Israel propaganda activity, four years for insulting Islamic sanctities, two years for spreading lies online and an additional year for anti-regime propaganda. >His lawyer, Amir Raisian, told Shargh Network, a reformist newspaper in Iran, that he…

Anyone opposition who gets arrested will get those allegations by default in Iran. It doesn't mean that those are the real reason. The real reason is exactly what's written there: twitting a dot at supreme leader and getting more likes than him (he previously did say that 'If I post a dot, I'll get more like than the supreme leader hahaha').

He was also posting satires about the religion of peace.... :) Source: I'm Iranian.

Post reply on HN