Remember when RADICAL FEMINIST Elon Musk won plaudits for "activating Starlink" to help Iranian protestors? His superfans swooned & the White House entered into talks with him about setting up SpaceX's satellite internet service in Iran to FIGHT THE POWER! About that...
The Iranian Govt imposed widespread internet blackouts to try to contain the unrest that followed the death in police custody of Mahsa Amini, detained for not wearing a hijab properly.
In response, billionaire SpaceX founder & serial attention-hogger Elon Musk asked the US government for exemptions from Iran export controls for his Starlink satellite internet service.
"Activating Starlink,” he tweeted, quickly gaining 187,000+ likes.
The tweet received great applause, with some of Musk's followers declaring him “one of the greatest freedom fighters of our century!"
Even the US government fell for the hype, with the State Department saying it would welcome & prioritise a licence application.
The idea was that satellite-based broadband service could help Iranians circumvent the regime's restrictions on accessing the internet & certain social media platforms, & so help Iranian women in their struggle - a noble ambition hardly anyone would criticise.
However...
While Starlink has plenty of satellites in position, there aren't any ground stations in Iran to receive signals. A terminal costs $599 & doesn't just require access to the satellites - they also need to be within a few hundred miles of a ground station. There are *none* in Iran.
They will only work, therefore, around the perimeter of the country, where terminals in neighboring nations, such as Turkey, Azerbaijan or Iraq, can be accessed.
While they're reasonably easy to disguise visually, they transmit as well as receive - making them simple to detect.
Musk hasn't said he'll cover the cost of the necessary satellite receiver dishes ($599 each) nor even the $110-per-month subscription fee - & thanks to Iran's ban on international transactions, Iranians can't buy them themselves.
Don't believe the hype.
While there is some evidence of receiver dishes being smuggled into Iran, it doesn't really matter as given that the dishes transmit as well as receive, they'd be announcing their presence to the Iranian authorities.
The fact is "there isn't a hope in hell of the plan working".
Concerning the protests in Iran, at tremendous risk to their safety, young people are demanding an end to years of oppression - burning their hijabs, shearing their hair, & marching in solidarity as the protest anthem Baraye, with its chorus “for #WomenLifeFreedom”.
In addition to instituting strict internet controls, blocking access to social media & knocking the entire web offline, the Iranian authorities have responded with a brutal crackdown in which over 230 Iranians are believed to have died.
Govts across the world are using technology to oppose uprisings, but another equally important question is: should grotesquely wealthy individuals like Elon Musk - known to have strong political views - really have a similar power? They already own swathes of our (news) media...
Many nations have severely curtailed internet freedom, including full shutdowns, as their default response to popular protests.
The most repressive regimes learn from each other, sharing technology & sometimes personnel to establish an ironclad grip on the web & their citizens.
At least 225 internet shutdowns have taken place in response to popular protests since 2016.
Access Now, which tracks internet shutdowns, reports that protests & political instability were the cause of 128 of 182 confirmed internet shutdowns in 2021.
Draconian protest laws & internet restrictions, including complete shutdowns, have followed popular protests in at least five countries in just the past 10 months, including Kazakhstan, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Burkina Faso & Tajikistan.
With great power comes great responsibility.
Protecting democracy & curbing the use of internet shutdowns—and the severe second-order consequences that attend them—requires a united approach that recognizes the underlying impulses & technologies, as well as the struggle of those impacted.
Repressive Governments have sought full control over the internet from the moment it was introduced, but shutdowns have emerged as a tactic in the past decade.
The number of shutdowns ballooned from just a handful in 2011 to a peak of 213 in 2019 before the Covid-19 pandemic.
While I welcome Musk's preference for an absence of censorship, in a democratic society, access to social media platforms, satellite technology & other essential components for the free flow of information should not be in the hands of profit-hungry corporations & individuals.
The Declaration for the Future of the Internet, signed last spring by the US, the European Union, & 60 other countries, is the strongest commitment governments have yet made to the future of a free, open, and global internet.
Among the declaration’s provisions is a commitment to “refrain from government-imposed internet shutdowns or degrading domestic Internet access, either entirely or partially.” The signatories to the declaration could form an alliance to counter creeping digital authoritarianism.
With Governments like the UK's signalling it wants to reduce or even withdraw from long-established internationally agreed laws & conventions of basic human rights, citizens & organisations that favour democracy over authoritarianism must remain vigilant. hrw.org/news/2022/10/2…
The threat to free access to information & the enjoyment of basic human rights is not an isolated one, but a global, networked menace. Countering it will likewise require a deeply interconnected global movement.
Transnational movements like the #MilkteaAlliance, have further united protesters demanding democracy & respect for human rights.
To achieve meaningful & durable change, connections like these must be further supported, sustained, & deepened.
Boris Johnson appears to have had a secret meeting with billionaire Peter Thiel - perhaps the most fanatical of the libertarian Oligarchs and co-founder of the controversial US data firm Palantir, the year before it was given a role at the heart of the UK’s pandemic response.
The hour-long afternoon meeting on 28 August 2019 was marked “private” in a log of Johnson’s activities that day and was not subsequently disclosed on the government’s public log of meetings.
Elon Musk has been amplifying far-right accounts again, including Tommy Robinson, Rupert Lowe, and numerous anonynmous known #disinformation superspreader accounts like 'End Wokeness'.
Let's examine the context for yesterday's march in Richard Tice's constituency, #Skegness.
After decades of neglect, Skegness (pop 20K), stands out on key socio-economic markers on national averages: residents are older; whiter; lower full-time employment; higher rates of few/no qualifications; and concentrated deprivation - it's far-more deprived than most of England.
History repeatedly teaches us that burdening already struggling communities is a recipe for disaster.
These communities have been crying out for help for DECADES, but successive UK Govts have largely ignored their pleas, and continued to increase inequality, which harms us all.
🧵 @Rylan Asylum seekers coming here aren’t technically "illegal." International law (the 1951 Refugee Convention) allows people to seek asylum in any country regardless of how they arrive or how many countries they pass through, as long as they're fleeing persecution or danger.
Allow me to explain why asylum seekers aren’t “illegal”, and how misinformation and nasty demonising and scapegoating rhetoric by certain politicians and media, including news media, has made some British people less welcoming of asylum seeekers.
@Rylan
People fleeing war, torture, or persecution have the legal right to seek asylum.
The 1951 Refugee Convention, which the UK helped write, says anyone escaping danger can apply for asylum in another country no matter how they arrive: claiming asylum isn't a crime.
Farage's illiberal, immoral, & unworkable authoritarian plan involves ripping up human rights laws forged after WWII, which protect British people, & wasting £billions of UK taxpayers' money, giving some of it to corrupt misogynistic totalitarian regimes. theguardian.com/politics/2025/…
Leaving the #ECHR, repealing the Human Rights Act and disapplying international conventions
The UK would be an outlier among European democracies, in the company of only Russia and Belarus, if it were to leave the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).
Opting out of treaties such as the 1951 UN Refugee Convention, the UN Convention against torture and the Council of Europe Anti-Trafficking Convention would also be likely to do serious harm to the UK’s international reputation.
It could also undermine current return deals, including with France, and other cooperation agreements on people-smuggling with European nations such as Germany.
The Society of Labour Lawyers said the plan would “in all likelihood preclude further cooperation and law enforcement in dealing with small boats coming from the continent and so increase, rather than reduce, the numbers reaching our shores”.
Farage said he would legislate to remove the “Hardial Singh” safeguards – a reference to a legal precedent that sets limits on the Home Office’s immigration detention powers – to allow indefinite detention for immigration purposes. This would be highly vulnerable to legal challenge.
Many of the rights protected by the ECHR and the Human Rights Act are rooted in British case law, so judges would still be able to prevent deportations, even without international conventions.
Reform UK’s grotesque far-right mass deportation plan is not just economically and socially illiterate (Britain an ageing population and low birth rate) rely on striking “returns agreements” with countries including Afghanistan, Iran, Eritrea and Sudan, offering financial incentives to secure these deals, alongside visa restrictions and potential sanctions on countries that refuse.
These are countries where the Home Office’s risk reports warn of widespread torture and persecution.
It would risk the scenario of making payments to countries such as Iran, whose regime the UK government has accused of plotting terror attacks on British soil.
The Liberal Democrats called the payments “a Taliban tax”, saying the plan would entail sending billions “to an oppressive regime that British soldiers fought and died to defeat”. They said: “Not a penny of taxpayers’ money should go to a group so closely linked to terrorist organisations proscribed by the UK.”
A reminder of the one, viewed 310,000 times, for which she was jailed, which urged people to burn down asylum seeker hotels after the #Southport attack - which had nothing to do with asylum seekers.
While all these tweets of Connolly's were made before her incendiary post, they don't say which year they were posted.
They can be accessed here, via The Wayback Machine, which has archived more than 916 billion web pages.
Connolly's tweet (top right) was in response to the tweet on the left, which criticised Laurence Fox for posting an upskirt photograph of Narinder Kaur.
The next one (right centre) was Connolly asking Kaur if she had 'flashed her gash'.
Aided by the billionaire-owned UK news media (Mail, Sun, Times, Metro, TalkTV and GB "News"), populist politicians push a cynical, divisive, and dangerously irresponsible false narrative that Britain is 'lawless'.