back to article Iran kills the internet for its people's own good as riots grip the Middle Eastern nation

Iran has been offline for three days after the government responded to widespread protests by killing the internet. Anti-government protests started on Friday when the authorities announced a sudden 50 per cent increase in fuel prices. The protests quickly spread to over 100 cities and towns, reflecting deeper hostility to the …


  1. Claverhouse Silver badge

    For All Our Sakes

    With Climate Change pressure, auto fuel around the world will go up.

    Fortunately the American public at least will take a 3X price increase without bitching.

    1. Imhotep

      Re: For All Our Sakes

      Climate change and fuel prices? Can you explain the connection?

      1. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

        Re: Connection from fuel prices to Primate Strange.

        (This post has been edited to remove words and phrases that cause panick among the President's appointed snow flakes.)

        CO2 lets sunlight through but blocks infra-red (what sunlight becomes after hitting Earth) this is the source of heat for Modal Warning. Burning fossil fuels creates CO2. Transport is a major use of fossil fuels. Increasing the price of fuel gives people a financial incentive to reduce distance travelled or to travel in a more efficient vehicle.

        (Perhaps with the offensive words removed Minitrue will not rewrite fulwise to rectify malquoted misprints.)

        1. Imhotep

          Re: Connection from fuel prices to Primate Strange.

          In your scenario it is not climate change increasing the cost of fuel, but government intervention.

          Perhaps you should read, think and then post - and perhaps refrain from the snarky attitude.

        2. steviebuk Silver badge

          Re: Connection from fuel prices to Primate Strange.

          "Increasing the price of fuel gives people a financial incentive to reduce distance travelled or to travel in a more efficient vehicle."

          Spoken/written like a politician. Ignoring the fact a lot of people are stuck in dead end jobs that just about pay minimum wage. Because of this they are still forced to drive the £250 shit box that was all they could afford, for the job that requires a car. They'd love an electric vehicle (while they can still charge them without massive queues at stations due to how long they take to charge) but couldn't possibly afford one. Not only that, when living in a council estate there are two issues. The fact you can't dangle a power lead out of your top floor flat all the way down to charge the car and the fact there are, to put it bluntly, knuckle headed cunts that live in said block who'll either try to nick the electric car or smash it up just because its not theirs & because they can. And you have the politicians or reg readers saying "Just put the price of petrol up. It will force the poor to abandon their car they can't afford to abandon or force them into getting an electric vehicle" when in fact it will just force them into more poverty because they'll be forced to pay the higher price in petrol due to having no other way out. The only people that can afford that electrical car switch are the ones already with money and now they'll have even more money to wave in our face.

          1. Mark Exclamation

            Re: Connection from fuel prices to Primate Strange.

            @steviebuk - well said, wish I could upvote you more than once!

          2. Clunking Fist Bronze badge

            Re: Connection from fuel prices to Primate Strange.

            Meanwhile, Prince Charles and Leonardo Dicaprio will fly around the world in first class whilst telling us to consume less...

          3. BlueTemplar

            Re: Connection from fuel prices to Primate Strange.

            Well, yes, fossil fuels account for most of our wealth. And so we've been living above our means for decades - the people that can afford to drive a car every day are certainly NOT "poor" by worldwide standards. (But I'm not going to discount their feeling of being "trapped" either - by definition, it takes a very weird type of person to go against social norms !)

        3. DiViDeD Silver badge

          Re: Connection from fuel prices to Primate Strange.

          Increasing the price of fuel gives people a financial incentive to reduce distance travelled or to travel in a more efficient vehicle

          Of course it does! After all, here in ArseTrailer, when cigarettes went up in the space of a few years from $3.00 a pack to $40.00+, everyone simply stopped smoking.

          1. jake Silver badge

            Re: Connection from fuel prices to Primate Strange.

            I know one couple who emigrated from Oz to California, mostly because of the (and I'm quoting here) "inbred mouth-breathing cunts in Canberra" ... but it was the tax on cigs that pushed 'em over the edge.

            She was born in Perth, he's a Native Californian, but was raised mostly in Melbourne (Mom from CA, dad from Australia).

            Oddly enough, after two years in CA they have now both quit smoking entirely ...

      2. EBG

        I'd have thought

        Reduction of demand for fossil fuels under "decarbonisation" would result in a lowering of fuel prices. Unless gov. increases the already punitive taxation.

      3. Imhotep

        Re: For All Our Sakes

        It was a simple question. Why would climate change increase fuel prices? Prices are normally determined by supply and demand, and, of course, taxes/fees also have an impact.

        The climate certainly has no effect on supply, and a movement to sustainable energy supplies would seem to decrease demand. That would usually tend to lower fuel costs, absent other factors.

    2. Dave314159ggggdffsdds

      Re: For All Our Sakes

      Why do people like you insist on rejecting the scientific consensus?

      1. Cederic Silver badge

        Re: For All Our Sakes

        Mainly because of decades of climate emergencies turning out to be nonsense.

        Ask yourself why we're all worried about climate change and not global warming, and indeed whether it's because all of the global warming climate models used to foment such fear and calls for action turned out to be entirely fucking wrong.

        At this stage a degree of scepticism is very appropriate. Reduce plastics use, seek more efficient everything, minimise resource use but don't go using discredited models based on faked data to try and scare me into shit.

        1. BigSLitleP Silver badge

          Re: For All Our Sakes

          If you think the current models are based on faked data, you are part of the problem.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: For All Our Sakes

            "If you think the current models are based on faked data, you are part of the problem."

            If you don't believe climate science is heavily politicized, YOU are part of the problem.

            As far as "scientific consensus" goes, I can supply a long list of "approved hypotheses" that were disproved later. Science is REQUIRED to include doubt and demands attempts to disprove hypotheses.

            Any attempt to shut down scientific debate is a sure sign of Ideology rearing its ugly head. Only political types try to silence dissent. True scientists WELCOME it.

            1. kmedcalf

              Re: For All Our Sakes

              Except of course for Galileo ...

          2. Mark Exclamation

            Re: For All Our Sakes

            @BigSLitleP - All the current models are based on "adjusted data" - why are they afraid of using "raw" data?

            Who wrote the computer modeling programs? Those who trumpet climate change did. Adjust a few lines of code here and there, and you'll get a completely different conclusion, maybe one that discredits climate change.

            If you think current models are completely accurate, you are part of the problem.

        2. DiViDeD Silver badge

          Re: For All Our Sakes

          "Climate Emergencies" are invented by press and politicians when they want to stir up public opinion or sell something (newspapers, advertising, unpopular policies, whatever). Science simply ploughs on, building up a body of evidence that nobody wants to read about because it's not melodramatic or divisive enough.

          We talk about Climate Change because, since the 19th century, that's what it's been referred to in scientific papers. Are you confusing newspaper headlines with actual science?

          Discredited models and fake data? Are you sure? You have citations (that don't come from sensationalist Op Ed pieces, I mean)?

          We are currently, according to very well researched evidence, at, or possibly a little way past, the point where changes in human behaviour might have helped to reduce the impact of CO2 on our climate. Scientists regard this as an emergency, not simply because the opportunity to do something is rapidly slipping away (if it hasn't already) but also because no bugger seems to be interested in doing anything in case it interferes with profits. No, the world is not going to end in fire in 20 years, but neither is it going to "sort things out on its own"

      2. Imhotep

        Re: For All Our Sakes

        Your comment has nothing to do with my question.

  2. jake Silver badge

    President Hassan Rouhani says the protesters are "thugs"?

    I think the proper psychological term is "projection".

    1. BrownishMonstr Bronze badge

      Re: President Hassan Rouhani says the protesters are "thugs"?

      I thought Mr. Supremo called them thugs?

  3. IceC0ld Silver badge

    without belittling the protest

    if the people will rise against 13 CENTS a litre, what would happen if they ever have to charge $2 a litre

    the govt will crack down, 00's possibly 000's will die, yet the people WILL prevail, they are already aware of a world outside Iran, the older generation will still recall when they had basic freedoms, and WOMEN were granted full access to education / work etc, even with the Shah's use of Savak - secret police - to hold onto power, the people will also be aware of how that turned out too

    the world is watching, it is a toothless beast on most occasions, but Iran DOES have OIL

    and it is, therefore, a good candidate for 'liberation' ......................

    we shall have to wait and see, and, sadly, the people there will, again, suffer

    sometimes this world we live makes me feckin weep

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: without belittling the protest

      Do you not think the fact they have oil in some way influences the media reporting like it possibly does with Venezuela? The 1st and 2nd countries in oil reserves. In honesty we can't know for sure, I may wrong however when I look at how these things are reported and consider the other countries rioting like Chile and Ecuador against social injustice from installed dictators and how they are not reported I think somethings not quite right. Hong Kong gets reported not because of oil or that they care, it's to perpetuate a world view, not one that I disagree with in this regard. I should give Iraq an honourable mention seeing as though nobody else really is, it's funny how once you have secured the oil fields the people don't matter anymore.

      1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds

        Re: without belittling the protest

        You have that the wrong way up, because you haven't understood the technical meaning of reserves. Venezuela and Iran have the world's largest reserves because they're failed states: reserves are what has been proven to the 'ready to pump profitably right now' standard, and because it's quite expensive to prove that, only mad countries do so for more than the next few years. Venezuela has 350 years of production lined up...

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: without belittling the protest

      The got used to cheap fuel. About 6-7 years ago when I had my last trip to Venezuela we filled up a big 4x4 which had a 70 litre tank and we paid with loose change in our pockets, when I did the math it came around to about 1 US dollar... puts perspective on the fuel taxes we pay in Europe, which is about half the price of the actual fuel if I'm not mistaken (too lazy to google, sorry).

      1. Def Silver badge

        Re: without belittling the protest

        which is about half the price of the actual fuel if I'm not mistaken

        Fuel duty plus VAT in the UK equals approximately three times the cost of the actual fuel.

        I think I'm right in saying Norway has some of the cheapest fuel in Europe. As of right now Diesel here is about 10p cheaper per litre than my old home town, outside Portsmouth. Add in the difference in salaries and it becomes cheaper still.

        1. Aristotles slow and dimwitted horse Silver badge

          Re: without belittling the protest

          Nothing to add other than well done for getting out of Portsmouth. I'm also just outside that craphole and am seriously thinking of heading back to either Italy or the UAE next year.

          1. Def Silver badge

            Re: without belittling the protest

            Well, technically I got out of Portsmouth every Saturday afternoon when I went home from shopping. I guess Havant's not much better in the grand scheme of things though. :)

            I left the area proper in the mid 90s though. Haven't looked back. (Have rarely been back to be honest.)

          2. markr555

            Re: without belittling the protest

            So Portsmouth is a craphole, but the UAE is a good place to live? You are obviously not a woman, an apostate, or a homosexual then, otherwise you might have thought a bit more about your intentions.

        2. 96percentchimp

          Re: without belittling the protest

          So what you're saying is that drivers in Norway pay neither for their carbon pollution nor their particulate pollution.

      2. LDS Silver badge

        Re: without belittling the protest

        Here we pay VAT on the fuel taxes as well...

    3. baud Bronze badge

      Re: without belittling the protest

      The actual cost figure alone like that doesn't give a lot of information: it's cheap, compared to US or EU prices, but it doesn't tell the whole story. It doesn't tell if the fuel makes up a big part of household budgets, which is more important to evaluate the impact of a 50% price increase. And fuel price increase will also impact food production and good deliveries, so it would raise prices across the board.

    4. phuzz Silver badge

      Re: without belittling the protest

      Current UK price is about £1.25 per litre, that's over $7 per gallon.

  4. Oengus Silver badge
    Thumb Down

    Only 13 cents

    Even with the price increase Iran’s 13 cents a liter gas prices

    If the Iranians riot over 13 cents per litre what would they do if they have a price rises we have here. In the last couple of days prices here have jumped up by 40+ cents per litre (33% increase). Lately this is standard for the regular price hike cycle.

    Jump price 25% during the day, drop steadily over the next couple of weeks to the starting price (or close to it), rinse, repeat.

    Oil companies here really rip us off.

    1. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

      Re: Only 13 cents

      Do not worry! There is a solution! On the 12th of December we get to decide who else rips us off.

  5. lglethal Silver badge

    Is every dictatorial regime stupid?

    I get it sanctions are hurting, cash reserves are dwindling and a large part of your budget is spent on fuel subsidies. You want to reduce that so you have more money to spend on, I dont know, equipping your thugs, sorry military. But EVERYTIME a dictorial regime ups its fuel or food prices massively by slashing subsidies, it gets massive riots. Often those riots escelate and the subsidies get reintroduced anyway, but the riots continue, and down falls the regime or at least it gets significantly weakened. EVERYTIME.

    Cant you play the long game for once? You've been managing your dictatorship for years now, show some patience. Drop the subsidies by a couple of cents a year until they're gone. People might grumble but an extra 2c per litre is not enough to bring people out on to the streets. But add 50c per litre and boom instant protests.

    Really how is this not in the basic Dictatorship for Beginners 101 course?

    1. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

      Re: Is every dictatorial regime stupid?

      It is always difficult to judge. The plan could be to identify the trouble makers and shoot them but I have such confidence in politicians that I believe the real answer is that back when they could afford to slowly increase prices they decided to delay because fairies riding unicorns would save them real soon now.

    2. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: Is every dictatorial regime stupid?

      Egypt managed to reduce fuel subsidies a couple of years ago and is still in power.

      1. BlueTemplar

        Re: Is every dictatorial regime stupid?

        Well, sounds like Egypt started out by making the same mistake, considering their recent history...

    3. Imhotep

      Re: Is every dictatorial regime stupid?

      Was it Churchill who described it as riding tigers and they couldn't get off?

      When misery reaches a certain level, things are just waiting for a spark. It doesn't matter whether it's something big or little, it just happens to be the wrong thing at the wrong time, and things blow up.

      Looking at the death count from this latest round of protests, this might be the time where the Mullahs lose control of the situation.

    4. Wicked Witch

      Re: Is every dictatorial regime stupid?

      They've been monkeying with their subsidies and local-use quotas for the last several years. They used to subsidise all sorts of random products (the standard big-organisation accumulation of decades of whatever seemed like a good idea at the time, applied to subsidies), then scrapped them all for a household-based UBI scheme, then scrapped that and started with the random subsidies again. They've managed to get away with most of them, and probably assumed they would again.

  6. Blockchain commentard Silver badge

    Did the Iranian's re-post pictures of Kim Kardashian's arse? That was supposed to break the internet!!!

  7. Pascal Monett Silver badge

    "80 per cent calmer"

    I read that to mean they have subdued or detained 80% of the protesters.

    And to those who are surprised about riots over 13 cents per liter gas prices, you forget that they don't have the same quality of life that you enjoy. This article from the World Bank paints a picture that is not all rosy. Unemployment is up, reaching an average of over 12% (more than 28% for the young). Poverty levels are rising up again, even though the bottom 40% of the population has seen an improvement due to international aid. With the sanctions, this is once again getting worse. Inflation is set to reach 30% in the coming years. Thirty percent.

    Look at your salary and image it being worth only two-thirds of that next year and tell me that you'd feel perfectly fine with a 50% price hike for fuel.

    I don't think so.

    1. Venerable and Fragrant Wind of Change

      Re: "80 per cent calmer"

      I'd be delighted. Long overdue. Of course it should be offset against a reduction in some more evil tax: for example, the employment tax they call "national insurance" that falls heavily on both hardworking people and productive business.

      Wasn't it 1973 we had a price hike of more than 100%?

    2. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Re: "80 per cent calmer"

      Look at your salary and image it being worth only two-thirds of that next year and tell me that you'd feel perfectly fine with a 50% price hike for fuel.

      After Dad died, we were doing a clear-out and found his salary book from the 70s. Around 74 maybe?

      He was getting a 2% pay rise, every month. This was because inflation was over 20% - and the company would go bust if it started paying its staff 24% more at the beginning of the year. But if they waited until the end of the year - he'd only be on 3/4 of his original salary, in cash terms, and he wouldn't be able to afford it.

      On the plus side, their mortgage was "only" at about 18% interest - and the face value of it was dropping rapidly in real terms.

      It being the 70s, he needed all that money to keep me in brown trousers and purple t-shirts. Often with orange stripes.

      1. Imhotep

        Re: "80 per cent calmer"

        Yes, and the word stagflation was coined to describe it. I know my salary didn't keep pace.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: "80 per cent calmer"

      I pictured a meteorologist giving that statment.

      "There's a 20% chance of unrest on Monday, with scattered riots on Tuesday and Wednesday."

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The guy who cuts my hair is Iranian and a wealth of information on how the clock has been turned back to the middle ages in Iran and any form of enlightenment is ruthlessly put down. Sad really as Persia was once a cradle area of civilisation and steeped in a rich cultural history.

    1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Yeah, but to understand why the mulahs have power you have to look at BP and the CIA working hand in hand to keep the Shah in power so they could get at all that lovely oil.


POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019