05 February 1404 at 12:29
In the coinuation of the conflicts over the policies of limiting cyber space, Kayhan newspaper took a critical position against the advocates of liberalizing access to the Iernet.
Using an aggressive tone in its latest note, Keihan has targeted iernet connectivity advocates. With regard to the latest domestic news, this newspaper has accused the defenders of iernet liberalization that they ignore the cultural and security consequences of an unregulated environme under the pretext of online business prosperity.
Keihan newspaper: Do not sacrifice security for virtual prosperity
In a sharp and frank note, Kayhan newspaper launched an all-out attack on curres that, focusing on economic ierests, demand the complete reopening of cyberspace and the removal of existing restrictions. By questioning the motives of these people, this newspaper considered the demand to return to the so-called “Yale and Raha virtual space” as a heavy price for national security.
By posing a coroversial and provocative question, Kaihan targets the basis of the argume of the propones of liberation: “Today, one should ask those who demand the opening of the virtual space so that, for example, the economy can prosper: How many do you cou each drop of martyr’s blood?” This newspaper explicitly calls the profits from activities on popular foreign platforms “blood money”.
This accusation is specifically stated in reference to the security coe published in these spaces: “Is the profit from the Instagram showcases in which training is given to slaughter security officers, nothing but blood money?”
Next, Kahan’s criticism is aimed at governme officials. This newspaper strongly complains that some members of the cabinet have appeared as critics of filtering, instead of answering about the failure to act in the establishme of the National Information Network, which was the main task of the governme. This protest is especially focused on Mohammad Jaafar Ghaempanah, the executive vice preside.
Keihan refers to his statemes in a meeting with digital activists. At that meeting, Qaimpanah apologized for the restrictions and considered the blockades to be the cause of the people’s dissatisfaction and the governme’s loss: “The governme itself suffers the most loss from this incide. “Blocking and filtering are the cause of people’s dissatisfaction, and I apologize for the ierruption of the Iernet.”
This newspaper believes that the vice preside should apologize to the families of 2,427 martyrs who sacrificed their lives for the wrong policy of “sacrificing security for speed”. According to Kahan, the apology should not be for restricting access, but rather for the historical delay in building a nationally secure infrastructure.
This newspaper considers the cutting of rece access not a restriction, but a necessary measure to preve infiltration: “The apology should be for the years of delay in creating a secure national infrastructure, not for cutting off the access of CIA and Mossad terrorists to the throat of the nation!” Finally, Kayhan emphasized the principle of governance and wrote: “Security is a prerequisite for any type of business, and a statesman who sacrifices security for the sake of colonial platforms is actually weakening the bargaining power of national governance.”
