Iran Protest Death Toll Could Top 30k, According to Local Health Officials

2026-01-2513:59311175time.com

At least 30,000 people were killed on Jan. 8 and 9 alone, senior officials of the country’s Ministry of Health tell TIME.

As many as 30,000 people could have been killed in the streets of Iran on Jan. 8 and 9 alone, two senior officials of the country’s Ministry of Health told TIME—indicating a dramatic surge in the death toll. So many people were slaughtered by Iranian security services on that Thursday and Friday, it overwhelmed the state’s capacity to dispose of the dead. Stocks of body bags were exhausted, the officials said, and eighteen-wheel semi-trailers replaced ambulances.

The government’s internal count of the dead, not previously revealed, far surpasses the toll of 3,117 announced on Jan. 21 by regime hardliners who report directly to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. (Ministries report to the elected President.) The 30,000 figure is also far beyond tallies being compiled by activists methodically assigning names to the dead. As of Saturday, the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency said it had confirmed 5,459 deaths and is investigating 17,031 more.

TIME has been unable to independently verify these figures.

The Health Ministry’s two-day figure roughly aligns with a count gathered by physicians and first responders, and also shared with TIME. That surreptitious tally of deaths recorded by hospitals stood at 30,304 as of Friday, according to Dr. Amir Parasta, a German-Iranian eye surgeon who prepared a report of the data. Parasta said that number does not reflect protest-related deaths of people registered at military hospitals, whose bodies were taken directly to morgues, or that happened in locales the inquiry did not reach. Iran’s National Security Council has said protests took place in around 4,000 locations across the country.

“We are getting closer to reality,” Dr. Parasta said. “But I guess the real figures are still way higher.”

That appears to be the reality implicit in the government’s internal figure of more than 30,000 deaths in two days. A slaughter on that scale, in the space of 48 hours, had experts on mass killing groping for comparisons.

“Most spasms of killing are not from shootings,” said Les Roberts, a professor at Columbia University who specializes in the epidemiology of violent death. “In Aleppo [Syria] and in Fallujah [Iraq], when spasms of death this high have occurred over a few days, it involved mostly explosives with some shooting.”

The only parallel offered by online databases occurred in the Holocaust. On the outskirts of Kyiv on Sept. 29 and 30, 1941, Nazi death squads executed 33,000 Ukrainian Jews by gunshot in a ravine known as Babyn Yar.

In Iran, the killing fields extended across the country where, since Dec. 28, hundreds of thousands of citizens had assembled in the streets chanting first, for relief from an economy in freefall, and soon for the downfall of the Islamic regime. During the first week, security forces confronted some demonstrations, using mostly non-lethal force, but with officials also offering conciliatory language, the regime response was uncertain. That changed during the weekend commencing Jan. 8. Protests peaked, as opposition groups, including Reza Pahlavi, the exiled son of Iran’s former shah, urged people to join the throngs, and U.S. President Donald Trump repeated vows to protect them, though no help arrived.

Witnesses say millions were in the streets when authorities shut down the internet and all other communications with the outside world. Rooftop snipers and trucks mounted with heavy machine guns opened fire, according to eyewitnesses and cell phone footage. On Friday, Jan. 9, an official of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps warned on state television to anyone venturing into the streets, “if … a bullet hits you, don’t complain.”

It took days for the reality to penetrate the internet blackout. Images of the bloodied bodies trickled out via illicit Starlink satellite internet connections. The task of counting the dead was hampered, however, because the authorities had also cut off lines of communications inside Iran. The first firm information came from a Tehran doctor who told TIME that just six hospitals in the capital had recorded at least 217 protester deaths after Thursday’s assault. Health care workers in Iran estimated at least 16,500 protesters had been killed by Jan. 10, according to an earlier report by Dr. Parasta in Munich. Friday’s update built on that research, he said.

“I am genuinely impressed by how quickly this work was pulled together under extremely constrained and risky conditions,” said Paul B. Spiegel, a professor at the Johns Hopkins University International School of Health. Like Roberts, he expressed wariness of extrapolating from the figures provided by hospitals. 

Roberts, who traveled into war zones to research civilian death rates in Iraq and the Democratic Republic of Congo, said, “the 30,000 verified deaths are almost certainly an underestimate.”

The emergence of the Ministry of Health numbers appears to confirm that—while underscoring the stakes for both Iranians and a regime that, in 1979, came to power when a sitting government was confronted by millions of people demanding its downfall.

On Friday, Jan. 9, Sahba Rashtian, an aspiring animation artist, joined friends on the streets in Isfahan, a city in central Iran famous for its beauty. "Before anyone started chanting," a friend told TIME, "Sahba was seen collapsed on the ground. Her sister noticed blood on her hand.”

Sahba died on an operating table at a nearby hospital. She was 23.

“She always joked about her beautiful name,” her friend said. “She’d laugh and say, ‘Sahba means wine, and I am forbidden in the Islamic Republic.’”

At the burial, the friend said, religious rites were barred, and Rashtian’s father wore white. 

“Congratulations,” he told mourners, according to the friend. “My daughter became a martyr on the path to freedom.”


Read the original article

Comments

  • By bothemer 2026-01-2514:519 reply

    On January 8, 2026, the digital sky went dark. I thought we are pushing the boundaries of the tech world and have super powers when needed. I was so wrong.

    This is Iran's third total internet shutdown, but the methodology has evolved into something far more surgical. They didn't just block IP addresses; they severed BGP routes, killed mobile data, and effectively jammed Starlink signals into a dead zone thanks to Russian imports. When the signal itself is murdered, your Tor bridges and VPNs become expensive paperweights.

    As builders, we are being out-engineered. We have grown complacent, assuming the "always-on" cloud is a fundamental constant of the universe. But if your software requires a remote handshake to function, it is a liability, not a tool, in a crisis zone. Every application built with heavy reliance on centralized APIs vaporizes the moment the backbone is cut.

    We must stop designing for the "connected" illusion and start building for the darkness.

    This is my plea to the HN community: stop treating "offline-first" as a niche feature and start treating it as a human right. We need robust, decentralized mesh networks that bypass state-controlled gateways entirely. We need isolated documentation tools and local-first databases that can sync via Bluetooth or physical handoffs.

    Build for the 212 regions that went dark last year so that the next time a state pulls the plug, the people aren't left helpless.

    a throwaway account for obvious reasons (they have also Chinese tech to track); make your code work when the world goes quiet.

    • By Aurornis 2026-01-2515:282 reply

      > This is my plea to the HN community: stop treating "offline-first" as a niche feature and start treating it as a human right. We need robust, decentralized mesh networks that bypass state-controlled gateways entirely. We need isolated documentation tools and local-first databases that can sync via Bluetooth or physical handoffs.

      I don’t want to downplay the seriousness of the problems in Iran, but switching to a world where tools are design first for syncing via Bluetooth and offline methods just isn’t going to make a better world for all of us.

      You need specialized tools for specialized situations. Trying to get the whole world to pay the overhead of mesh networks and Bluetooth handoffs and all of the design choices that go along with it would be a mistake.

      The software world is not monolithic. Pleas for everyone to stop building for the way the world works and start building for highly unusual and specific use cases isn’t reasonable.

      Build specialized tools for specialized circumstances. They will always serve the purpose far better than if you try to get everyone to build their general purpose tools around extremely rare circumstances.

      • By jvanderbot 2026-01-2515:31

        Expecting all apps to go offline-first is probably a nonstarter.

        Expecting a robust ecosystem of offline-first apps, ideally compatible with everyone else's existing apps, would be awesome.

        An opt-in facebook streaming offline mode where posts are queued and sent...

        or an opt-in signal mode where p2p messaging is possible via transient connections (imagine the data mule movie that would be coming out in 2030). All this is technically possible, just not prioritized.

      • By xantronix 2026-01-2516:10

        > The software world is not monolithic. Pleas for everyone to stop building for the way the world works and start building for highly unusual and specific use cases isn’t reasonable.

        This expressed expectation of "how the world works" is the perception of a monolith, however. There is no divine right or reason for things to be designed online-first, except for incentives to the service providers. When somebody designs an app to be online-first, they are choosing to be a service provider, and not an app author. This distinction may not be clear to developers who came to be in a culture where online-first is a first order concern, but it is immediately clear to anybody who "owns" the "app" in question when the service is either neglected or decommissioned in a few years, or is otherwise made inaccessible via the internet.

    • By StrLght 2026-01-2516:411 reply

      > We need robust, decentralized mesh networks that bypass state-controlled gateways entirely.

      Let's do a thought experiment: assume they're here and that we are talking about a dictatorship. What's next?

      If it's something like Meshtastic — it requires standalone hardware. These devices will be outlawed. The entire country will stop importing them, confiscating these devices from whoever uses them, probably jailing people who own them.

      Alright, then what if it's something like BitChat instead — you only need your phone. If it gets traction, police will stop you and force you to unlock your phone. They do this already in Russia.

      It's not a technical problem and can't be solved like one.

      • By jauntywundrkind 2026-01-2518:312 reply

        A million years ago when I was in highschool, teachers would make us show them that we cleared our TI-83 calculators.

        So there were of course various programs to simulate the experience of clearing the calculator. Plenty of ways through the police stop with our illicit digital goods, even then.

        Generally just don't come here anymore, but with the US fascists now checking phones at borders, the idea of having low detectability digital "smuggling compartments" (digitally speaking) in our devices is becoming all too real. Some loopback filesystem that your phone can mount that has the rest of the phone, various systemd-sysext layers for bitchat.

        With the UK joining the idiot races to maybe ban VPNs, we have another not so far off reason for needing protection versus the totalitarian. Sorry but if you believe tailscaling home is a crime you're the enemy of society, your rules are a joke, and declaration of Independence of cyberspace strongly is in detail about what a mockery of yourself you are making.

        • By StrLght 2026-01-2522:521 reply

          > A million years ago when I was in highschool, teachers would make us show them that we cleared our TI-83 calculators.

          Comparing high school to a dictatorship is one way to confirm that you have very little experience with the latter. You do understand that if something is causing issues to the regime, then regime will simply make it illegal? Illegal to use, to posses, to buy, etc. — not like specifics matter here.

          > Generally just don't come here anymore, but with the US fascists now checking phones at borders, the idea of having low detectability digital "smuggling compartments" (digitally speaking) in our devices is becoming all too real. Some loopback filesystem that your phone can mount that has the rest of the phone, various systemd-sysext layers for bitchat.

          Even then, that's just wishful thinking. Only GrapheneOS has something similar right now, duress PIN/password (which isn't exactly designed for cases like this, but still) [0]. It won't help you much in a dictatorship, the police isn't that dumb — you'll be subjecting yourself to physical harm by using it. They know that your phone isn't empty, and they don't need anything to prove it. For them gut feeling is enough, laws and human rights are irrelevant.

          Also, let's be realistic, Apple isn't going to have something like that on iOS.

          [0]: https://grapheneos.org/features#duress

          • By jauntywundrkind 2026-01-264:521 reply

            > You do understand that if something is causing issues to the regime, then regime will simply make it illegal?

            The teachers made having a calculator with stuff loaded on it illegal. IP piracy is illegal. Streaming sports is illegal. There's all manners of illegal activity we do. I don't see how my story wasn't clear to you: legality isn't self-enforcing, and it isn't the world's job to bow down to information control demands from governments.

            I'm not surprised but I am disappointed seeing two comments that have the most unhackerly spirit. Assuming we should try and do nothing, assuming the government has vast infinite overwhelming technical power, to the degree where it's not even worth trying anything or securing ourselves and our freedom of speech. Assuming technical works will make no difference. I don't think tech has control, is the end all be all here. But I think tech should be showing up to attempt the right thing, attempt to help people deal with fascist totalitarian movements trying to clamp down on the people of this world is something tech ought to do.

            > Even then, that's just wishful thinking.

            Well, to some degrees, I think it depends on us and our attitudes. And whether we just accept our lot/accept domination from above or not. With the increasingly scary situation at the US and in places like Iran, I think maybe perhaps more people might be interested in doing some civic good against thought control, hopefully.

            • By 4ggr0 2026-01-2711:111 reply

              if you get caught in high-school fake-clearing your TI, you may get a failed grade for this specific exam and/or detention.

              if you get caught doing an illegal activity in an authoritarian dictatorship, you face fines and/or prison time or death.

              of course we can compare these situations to use them as light analogies, but i think that's about where the comparison ends. or in other words, of course you can 1:1 compare situations if you completely dismiss the potential consequences.

              having the spirit to free yourself from fascism is needed, but you may get shot while trying to flee to safety or while being pinned to the ground, defenseless.

              • By jauntywundrkind 2026-01-2819:18

                The more the world can do to normalize good personal security & privacy, the harder it is going to be for regimes.

                Iran has had to turn off the internet for good to maintain their vicious violent theocratic totalitarianism. They had to basically give up technology, pull the plug. Sure that demonstrates them "winning", them having control, but also, they couldn't monitor everyone, they couldn't control technology, and their nation will be immensely poorer and worse generally, in remarkably huge ways, because they lost so hard & had no choice.

                The declaration of Independence of cyberspace was over the top & ridiculous, but it's right. These states have extremely limited power, and are smaller, much smaller, than the noosphere that surrounds them. With extreme injury states can secluded themselves, like a North Korea, to maintain control. But humankind comes from man the tool maker, homo erectus, and that has been and will keep being our better side. Giving the bastards up above hell, building liberatory, private systems isn't nearly as pointless and hopeless and useless as your 100% all negative don't even try view would indicate, we do have power, especially if we work broadly to improve the general footing, rather than building just exceptional war-time tooling.

        • By tavavex 2026-01-2519:18

          > Sorry but if you believe tailscaling home is a crime you're the enemy of society, your rules are a joke

          Are you replying to the wrong comment? The person above said nothing about how good or bad privacy measures are. What they're saying that totalitarianism is a problem of governance, not technology. In a totalitarian world, when some new technological way to bypass oversight is conceived, the government or other powerful entities will always have the means to shut it all down, they just need to care enough. If people start using VPNs en masse, they'll start mandatory computer searches, develop increasingly sophisticated tracing and detecting tech, or as a last resort shut it all down by targeting the underlying infrastructure - you know, like Iran. If enough people start carrying devices with hidden filesystems, then they'll start equipping police, border guards etc. with devices that plug into phones and detect these hidden compartments, armed with mandatory manufacturer backdoors and all zero-days they'll ever need. The point is that crackdowns are inevitable, unless your movement aims at staying nearly irrelevant to the regime. They always have the means to win. Changing it requires a restructuring of society, not an increasingly elaborate and lopsided cat-and-mouse game.

          > declaration of Independence of cyberspace

          Please tell me you're joking.

    • By luckylion 2026-01-2515:041 reply

      I disagree. Build for your target audience and your targeted application. We don't need for every vehicle to be off-road-capable when you're expecting to deliver cargo on paved roads. We can do that, but it will make things more complex and more expensive.

      I'm not saying that nobody should ever consider "the state cuts off the internet" as a criteria when deciding what to do, but making that a foundational requirement is like starting out with "handle google-scale" as a requirement when you have zero reason to believe you will.

      There are plenty of good reasons for local first apps, but "build for darkness" is pretty far down the list for me.

      • By TeMPOraL 2026-01-2515:271 reply

        In other words: "who's gonna pay for that?".

        The sad thing about continuing development of existing technologies is that all reliability, robustness, and multi-purpose capabilities get optimized away over time. In the ideal world, companies wouldn't even sell you hardware or software, they'd just charge for magically doing the one thing you want at the moment, with no generality and no agency on your end.

        It's a miracle we still have electric outlets in homes, and not just bunch of hard-wired appliances plugged in by vendor subcontractors.

        • By Aurornis 2026-01-2515:311 reply

          > In other words: "who's gonna pay for that?".

          As opposed to what? Everyone pays the overhead and price of apps designed for things like local-first Bluetooth sync?

          This is a situation where the market will prevail and people would go toward (and therefore pay for) apps designed to fit their needs, not apps designed around rare and unusual scenarios.

          Build specific tools for specific situations. You won’t get anywhere trying to get all general purpose apps to focus on niche requirements.

    • By RicoElectrico 2026-01-2515:113 reply

      Shameless plug: start with https://comaps.app/ . Recently I helped a woman find an address because she told me there's some problem with her internet connection.

      I think having an offline map of at least the region you live in can come in handy. In fact, I carry an old phone with impressive battery life (Samsung Galaxy A10) and offline maps installed on it so I don't get lost.

      • By sixtyj 2026-01-2516:46

        Paper maps (or printed) is mandatory when you are on track in mountains. Offline digital maps are useless in -30 when phone battery and powerbank are dead.

      • By cvarjas 2026-01-262:081 reply

        Great to see more offline map projects. Is this any different than Organic Maps currently? The about page indicated this project is a continuation of Organic Maps due to issues with that project, not sure if there are new features or if it will be the main project going forward.

        • By biodranik 2026-02-0221:25

          Organic Maps has more features, and will have even more features.

      • By graemep 2026-01-2516:01

        There are lots of offline map apps. OSMAnd, for one.

        Very useful in some areas. Not even that out of the way - I have needed offline maps in Cumbria, which is just rural and hilly.

    • By endofreach 2026-01-2521:04

      definitely not what you have in mind here, but at least something going a different route: https://offbridge.net

      of course nothing that would help iranians right now. even if, the numbers would be blocked quickly i guess. but also there doesnt seem to be features that would help in such a serious situation

    • By Noaidi 2026-01-2515:121 reply

      > As builders, we are being out-engineered.

      The funny part of engineers is that they always think that, at some point, they will reach perfect engineering.

      The best engineering already exists and you do not need to do a thing. Code will not save you from the shtstorm that is coming.

      • By Aurornis 2026-01-2515:21

        > The funny part of engineers is that they always think that, at some point, they will reach perfect engineering.

        This is the opposite of what I’ve observed. Most engineers know that everything is tradeoffs and compromises. They know there will always be a better way.

        A lot of engineering management is getting engineering teams to accept good enough rather than endless iterations and refactoring.

    • By ajjahs 2026-01-2515:56

      [dead]

    • By tomasphan 2026-01-2515:055 reply

      How would you communicate using an offline app?

      • By nailer 2026-01-2515:30

        By ‘offline’ they mean not connected to the internet. So peer to peer communication via wifi or bluetooth or USB or whatever else.

      • By trash_cat 2026-01-2515:07

        BitChat comes to mind.

      • By supertrope 2026-01-2517:08

        Copy files onto Micro SD cards. Smuggle them out of the country or to a contact who has Internet access.

      • By preisschild 2026-01-2515:21

        peer to peer RF like bluetooth or IEEE 802.15.4

      • By Noaidi 2026-01-2515:13

        With your mouth?

  • By firejake308 2026-01-2514:465 reply

    > As of Saturday, the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency said it had confirmed 5,459 deaths and is investigating 17,031 more.

    The 30,000 number comes from the Ministry of Health. It seems the UN number also aligns with the new 30,000 number. This is much worse than the 3,000 that was reported earlier. But it also seems like the crackdown is over now, and we're still just counting deaths from Jan 8 and 9.

    I compare this to the recent protests in Bangladesh, where Sheikh Hasina ordered the military to shoot the protesters and the military refused. The difference between these two countries is proof that people do have the ability to disobey orders from authoritarian leaders, and that decision can have a huge impact.

    • By reliabilityguy 2026-01-2515:061 reply

      The difference is that IR didn’t use Artesh (it’s military) to suppress the protests. They bused in its proxy militias from Iraq, who doesn’t care much who to shoot.

      • By swat535 2026-01-2516:061 reply

        I'm Iranian (diaspora from Canada), there are multiple branches of security forces in the regime:

        1. The army (air, land, sea, etc)

        2. IRGC (revolutionary guards)

        3. Basij (a specialized militia within IRCG, often with their own chain of command)

        4. Police (for civilian monitoring and control)

        5. Guidance Patrol (specialized "morality" police for enforcing Islamic law)

        6. Other (undercover, highly trained agents both inside and outside of country)

        The reason why it's setup up this way, is to prevent mutiny within the regime.

        After the revolution, they realized that they have to setup a system like this to protect themselves, if one of these is compromised.

        Currently, Iran is in the process of preparing for a long war with Israel, United States (and their allies in the region). Khamenei has been moved to a secure location and is no longer appearing for "Friday prayers".

        He will likely attempt to flee should the regime falls. I hope that he is captured alive and is forced to stand trial.

        He has to answer for every single person he has harmed, both in Iran and elsewhere.

        • By orwin 2026-01-2516:241 reply

          That's remarkably similar to Saddam Hussein organization, except the 5. Do they need that much because they are a minority in the country too?

          (Also, were your family part of the mujahideen/OMPI/MEK? I know two French iranian from the diaspora: one had his family involved in the revolution against the shah, and then had to leave when fundamentalists took power, and the other is from a Persian northern clan who supported the Shah and got booted out when the Shah fell, but they still had property (Hashish and poppy seeds if i understood the "import export" subtext correctly) in Afghanistan and northern Iran. Wildly different family stories, both still sad at what Iran became)

    • By GordonS 2026-01-2515:402 reply

      Isn't HRANA funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a well-known CIA front?

      • By orwin 2026-01-2516:09

        IHR have around the same numbers, and isn't associated with the CIA. Valid concerns, but here you have multiple sources.

      • By tokai 2026-01-2515:591 reply

        Is it really a gotcha that CIA is pushing money towards orgs that are in opposition to a US adversary? Is the French resistance during ww2 tainted because they received support from OSS?

        • By pydry 2026-01-2516:091 reply

          Kind of. The US isnt helping push back a horde of Nazi invaders this time.

          They're trying into install a literal monarchy on behalf of a regime which is guilty of committing a Nazi style genocide.

          Probably a little skepticism is warranted on their casualty figures.

          • By Sabinus 2026-01-2522:102 reply

            Israel's genocide is anything but Nazi-like.

            It's more ethnic cleansing via conflict than it is industrial racially targetted murder.

            Remember Israel has millions of "Arab Israelis"/Palestinians living in Israel proper.

            • By pydry 2026-01-2610:19

              The Nazis didnt go from 0 to industrial scale slaughter either. They also planned for ethnic cleansing by deportation to Africa first.

              The salient features are mass slaughter and land grabs motivated by a racial supremacy based ideology. In these respects they are identical.

              Those Arabs dont feel entirely safe living as second class citizens in a society where UN recognized genocide of their brothers and sisters goes unpunished and chants of "death to arabs" have become louder every day.

            • By mhb 2026-01-260:06

              Yes. It's anything but genocide too unless you redefine genocide in some idiosyncratic way that suits your particular world view.

    • By aaomidi 2026-01-2514:49

      Main difference is that a good chunk do the crackdown was done by bringing in katib hezbollah from surrounding countries.

    • By geremiiah 2026-01-2514:591 reply

      > The 30,000 number comes from the Ministry of Health.

      Then why does the article say that they couldn't independently verify the number and that the only source is a German-Iranian eye doctor?

      • By tremon 2026-01-2517:40

        Have you given some thought to that question yourself, and what conclusion did you reach?

    • By pydry 2026-01-2515:171 reply

      >The 30,000 number comes from the Ministry of Health.

      It comes, allegedly, from people from that ministry who were talking to TIME.

      I would imagine their contact was probably mediated by the state department - the same people currently gearing up for an Iraq-style invasion.

      Later on TIME adds:

      >TIME has been unable to independently verify these figures.

      Which is not altogether unsurprising. TIME wasnt exactly the most careful magazine when it came to verifying state department supplied intelligence about WMDs back in 2003.

      • By tehjoker 2026-01-2516:03

        There are reports from Iranians and admissions from the US that they had people inside the protests to cause chaos.

        “The Iranian regime is in trouble. Bringing in mercenaries is its last best hope,” Mr Pompeo wrote on X. “Riots in dozens of cities and the Basij under siege — Mashhad, Tehran, Zahedan. Next stop: Baluchestan," he added. At least ten killed in Iran protests as authorities issue warnings to demonstrators"

        “Happy New Year to every Iranian in the streets. Also to every Mossad agent walking beside them."

        https://www.thenationalnews.com/news/mena/2026/01/03/mike-po...

  • By jeswin 2026-01-2515:0015 reply

    What explains the silence from activists outside Iran on this particular issue? I see relatively limited coverage on global media. Iranians seem to be fighting this alone, and dying by the thousands.

    Perhaps we know, but the reasons will be unpopular.

    • By eaurouge 2026-01-2515:571 reply

      There's limited coverage of all global conflicts, certainly in American media, but quite likely in other Western media.

      > What explains the silence from activists outside Iran on this particular issue?

      What explains the silence from the media on all other conflicts. It's certainly not because lives are not being destroyed in Sudan [1] and Myanmar [2].

      1. https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/01/1166738

      2. https://news.un.org/en/story/2025/09/1166004

      • By mhb 2026-01-2517:02

        > There's limited coverage of all global conflicts

        Not exactly. There's a singular exception which has received torrential "coverage".

    • By orwin 2026-01-2515:42

      Lack of shock images, and lack of personnel for humanitarian orgs. Protests and killings are happening outside of the locations MSF is implanted, and even if we have stories from doctors prevented from helping shot protesters, we don't have videos (and in the last few years and especially the last two weeks, doctors finally understood no one cared if they were prevented to help, since it was acceptable in France and even in the US).

      The only NGO looking for Iran exclusively is Iran Human Right (https://iranhr.net/en/) and depend on the UNHRC, which is not particularly media trained and not good at reacting (also, they lost US funding less than a year ago and are reorganizing as we speak).

      In the end, it will be like Yemen or Sudan all over again: media hear of the massacre late, send journalists, journalists get refused, they send journalists to neighboring countries and infiltrate with local guide help, some journalist dies, and three month after the beginning of the trouble we will get images and information.

    • By kelipso 2026-01-2515:071 reply

      Probably the activists are hesitant because the US is rearing to start a war with Iran (that will certainly kill way more civilians) and they don’t want to contribute to that decision.

      • By wahnfrieden 2026-01-2516:03

        US activists against IDF wanted US to stop arming and funding and enabling genocide directly. Many IDF soldiers are also from the US or go back and forth.

        US isn’t arming or funding or enabling Iran directly, so calls for US action would mean call to war, which US leadership has already been signaling.

        Maybe you think US should go to war. Regardless that’s the biggest difference.

        There are also frankly many who are confused about Iran - sympathizing with Iran leadership as enemies of IDF and not understanding who they are and what they do. Lack of video going around doesn’t help.

    • By SonOfKyuss 2026-01-2515:192 reply

      In America at least, we saw protests against some of the things Israel did in Gaza because the US government is supporting Israel. Since the US is not a supporter of Iran, and in fact has been strong adversary for decades, there is less reason to protest here. Plus, we’ve got some serious problems of our own that are keeping us occupied at the moment

      • By luckylion 2026-01-2515:342 reply

        It's true that the recipient of the protest might be different, but that's no reason to be quiet.

        China in Tibet, China's treatment of the Uyghurs, Russia's war against Ukraine, Kony 2012 etc, there are lots of causes where the local government in whichever country you look at isn't actively involved, yet there was a lot more public noise and campaigns.

        I don't know what the answer is, but "my government doesn't deliver weapons to them" hasn't been a reason before, so I don't see why it would be now.

        • By lukeschlather 2026-01-2515:531 reply

          US government policy is completely aligned with the goal of stopping Iran from doing this, there is no reason to protest the US government on this issue.

          • By luckylion 2026-01-2518:23

            It's not always a protest against government, sometimes it a campaign of lobbying, sometimes it's international attention.

            The US government wasn't a friend of Kony in 2012. Before Trump 2, the US were not that friendly with Russia, yet people protested in many places around the world to show support for Ukraine and to voice their opposition to Russia's imperialistic wars, being aligned with their governments' position.

            It's different with Iran. Some of that is likely to be Iran's lower profile, but not all -- it's not like media outlets are not reporting on it at all and you have to get your information from niche sources to hear about events in Iran.

        • By orwin 2026-01-2515:531 reply

          China in Tibet manifestation were mostly thanks to the Dalai Lama. Without a spiritual chief in exile, no one would have cared.

          The Uighur is easy: Nike and a lots of western brand used Chinese work camps. In my neighborhood that's what people protested, not really Chinese treatment of their minority, but the fact our brands used slave labor. Nike and all no promised they wouldn't use slave again, the Uighur are still discriminated and forcefully sterilized, no one care anymore in the West.

          Russia war against Ukraine is very different, it's the first war in Europe since the 90s, and the first "real" war in europe since 45 (I guarantee you if Ukraine folded in 3 days, no one would have said much). Also, Europe is financing the Russian war economy, which is easy to protest.

          • By seanmcdirmid 2026-01-2515:581 reply

            Westerners treat Tibetans like pandas, which is why China has travel restrictions into Tibet proper for foreigners. Most westerners don’t know the Uighurs exist, and anyways they are Muslims. Accordingly, China doesn’t bother with travel restrictions into Xinjiang. The fact that they have any attention from westerners at all these days is kind of amazing.

            • By wahnfrieden 2026-01-2516:06

              A lot of the continued attention is due to Adrian Zenz

      • By midlander 2026-01-2516:161 reply

        But the protests weren’t limited to Ameica, there were protests all over the world, including in Muslim countries.

        And the outrage wasn’t always directed at the government. We don’t see Iranian students in the US being attacked. We don’t see Iranian places of worship in the US being attacked. We don’t see as much outrage in the comments on HN - there were some event justifying it.

    • By TiredOfLife 2026-01-261:29

      Because for some strange reason majority of activist accounts stopped posting when Iran turned off internet

    • By feb012025 2026-01-2520:59

      Pretty easy actually. The only leverage we have over Iran is military action, which I think historical precedent shows will lead to worse outcomes for everyone involved.

      The way I see it, any support for Iranians will be co-opted to start a war with Iran, which will be a disaster.

      This isn't the case for Israel / Gaza, which is what I assume you're alluding to when you talk about activism.

    • By tmnvix 2026-01-272:29

      Quite possibly because they don't want to become the US and Israel's useful idiots - contributing to calls for war that could easily lead to the deaths of millions if past experience is anything to go by.

      If the US were serious about the well-being of Iranian people they'd stop trying to screw the economy and foment violent unrest, but of course that is not what they are interested in. They want war. They want regime change. They want balkanisation.

    • By newyankee 2026-01-2515:501 reply

      Islam and Neoliberal wests are the strangest bedfellows. Thankfully people like Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins and many others pointed the oddities long before many others made it us vs them political. Palestinian cause is used to drown any other legitimate concerns about ideology

      • By tovej 2026-01-2518:031 reply

        Richard Dawkins is a weirdo crank these days who's co-authoring questionable books woth sex offenders about transgender issues. And the one thing Christopher Hitchens was most right about was Israel, he was an anti-zionist.

        And the neoliberal west has more in common with Israel than Iran, I don't quite understand why you choose to write broad political comments if you don't have the basic background knowledge that would be needwd in this discussion.

        • By newyankee 2026-01-2523:451 reply

          It is not broad political comment. If you read the original text and sunnahs as well as follow the interpretations of a lot of scholars like Zakir Naik and others that are unapologetic the truth that is conveniently hidden in discussions easily comes out.

          The entirety of the world does not run on Western neoliberal lens and every region has had its history and challenges and fights that due to cognitive limits during discussion are never given their legitimate space.

          This can apply to grooming gangs in UK, the conditions of minorities in middle east (Yazidis or others)

          An individual who might have an issue with a broad ideology that considers all non believers as subhuman to be converted, killed or brought into the said ideology by hook or crook can be motivated with their own experiences.

          • By tovej 2026-01-267:08

            Are you claiming all muslims believe non-muslims are subhumans? That's far-right rhetoric and simply untrue.

    • By tovej 2026-01-2515:232 reply

      There's no activism because everybody agrees it's terrible. If your govt is already cutting out Iran and sanctioning them, there's no need to demand action.

      This is very different from Israel, where our govts are actively supporting a genocide. That requires activism to change course.

      Why would people demonstrate if everyone is aligned?

      • By behnamoh 2026-01-2515:36

        > If your govt is already cutting out Iran and sanctioning them, there's no need to demand action.

        “Human beings are members of a whole

        In creation of one essence and soul

        If one member is afflicted with pain

        Other members uneasy will remain

        If you have no sympathy for human pain

        The name of human you cannot retain”

        —Saadi, Persian poet

      • By jryle70 2026-01-2515:561 reply

        Protests were about US's inaction in Gaza as much as its support for Israel. Why no such protests now? Why aren't there thousands of people gathering demanding US doing something to help Iran's people?

        • By throw310822 2026-01-2516:191 reply

          The US was not inactive in Gaza. It was actively supporting, funding and and arming a genocide. Currently the Trump administration is actively engaged in a process to clean up the Gaza strip, rebuild it with the money of other countries, and finally hand it over to Israel for free (for who do you think those nice skyscrapers would be built, for the Palestinians? Lol).

          • By mhb 2026-01-2517:071 reply

            > for who [sic] do you think those nice skyscrapers would be built, for the Palestinians? Lol)

            Are you under the illusion that the Palestinians funded and built their previous infrastructure? Lol.

            • By throw310822 2026-01-2517:501 reply

              Are you under the illusion that your comment has any relevance, besides revealing your urge to vilify an entire people?

              • By mhb 2026-01-2518:061 reply

                Try and follow. The Palestinians weren't the ones who built their original infrastructure and it wasn't "hand[ed] ... over to Israel". Other than your antipathy towards Israel, what makes you think that whatever other countries pay to rebuild for the Palestinians will be handed over to Israel?

                • By tovej 2026-01-267:141 reply

                  What's your point? Palestinians built the first Zionist settlements too. They were hired as workers before Labor-Zionism made ethnicity be a necessary condition for employment in the settlements, later in Israel.

                  Israel has already grabbed a huge amount of Gaza after the genocide and Trumps "peace". And in the west bank they have ramped up the annexation as well. Israel has been swallowing Palestine while driving away Palestinians for more than 75 years now.

                  An apartheid state is not going to give the second class ethnic group any concessions.

    • By behnamoh 2026-01-2515:112 reply

      Because Persians are fighting islam (they're burning down mosques).

      and the islamic regime was a sponsor of previous pro-palestine movements.

      leftists don't find this an appealing mix. they'd rather blame Israel for everything, but here we see Iranians siding with the Israelis because they've seen what islam does to their country.

      • By graemep 2026-01-2515:591 reply

        I very much doubt they are fighting Islam. Most of them are Muslims. They are fighting fundamentalist Islam. DO you have any evidence they are doing this or "siding with the Israelis"? The fundamentalist Islamist Saudi's seem to get on with Israel fine these days.

        I think its simpler. There is no one white involved. What is unique about Israel is that most of its population is white so its an issue worth covering (for people backing either side). The same with Ukraine. On the other hand what happens in Eritrea or Sudan or Myanmar or Xinjiang does not matter.

        • By behnamoh 2026-01-2516:331 reply

          I'm Persian. most Iranians are NOT muslim; that's what the islamic regime's propaganda has tried to convey for 47 years. if anything, many who were already muslim became atheists after seeing the atrocities of the regime in the past decades.

          Iran's population is also overwhelmingly pro-West.

      • By Calavar 2026-01-2515:571 reply

        This is a straw man in my opinion. But regardless of that, your theory doesn't explain why conservative media isn't really covering this either - The Iran protests haven't exactly been front page material on Fox News or OAN or Breitbart

    • By tdeck 2026-01-2515:232 reply

      [flagged]

      • By whyage 2026-01-2515:354 reply

        It doesn't erase Israel's genocide, but the question is still valid: why don't these crimes against Iran's own citizens evoke international outrage?

        • By throw310822 2026-01-2516:15

          First of all, knowing well that the US has been looking for excuses to attack Iran for the past, I don't know, twenty years at least, I am extremely suspicious of information about the numbers of these massacres. I know perfectly well that a media campaign filled with horrific reports is going to precede an attack by the US to either reduce the country in ruins or to a puppet state. I am also quite suspicious that these protests might be somehow encouraged by the US precisely for the same purpose. I mean, if Russian propaganda can influence foreign countries, I can't put a limit to what USA's power in the IT and social media space can do.

          Besides this, of course when atrocities are perpetrated by an ally with whom you entertain friendly diplomatic, commercial and military relationships, it makes a lot of sense to protest: you have some leverage. When they are committed by an enemy country with which you have already severed any relationship, protests are pointless.

        • By GordonS 2026-01-2515:582 reply

          Because Iran claims foreign-backed terrorists were behind all the murder and destruction - backed by Israel, the US and UK.

          Mossad has openly said they have people in Iran, and Israeli media has said they've sent weapons to the "protestors" in Iran. Senior figures in the US government have alluded to the same.

          Many videos have been published by Iranians online, which certainly do not show "peaceful protestors" - they show gangs of masked men beating random civilians to death, fire-bombing buses and ambulance; they show leaders dishing out weapons and satellite comms devices, and trained men using assault rifles to attack civilians and the police.

          We've also seem video of over a million Iranians marching in Tehran in support of the government, and in protest of the foreign-back terrorists.

          And we have the MSM happily parroting any death figures they get, from anyone... even if they are literally from Pahlavi's mate or a CIA "human rights" group based in Langley!

          We should all be more sceptical when our media and governments try to gain consent for war, and we should be asking who stands to gain - it's certainly not us, the people.

          • By UltraSane 2026-01-2517:221 reply

            The Islamic theocracy in charge of Iran is deeply unpopular due to its repression and severe mismanagement of the Iranian economy. It has cut Iran off from the Internet.

            "We should all be more sceptical"

            This is very ironic coming from someone who actually believes anything the Iranian theocracy says. They are even less honest than Trump.

            • By GordonS 2026-01-2517:252 reply

              > The Islamic theocracy in charge of Iran is deeply unpopular due to its repression and severe mismanagement of the Iranian economy

              Here's a way of saying that in a less propaganda'y way: "The Iranian government is unpopular because of the impact of US sanctions, which have made the lives of ordinary citizens mucher harder than they need to be."

              > It has cut Iran off from the Internet

              Because foreign-backed terrorists were using Starlink terminals to communicate, and the security services needed to find them, and stop them; at least, that's what Iran claims, and it at least makes sense.

              • By UltraSane 2026-01-2519:17

                Iran's economic problems include massive resource diversion to IRGC enterprises, funding for foreign militias (Hezbollah, Houthis, Iraqi PMFs), and systemic corruption that predates the harshest sanctions. The Rial was already collapsing under Ahmadinejad's mismanagement. They have refused to invest in modern water distribution infrastructure. Attributing it all to sanctions is the regime's own preferred narrative.

                Iran has cut internet access during every major protest 2017, 2019 (where they killed 1,500+ protesters in a week), 2022 after Mahsa Amini. The pattern correlates perfectly with domestic unrest, not with any "terrorist" incidents. The Starlink justification appeared after they'd already established the shutdown. You're taking their post hoc rationalization at face value.

                You accused me of propaganda, then in the same breath presented the Iranian government's exact talking points as reasonable alternatives. That's the irony I was pointing out. You're not being skeptical you're being selectively skeptical, which is worse than being credulous because it masquerades as critical thinking. If you want to argue the US has done bad things in Iran (1953 coup, shooting down IR655, etc.), sure. But "the regime isn't that bad, actually" requires ignoring their own documented behavior.

              • By AnimalMuppet 2026-01-2517:58

                The Iranian government is unpopular because of the impact of US sanctions, true, but those sanctions did not come out of nowhere. They are largely caused by the actions of the Iranian government. So that government does not get a pass because the pain comes from sanctions. It's still the consequences of their own actions.

        • By pydry 2026-01-2515:41

          The principle we ought to follow is the principle we expected Soviet dissidents to follow.

          What principle did we expect Andrei Sakharov [a Soviet scientist punished for his criticism of the U.S.S.R.] to follow? Why did people decide that Sakharov was a moral person?

          Sakharov did not treat every atrocity as identical-he had nothing to say about American atrocities. When he was asked about them, he said, "I don't know anything about them, I don't care about them, what I talk about are Soviet atrocities."

          And that was right-because those were the ones that he was responsible for, and that he might have been able to in­fluence. Again, it's a very simple ethical point: you are responsible for the predictable consequences of your actions, you're not responsible for the predictable consequences of somebody else's actions.

          Conversely, how do we view the protests in the USSR against jim crow laws under stalin? They surely existed, but of what consequence were they? None whatsoever.

        • By alex1138 2026-01-2515:431 reply

          I want people to be REAL careful about "Israel obviously committed a genocide"

          All those people brutally murdered on October 7 don't just disappear. Whatever you think about Israel's response it's kind of amazing the main focus is on the "big bad" of Israel

          There were pro-Pally protests on October 8! If not October 7. Before the bodies were cool, so to speak

          If you were pro-Palestine it is absolutely your moral duty to not just be silent. There is absolutely no ambiguity here. The Islamic Republic is slaughtering Iranians

          Edit: And I don't give a damn if this is "construed as hostile", if you downvote me for this (Already one in the last minute) you do not deserve the 500 karma you have to be able to downvote me. I, in fact, suggest that you delete your account

          • By t-3 2026-01-2518:472 reply

            Whether or not Israel was provoked has nothing to do with whether or not Israel is committing genocide. How many eyes need to be claimed to repay those that were lost? They have gone far beyond the 1:1 ratio everyone is familiar with from the ancient saying.

            • By alex1138 2026-01-2518:491 reply

              And you get your numbers from what? The Hamas controlled Ministry of Health?

              • By t-3 2026-01-2519:001 reply

                No matter who you get the numbers from, Israel has killed far more than 1200 Palestinians.

                • By UltraSane 2026-01-263:40

                  Then Hamas was VERY stupid for attacking on Oct 7 2023

            • By midlander 2026-01-2519:21

              There’s no magic right to kill n people for n deaths. If 1 person killed a 1000 people, that doesn’t give you the right to kill 1000 people.

              If an army of 100,000 attempts to kill as many people as they can but have only managed 1000 so far, you can kill as many as many of them as you need until they stop trying to kill you.

      • By UltraSane 2026-01-2515:401 reply

        Please define what you think Zionist means. I have no idea WTF it means since Israel exists as a Jewish state for 76 years.

        • By tdeck 2026-01-2515:421 reply

          > Please define what you think Zionist means. I have no idea WTF it means since Israel exists as a Jewish state for 76 years.

          If you don't know what words mean, why is that my problem?

          • By UltraSane 2026-01-2516:11

            What do YOU think it means? What are you trying to communicate when you use it?

    • By lingrush4 2026-01-2515:26

      Nobody in the west actually cares about injustice. They just pretend to care when it's politically convenient.

      Unfortunately, ABC and NBC haven't found a way to blame Trump for what's happening in Iran. Highlighting the atrocities perpetuated in the name of Islam is more likely to help Trump than hurt him, so this story must be minimized. It's just good, smart politics.

    • By 31337Logic 2026-01-2515:10

      Religion and virtue signaling.

    • By Noaidi 2026-01-2515:151 reply

      People are not being told to be outraged about it via whatever social media platform.

      • By t-3 2026-01-2518:05

        This article right here, and the countless that came before are telling people to be outraged. People aren't, partly because they don't know what to believe without really any reliable or unbiased reporting, partly because the Trump outrage machine has filled the news feeds with so much other stuff to be outraged about, and partly because the situation in the Middle East seems so futile and stupid that people don't want to care because nothing will change and no government with any say in the region will allow peace or democracy or self-determination to the people there.

HackerNews