Iran’s stranglehold on Internet use in the country is no secret. From monitoring its users to blocking sites quicker than you can say Ahmadinejad, Iranian authorities will stop at nothing to ensure that their citizens’ Internet use is highly regulated. Even if it means they have to build their own Internet, so to speak.
The latest Internet-related piece of news to come out of Iran is probably the most disturbing we’ve heard in a while. An Iranian web programmer, Saeed Malekpour, has been sentenced to death on charges of insulting the sanctity of Islam. He was accused of developing porn sites, and according to the Guardian, Malekpour’s accusation is the result of developing software to upload photos, which was then used by a porn site without his knowledge.
Malekpour, a Canadian resident, was arrested during a visit to Iran in 2008 and was placed in the notorious Tehran prison, Evin. Malekpour spent his first year in solitary confinement, with no charges brought against him.
With a confession, which Malekpour says was violently forced out of him, the Iranian Supreme Court sentenced him to death in June 2011. In a letter shared by Persian2English in March 2010, Malekpour wrote:
A large portion of my confession was extracted under pressure, physical and psychological torture, threats to myself and my family, and false promises of immediate release upon giving a false confession to whatever the interrogators dictated.
The forced confessions went on for a month, some of which Malekpour described as “ridiculous”:
They asked me to falsely confess to purchasing software from the UK and then posting it on my website for sale. I was forced to add that when somebody visited my website, the software would be, without his/her knowledge, installed on their computer and would take control of their webcam, even when their webcam is turned off. Although I told them that what they were suggesting was impossible from a technological point of view, they responded that I should not concern myself with such things.
Using these confessions, which were recorded and broadcast on state TV, Malekpour was sentenced to death. In June 2011, the death sentence was suspended, and Malekpour’s case came under review once again.
Today, the Supreme Court has upheld the sentence, which could be carried out any day now. In a statement issued by his office, Canada’s Foreign Minister John Baird said:
“Canada condemns Iran’s reported decision to execute Mr. Malekpour. Sadly, his case is far from the only example of Iran’s utter disregard for human life. The regime in Tehran frequently ignores principles like due process for its citizens domestically, and international human rights obligations generally.”
Malekpour’s case is not the only one that we have seen this month to come out of Iran. Last week, Global Voices reported that Iranian blogger Siamak Mehr could face the death sentence after a 15 minute trial in December. He, like Malekpour, has been charged with insulting Islam.


















It's all about a few people creating fear in most of the people, so they remain sheep.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeAndrew it is not infer you mean it's imply. That over, one almost feels reading this, that why wait any longer before bombing them back into the Middle Ages where they belong and where they long to be. Our Western liberal values forbid that I guess.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeI think your title sucks - it seems to infer that if he had developed software used in porn distribution that his sentence would be justified. This is awful the Iranian government is a bunch of thugs (according to my friend who was in the Iranian Airforce), I am no neo-con but perhaps it's time for arab spring to reach Tehran.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeAnd what is Stephen Harper doing about it? NOTHING! That extremist right winged, Fundamentalist is doing NOTHING to protect Canadian citizens in other countries! He never has, and he never will!
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeWhat the fuck??
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeKilling people for nothing. Until when?
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeJesus. That makes me sick.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Likethey are pure scum. the middle east is a horrible place and it lives up to its horrific stereotype yet again and shows what a terrible role religion plays in society and has since the beginning of time. bloody pathetic excuse for human beings
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Likech33se It has nothing to do with religion and it never has. Dictators will use whatever excuse is handy to reinforce their grip. The most state-sponsored deaths in history have been by nations that banned religion.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeMerennullich33se The problem is, Religion is an exceptionally powerful tool to use in that situation. It's platform is unchallengeable and absolute. It also impairs critical thinking and reason based discussions with the logic that "Because people from over a thousand years ago say so".
Religion is a tool, and like any tool, wielded by the right person, can be deadly. It's like giving a Navy Seal a .50cal gun and putting him in charge of a school full of children.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Liketyfudch33se This is pure rhetoric. We've seen time and again how the "tool" of religion was easily replaced with sophistry about the People's Will, Democracy, Worker's Rights, and even atheism. The very same rhetoric you just used HAS been used in multiple countries to excuse state-sponsored killings.
The problem is never the tool. It's who people allow to wield it. I would trust the -well trained- Navy Seal in your hypothetical situation with a .50cal around children far more than the average unarmed substitute teacher with zero training.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeMerennullityfudch33se Oh? You want to draw equivalence? When was the last time someone was put to death for "insulting atheism"?
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Likenoduermetyfudch33se Likely yesterday. Have to check with Mao to be sure.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeMerennullinoduermech33se
Speaking of rhetoric...That has nothing to do with atheism. It's about any leader's agenda. Purely political. Atheism has no political alignments or life ideals. It's just an absence of belief in a god. Any god. Nothing more, nothing less.
Mao put people to death for insulting his control over them. For trying to fight the system he implemented, because that's how you do it. He did not put anyone to death for saying "there's a God". He put them to death because by saying that and attempting to form a religion, they were challenging his control over them. Religion is a powerful social tool and can challenge authority with fast spreading adoption of a belief that's contrary to political ideologues.
Religion also comes with it's own "way of life" as some sort of a guidebook, which many people in authority will also use to subvert people of that religion to dominance. It's about using whatever tools get the job done, and religion is a very powerful tool for accomplishing that.
Look at the war on Iraq/Afghanistan for oil that was called for because our president believed God told him to go to war and it was a holy war.
Or the crusades. Or the religious killings in the middle east. Or the hangings of gay/blacks from extremist religious groups who were told to by God because that's what they got out of a 2,000 year old book.
Religion, like any tool, can also be used for good. But it's been used more consistently throughout history, and even the modern day, for exerting control and keeping civilization in the stone age with an outdated moral code that's constantly struggling with the budding humanist realizations that we're all equal and we all deserve an equal chance to be happy as long as nobody gets hurt.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeMerennullityfudch33se That's BS. Communists had some screwed up reasons for executing people; whatever they considered anti-revolutionary; but there was no charge called "insulting atheism". When was the last time someone was executed by a state for "insulting" Christianity? Or Buddhism? Or Hinduism? Or Judaism? Or any other religion?
Maybe the question should be put differently. Since you think this is just ho-hum power at work, and from there presumably draw equivalence with every other regime in the world, do you think the US would be a worse place if people could be executed for insulting Jesus? Or would it be just the same as it is right now?
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Liketyfudnoduermech33se It no more has to do with atheism than the issue in Iran has to do with Islam. Both are used as an excuse to gloss over the fact that the ruler is making arbitrary decisions that do not respect the value of human life. With true Islam, true Christianity, and true (insert almost any religion here), the actual doctrine states that the leaders aren't supposed to do what evils they do with it. Atheism lacks the base doctrine, but that doesn't mean atheists don't equally know the value of human life. Regardless, each one is twisted and painted over the top of the leader's agenda.
It's no less true when the bitter old men and women of a community grow frustrated with the change reality forces upon them and make up pseudo-Old English slogans that sound like they fit with the King James translation but directly contradict the Bible to suit the will of the extremist.
Karl Marx called religion the "opiate of the masses", using that thinking the same way you are now. Using Karl's words, Lenin demonized religion and made it the scapegoat and excuse for millions of deaths.
Closed mindedness is the opiate of the masses, and it knows no religious creed.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeMerennullich33se Hold on, I've got this.
Maybe Mao and Stalin were in fact True Atheists. It doesn't matter. They killed people and killing people is wrong. It would not have been any better or worse if they had or hadn't been True Atheists; killing people is always wrong no matter what you believe and what they believe.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Likech33se So by your logic, every authoritarian regime represents their people? In case you missed it, there was quite the popular uprising in Iran in which they attempted to put an end to this very kind of thing.
It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to claim that a government like this actually represents the real society that it governs over. You seem a little blinded by your hatred there...
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeHow bizarre.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeNice going Iran. This should really get your tourism business back on track.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Likethis is a test comment to see if they're posting
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Like