Posts Tagged ‘Free Speech’

The only government can do in ‘regulating’ something is to ultimately destroy what it was ‘trying’ to protect.

Kurt Nimmo
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, December 29, 2010

According to a recent Rasmussen’s poll, most Americans understand the FCC’s internet regulations will be used by the government to push a political agenda.

54% of respondents oppose the FCC effort to regulate the internet while 21% support it. 25% are not sure. By a 52% to 27% margin, Rasmussen reported on December 28, voters believe that more free market competition is better than more regulation for protecting internet users. Most Democrats see an unbiased regulatory approach, while most Republicans and unaffiliated voters fear a political agenda.

In April, a Rasmussen poll revealed that just 27% of Americans believed the Federal Communications Commission should regulate the internet like it does television and radio.

Internet regulation was the hallmark of Obama in 2008 as he ran for president. After installing Genachowski as FCC chairman, the Obama administration started to move on its promise to regulate the internet. The FCC began to act like a fiefdom and told a federal appeals court it had the power to impose regulation on broadband rates, even though Congress had not given the agency the power to do so.

In fact, 300 members of Congress, including a large number of Democrats, told the FCC in no uncertain terms to stop its attempt to grab power over the internet. The FCC temporarily changed tack and convened negotiations over the summer with a select group of industry representatives and proponents of internet regulation.

In August, the FCC worked with House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman on a draft bill codifying network management rules.

The FCC decided before Christmas to make its move. Obama said the new government regulation will “help preserve the free and open nature of the Internet.” In fact, it would do just the opposite.

Genachowski and the FCC naturally try to make this unwarranted move look like a white knight government protecting consumers against greedy telecommunications companies and ISPs. Beyond the rhetoric about “net neutrality,” however, lies the real purpose of the FCC regulations – government control and censorship.

“What governments around the world are suddenly beginning to realize is that a free internet is ultimately incompatible with government secrets, and secrets are essential to any government that wants to remain in power,” writes Mike Adams of Natural News. “As part of a long-term plan to control content on the internet, the FCC is now attempting to assert authority over the internet in the same way it has long exercised content censorship authority over broadcast television and radio.”

Adams argues that the FCC is attempting to assert its authority over the internet. “By asserting its authority with net neutrality, the FCC will establish a beachhead of implied authority from which it can begin to control and censor the internet,” he writes.

Obama’s FCC commissariat is not losing sleep over the First Amendment. It was the FCC’s Chief Diversity Officer Mark Lloyd who said that “blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination of other communications policies,” namely converting the internet into the same government regulated medium as television and radio.

Prior to the FCC vote, the United Nations announced its plan to regulate the internet.

“The United Nations is also aiming to run the Internet for you,” warns Joseph A. Klein. “With the backing of governments around the world who don’t mind free-riding on American investment and know-how in the Internet while seeking as many ways as possible to usurp control over its governance, the UN establishment has been trying for years to move control of the Internet’s day-to-day management to some sort of global governance forum.”

Efforts by the FCC and the United Nations at the behest of the globalists are contrary to the model that has emerged since the technology was invented in 1973 and became public in the early 1990s.

“The beauty of the Internet is that it’s not controlled by any one group. Its governance is bottoms-up – with academics, non-profits, companies and governments all working to improve this technological wonder of the modern world. This model has not only made the Internet very open – a testbed for innovation by anyone, anywhere – it’s also prevented vested interests from taking control,” wrote Vint Cerf, who is often called the father of the internet, in response to the UN proposal to regulate the internet.

A free and open internet is anathema to government as it moves to control nations, populations, and telecommunications. In order to succeed and build world government and its accompanying control grid, the internet must be tamed and folded into the established propaganda apparatus.

The machinations of the FCC and the United Nations reveal once again how worried the establishment is about a free and open internet. The internet cannot be allowed to be a primary and growing source of alternative information that challenges daily the corporate media propaganda system that acts like a megaphone for a control freak government.

Advertisements

Senator Joseph Lieberman just cannot help his big government leanings, or even here.  It almost compulsory for him.  With him being a strong advocate of internet control for a long time, he has now introduced legislation to control the internet in emergency situations.  As stated below, this bill has every potential to silence free speech.

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, June 16, 2010

The federal government would have “absolute power” to shut down the Internet under the terms of a new US Senate bill being pushed by Joe Lieberman, legislation which would hand President Obama a figurative “kill switch” to seize control of the world wide web in response to a Homeland Security directive.

Lieberman has been pushing for government regulation of the Internet for years under the guise of cybersecurity, but this new bill goes even further in handing emergency powers over to the feds which could be used to silence free speech under the pretext of a national emergency.

“The legislation says that companies such as broadband providers, search engines or software firms that the US Government selects “shall immediately comply with any emergency measure or action developed” by the Department of Homeland Security. Anyone failing to comply would be fined,” reports ZDNet’s Declan McCullagh.

The 197-page bill (PDF) is entitled Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act, or PCNAA.

Technology lobbying group TechAmerica warned that the legislation created “the potential for absolute power,” while the Center for Democracy and Technology worried that the bill’s emergency powers “include authority to shut down or limit internet traffic on private systems.”

The bill has the vehement support of Senator Jay Rockefeller, who last year asked during a congressional hearing, “Would it had been better if we’d have never invented the Internet?” while fearmongering about cyber-terrorists preparing attacks.

The largest Internet-based corporations are seemingly happy with the bill, primarily because it contains language that will give them immunity from civil lawsuits and also reimburse them for any costs incurred if the Internet is shut down for a period of time.

“If there’s an “incident related to a cyber vulnerability” after the President has declared an emergency and the affected company has followed federal standards, plaintiffs’ lawyers cannot collect damages for economic harm. And if the harm is caused by an emergency order from the Feds, not only does the possibility of damages virtually disappear, but the US Treasury will even pick up the private company’s tab,” writes McCullagh.

Tom Gann, McAfee’s vice president for government relations, described the bill as a “very important piece of legislation”.

As we have repeatedly warned for years, the federal government is desperate to seize control of the Internet because the establishment is petrified at the fact that alternative and independent media outlets are now eclipsing corporate media outlets in terms of audience share, trust, and influence.

We witnessed another example of this on Monday when establishment Congressman Bob Etheridge was publicly shamed after he was shown on video assaulting two college students who asked him a question. Two kids with a flip cam and a You Tube account could very well have changed the course of a state election, another startling reminder of the power of the Internet and independent media, and why the establishment is desperate to take that power away.

The government has been searching for any avenue possible through which to regulate free speech on the Internet and strangle alternative media outlets, with the FTC recently proposing a “Drudge Tax” that would force independent media organizations to pay fees that would be used to fund mainstream newspapers.

Similar legislation aimed at imposing Chinese-style censorship of the Internet and giving the state the power to shut down networks has already been passed globally, including in the UK, New Zealand and Australia.

We have extensively covered efforts to scrap the internet as we know it and move toward a greatly restricted “internet 2″ system. Handing government the power to control the Internet would only be the first step towards this system, whereby individual ID’s and government permission would be required simply to operate a website.

The Lieberman bill needs to be met with fierce opposition at every level and from across the political spectrum. Regulation of the Internet would not only represent a massive assault on free speech, it would also create new roadblocks for e-commerce and as a consequence further devastate the economy.

The U.S. Senate has passed the homosexual hate-crimes bill and will now send it to President Obama to sign it into law. This bill is a trojan horse to legitimize the creation of more laws that will completely obliterate the 1st amendment of the United States.

featured stories   Hate Crime Bill Is A Trojan Horse Against Free Speech  
  hate crime bill
   

Many homosexual organizations say this is a victory, however they are just being used to further infringe on Americans rights to free speech.

In a 68-29 vote, senators passed 2010 National Defense Authorization Act, which includes the hate crimes measure that adds “sexual orientation” and “gender identity,” as well as disability, to the current categories — such as race, religion and gender — protected from hate crimes. The House of Representatives voted 281-146 on Oct. 8 for the same defense legislation, which was used as a vehicle for the hate-crimes measure though it is not directly related to the controversial provision. President Obama has said he would sign the bill.

Any “hate crimes” bill is a disaster for the 1st amendment and leads into the direction of a nanny government… we are all grown-ups, correct? When someone puts you down whether it’s about race, gender, sexual orientation do we really want the federal government and the police to get involved in such petty affairs? And shouldn’t the police and the government be investing their time on more serious situations? Any ‘hate crimes’ bill is just a step towards the end of the 1st amendment and stepping into the direction of a nanny government, handing out fines and putting people in prison for hate speech.

I’m not implying that gay rights aren’t a good thing, I think anyone of any sexual orientation, gender, etc. should have a right to marry, but this hate crimes bill is nothing more than a foot-in-the-door for other tyrannical regulations that will criminalize any type of speech.

 

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t
  • featured stories   Hate Crime Bill Is A Trojan Horse Against Free Speech

This bill could lead to an age of “Pre-Crime” and “ Preventative Detentions“, if say the FBI suspects you of potentially committing a hate crime you can be prosecuted and detained even if no crime was even committed. It can also lead to cyber-bullying laws which could mean an expensive fine or prison-time for internet bullying, this bill can also lead to ‘political hate laws’ where any dissent against the government or its policies could make you a political prisoner.

The White House is already planning to create an “enemies list” where any dissent against its policies can land many into a permanent White House database. The U.S. Government and Homeland Security have established its hatred for dissidents in this country, they have established that anti-New World Order groups, Alternative Media Outlets (like this one) are potential violent terrorist tools. Anything about the U.S. Constitution, any partisan activists or any civil disobedience of any kind is now considered potential violent extremism by Homeland Security.

The  unclassified Homeland Security memo even says people who are concerned about loss of U.S. sovereignty, illegal immigration and gun-control who are genuinely upset about encroaching freedom may be considered a potential insurgents against the U.S. government! Even liberal environmental activism, anti-war activism is considered potential violent extremism.

When you think of the phrase “hate crimes” remember that hate speech is a form of free speech and protected by the 1st amendment of the Bill of Rights and Constitution. The whole point of free speech is to protect unpopular speech like hate speech. When Obama signs this hate crimes bill into law the government will officially turn free speech into a criminal act, and soon it will become a terrorist/extremist act if Homeland Security (aka: the American Gestapo) gets its way.