The mainstream news media refuse to
report anything negative or unflattering about President Obama or his associates or his
actions. Thus, the internet is the best way for average Americans to exchange their
observations and opinions about what's really happening and where the country is
headed. Mr. Obama is obviously very aware of this.
Mr. Obama wants control of the internet, up to and including an internet kill switch, because the internet is the
central nervous system of the Tea Party, and the easiest way to bypass the state-controlled news media.
State governments don't seem interested in controlling the internet, as long as commercial
transactions can be taxed. Not heavily taxed -- at first -- just enough to break the ice.
Obama Backs Internet Controls to Grapple with the 'Demand for Crazy'. Government regulation and control over
the internet can defeat a "demand for crazy" through the spread of incorrect messages, former President Barack Obama said
Wednesday [4/6/2022]. Obama, 60, spoke with Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg at an event hosted by the University
of Chicago's Institute of Politics and the magazine. "I do think that there is a demand for crazy on the internet that
we have to grapple with," Obama said, before adding a mix of regulation and industry standards are needed to address the
issue. Obama lamented how misinformation plays out across the U.S., accusing those who say President Joe Biden did not
win the 2020 election as guilty of falling for conspiracy theories.
Year Later: The Internet Thrives Without 'Net Neutrality'. It's been a full year since the FCC repealed
"net neutrality." And how have the predictions of doom and gloom held up? [...] Well, here we are, one year later.
The internet is still functioning. In fact, it's better than ever. Last year, average internet download speeds shot
up almost 36%, and upload speeds climbed 22%, according to internet speed-test company Ookla in its latest U.S. broadband
report. There are more users than ever. More videos to watch. More content to consume. More commerce
being conducted. No sites are being blocked. No one is complaining that their service is being throttled.
And more people are gaining access to broadband.
Internet has bigger problems than Facebook, and it's Obama's fault. If you think Facebook has problems, they're
nothing compared to the fiasco at the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. Americans should be far more
alarmed about what's happening with the obscure, private California company that oversees the Internet's backbone. ICANN's
gross mismanagement of behind-the-scenes technical operations threatens the security, interoperability, and openness of the entire
Internet, industry experts warn. Unlike the Facebook situation, however, there may not be much lawmakers can do.
Obama's $50 Million Netflix Swamp Cash Deal Explained. Want to know how the D.C. swamp works at the highest
levels and how this one White House example is legion throughout the federal government? It goes something like
this: As president, Barack Obama aggressively pushed for "Net Neutrality" which primarily built and then protected the
platform for Netflix ISP dominance. Netflix's value skyrocketed. And what then happened in 2018? Netflix
turned around and gave the Obamas a $50 million dollar 'consulting and development' deal.
of Government Control. Should we give the government, through the Federal Communications Commission, control over the
internet? During the Clinton administration, along with the help of a Republican-dominated Congress, the visionary 1996
Telecommunications Act declared it "the policy of the United States" that internet service providers and websites be "unfettered
by Federal or State regulation." The act sought "to promote competition and reduce regulation in order to secure lower prices
and higher quality services for American telecommunications consumers and encourage the rapid deployment of new telecommunications
technologies." In 2015, the Obama White House pressured the FCC to create the Open Internet Order, which has been branded by
its advocates as net neutrality. This move overthrew the spirit of the Telecommunications Act. It represents creeping
FCC jurisdiction, as its traditional areas of regulation — such as broadcast media and telecommunications — have been
transformed by the internet, or at least diminished in importance. Fortunately, it's being challenged by the new FCC
chairman, Ajit Pai, who has announced he will repeal the FCC's heavy-handed 2015 internet regulations.
The Prince and the Community
Organizer. Trying hard to sound sage, Obama offered up self-serving platitudes about the dangers of the
Internet. Under the guise of lamenting a partisan media, he called for a return to the old one. He misses
the liberal media monopoly terribly and wishes for a suppression of dissenters from it: "One of the dangers of
the internet is that people can have entirely different realities. They can be cocooned in information that
reinforces their current biases." It is safe to say he is not referring to viewers of CNN and MSNBC.
Obama will let us know which "facts" can be used in any debate and which opinions deserve to be heard: [...]
FEC Commissioner to Resign. A Democratic Federal Election Commission official who pushed to regulate the
internet and has been absent from public meetings for months is resigning, according to an announcement. Ann Ravel, who
wanted to regulate political speech on the internet from websites such as the Drudge Report, announced Sunday [2/19/207] that
she is stepping down from her post.
Quietly Signs Bill Declaring War On Independent Media. The human wrecking ball that is Barack Obama is refusing
to be a good lame duck and just go away. In a flurry of blows to America and a key Middle East ally, Obama stabbed
Israel in the back at the United Nations and set the conditions for a total war on independent media. The fiendish
Obama waited until the Christmas weekend to quietly sign off on the creation of a new federal entity to combat "Russian"
propaganda and target websites deemed to be sources of fake news. Snuggled warmly within the National Defense
Authorization Act (NDAA) to fund the military was a nasty and secretive provision that thanks to Congress, creates an
Orwellian Ministry of Truth.
Day That Will Live in Infamy. And when the U.N. takes control, and I think it would be closer to five years instead of ten,
do you think they won't start charging fees to have access to the internet? Access to publish, advertise, read, and yes... to
utilize the cloud in order to access your own information. What kind of control would they impose after that? And how much
will they charge and do we really think they won't have back door access to all that information for potential taxing purposes.
That's what the U.N. has been pushing for years to allow them international taxing authority. [...] As for Bolton's statement "the
Internet handover — a mistake of such colossal proportions that you would have thought we'd have a huge debate about it in
this country", I find that amazing also. Where's the outcry?
Whatever it takes to keep the dirt under the carpet until after Election Day... Ecuador
cut off Assange's internet at U.S. request, WikiLeaks says. Wikileaks said Tuesday [10/18/2016] that Secretary
of State John Kerry asked Ecuador to stop WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, from publishing leaked emails that could disrupt
peace negotiations with a guerrilla group in Colombia. Assange, who has been in refuge in Ecuador's embassy in London
for more than four years, saw his access to the internet cut over the weekend.
Imperial President's Toolbox of Terror: A Dictatorship Waiting to Happen. Secret courts, secret orders, and secret budgets
have become standard operating procedure for presidential administrations in recent years. A good case in point is Presidential Policy
Directive 20, a secret order signed by President Obama as a means of thwarting cyberattacks. Based on what little information was leaked
to the press about the clandestine directive, it appears that the president essentially put the military in charge of warding off a possible
cyberattack. A FOIA request by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) seeking more details on the directive was allegedly
denied because doing so could cause "exceptionally grave damage to the national security." However, EPIC believes the order allows for
military deployment within the United States, including the ability to shut off communications with the outside world if the military believes
it is necessary.
Internet Surrender: It Ain't Over 'til It's Over. Until October 1, ICANN operated pursuant to a contract administered by
the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), which is part of the U.S. Commerce Department. ICANN, therefore, was
answerable, in some measure, to Congress and the American people. However, the Obama administration, which, in every other area is obsessed
with federalizing and controlling every private function and abolishing private property rights, in this particular case, for some strange reason,
is obsessed with "privatizing" the Internet. Hence, he has claimed the authority to transfer the stewardship of the Internet to ICANN.
war: Dems reject call to protect Internet news, talk radio from regs. In the latest partisan escalation
on the Federal Election Commission, a top Democratic commissioner has ripped a Republican commissioner's bid to protect
books, radio and Internet media from regulation as "pitiful." Ann Ravel, a former FEC chairwoman, joined other Democrats
at a meeting this month to block Republican Lee Goodman's proposal to explicitly expand the "press exemption" from regulations
to books, satellite radio and Internet-based news media.
Control of Internet Puts the Global Debate Under Threat of Censors. In another blow to American global
leadership the Obama administration is abdicating control of the Internet. [...] Under the new arrangement, America loses
power. That seems to be the theme of Mr. Obama's overall legacy building — globalization and a
reduction in U.S. influence. Opponents of the Mr. Obama giveaway are going to court to reverse it. Last
Friday, four states — Texas, Arizona, Oklahoma, and Nevada — failed to get a federal court judge to
delay the transfer. Expect more litigation. Challenges to the giveaway will question the constitutionality of
President Obama handing over our government property without getting Congress's consent. The Internet was created by the
United States a half century ago as a Defense Department project. Within 20 years its influence had spread worldwide.
US cuts cord on internet
oversight. The US government on Saturday [10/1/2016] ended its formal oversight role over the internet, handing over
management of the online address system to a global non-profit entity. The US Commerce Department announced that its contract
had expired with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, which manages the internet's so-called "root zone."
the New Authoritarian Masters of the Internet. President Barack Obama's drive to hand off control of Internet
domains to a foreign multi-national operation will give some very unpleasant regimes equal say over the future of online
speech and commerce. In fact, they are likely to have much more influence than America, because they will collectively
push hard for a more tightly controlled Internet, and they are known for aggressively using political and economic pressure
to get what they want. Here's a look at some of the regimes that will begin shaping the future of the Internet in just
a few days, if President Obama gets his way.
AGs sue to stop Obama's internet transition. Four Republican state attorneys general are suing to stop the
Obama administration from transferring oversight of the internet to an international body, arguing the transition would
violate the U.S. Constitution. The lawsuit — filed Wednesday in a Texas federal court — threatens
to throw up a new roadblock to one of the White House's top tech priorities, just days before the scheduled Oct. 1
transfer of the internet's address system is set to take place.
Reckless Plan Threatens U.S. Oversight of Internet. The Obama administration is poised to surrender control of
certain Internet functions to non-profit ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, on October 1.
According to Americans for Limited Government's senior editor Robert Romano, opposition to this Internet giveaway has united
Republicans such as Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and presidential candidate Donald Trump. But questions remain as to whether
or not the Republicans will unite sufficiently to insist language is included in a continuing resolution that will forbid the
transfer of control.
Gaffney on Obama's Attempt to Slip Irreversible Internet Surrender Under the Radar: 'We've Got Three Days to Fix This'. The
conversation turned to the impending handover of Internet control to a foreign body, a topic that should be of major concern to American
voters, although [Alex] Marlow sarcastically observed there was no time for it during the debate because moderator Lester Holt thought it
was more important to discuss Donald Trump's thoughts on Barack Obama's birth certificate. "A lot of people in this audience have
absolutely no clue why we would do this and can't even interpret what Obama and the globalists are thinking," Marlow said.
Should Not Put Free Speech on Internet at Risk by Giving Up US Oversight. The incredible ingenuity of the
American people invented the internet — one of the most transformational technologies in human history. But
even though we created and paid for the internet, we did not keep it for ourselves; we shared it for the benefit of all
humanity. That spirit of freedom and generosity is the very essence of our great nation. Since the internet's
inception, the United States government has played a critical role in supervising the core internet functions that allow
websites to interface with the internet. If any other country had created the internet, this power could have been used
to deny internet access to websites that were deemed politically undesirable, unpopular, threatening, or disfavored by the
ruling elite. But not here in the United States. The internet is an oasis of freedom today because of our First
Amendment, which is unparalleled in the protection it affords free speech. So long as the U.S. government is involved
in internet governance, it cannot deny any website internet access on account of the ideas it espouses.
Now or Never to Save the Internet. We have, unfortunately, come to expect our elected representatives to shirk
hard decisions. So it came as little surprise when the Senate released the text of a continuing resolution late last
week to fund the U.S. government that did not include key objectives sought by conservatives, such as stopping taxpayer
funding for Planned Parenthood. Although there are many problems with this budget deal, only one is irreversible and
permanent: allowing the Obama administration to cede oversight of the Internet to foreign bodies. It's troubling
that the Senate has failed to include language prohibiting this transfer of power.
House: Ceding U.S. Internet control to global body is 'small government'. White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest
told reporters on Thursday [9/22/2016] that ceding U.S. control of the internet to foreign governments is essentially a form of limited
government. Sen. Ted Cruz, Texas Republican, and other concerned lawmakers are fighting to prevent the Internet Corporation
for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a California nonprofit, from falling into the hands of a "multi-stakeholder" global body.
A Commerce Department agency will relinquish oversight of ICANN on Oct. 1 unless Congress intervenes.
Donald Trump Opposes Ceding Internet Control To Foreign Powers. The Republicans in Congress are admirably
leading a fight to save the Internet this week, and need all the help the American people can give them to be successful.
Hillary Clinton's Democrats are refusing to protect the American people by not protecting the Internet. The U.S. created,
developed and expanded the Internet across the globe. U.S. oversight has kept the Internet free and open without government
censorship — a fundamental American value rooted in our Constitution's Free Speech clause. Internet freedom is
now at risk with the President's intent to cede control to international interests, including countries like China and Russia,
which have a long track record of trying to impose online censorship.
oversees the internet? Will Congress delay Oct. 1 transfer? Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, has been darkly
warning about giving up U.S. oversight of internet names as of Oct. 1 — and he has been getting growing support
for congressional action, even from Donald Trump. But on Thursday Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., laid
out a "clean CR," a blueprint for a continuing resolution to fund the government from Oct. 1 through Dec. 9. It
does not include a provision to delay the transfer.
who controls ICANN jeopardizes our presidential election. Changing who controls the Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) so close to our presidential election will jeopardize the results of how you vote on Nov. 8
unless Congress stops this changeover. When the calendar hits Sept. 30, a mere 6 weeks before our election, the
United States cannot be assured that if any web site is hacked, the responsible party will be held accountable. We cannot
be sure if a web site is a valid. We cannot be sure if one country is being favored over another. These are all the
things ICANN is responsible for and has worked perfectly since the Internet was created. Why change it now and so close
to the election?
We Shouldn't Give Away the
Internet to Authoritarian Regimes. The essence of human freedom, of civilization itself, is cooperation:
cooperation between friends and family; businesses and customers; entrepreneurs and employees. History and human
experience teach that humans cooperate best when they do so voluntarily, without government coercion. That is why I
fully support the eventual transition of control over the internet from the Department of Commerce and to a private
entity. But I also worry that President Barack Obama is hastily rushing the current transfer of power to the Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), which could make it easier for the United Nations to take over the internet.
essential that we keep the internet secure, free and open. For most of the internet's history, the important
role of assigning domain names has been left to a nonprofit group called the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
Numbers (ICANN), which is under contract with the United States government. If the Obama administration has its way,
however, that will change prematurely on September 30, when the contract expires and governance of ICANN will transition
to a global multistakeholder community. I believe ICANN isn't ready for this transition.
Group ICANN Boosted Member Who Transferred U.S. Technology to Iran. The international organization the Obama
administration is pushing to hand control over the internet to has provided official accreditation to people who have
transferred technology to Iran, worked with North Korea, and ordered "murders-for-hire," according to congressional testimony
that raises questions about the organization's practices. Obama administration efforts to hand over control of America's
Internet to The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or ICANN, an international coalition of 162 countries and
entities, have sparked outrage on Capitol Hill, where critics allege the move would stifle the free flow of information.
Obama officials could face jail for internet 'handover'. Sen. Ted Cruz warned Commerce Department
officials they could face jail time for their efforts to hand control of the internet's domain name system to an
international group, saying they violated congressional funding restrictions. Cruz said the employees are at risk of
"personal criminal liability of up to two years in prison" because, he alleged, they overstepped provisions in the last
government spending bill that prevent them from using funds to carry out the transition. "This administration is not
going to prosecute it, but a new administration will be in Washington," Cruz said at a Senate Judiciary hearing
Wednesday. He said he couldn't say who would be the next president, but he was advising employees of the Commerce
Department to be "on notice."
Transfer: The President's ICANN Internet Problem. The Administration has an ill-conceived plan to give up
Internet oversight, and that is no fiction. Since the beginning of the year, President Obama has urged that our
Commerce Department relinquish its control over the last remaining parcel of U.S. authority; namely, supervision of IANA
(Internet Assigned Numbers Authority), which governs such critical Internet domains as ".mil," ".gov" and ".edu." The "tech
gurus" I mention above are real too, comprising the international Board and committees of ICANN (Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers) a private, non-profit group that is on the cusp, under the Administration's plan, of gaining
complete, autonomous control of the most basic functions of the Internet, free of any U.S. veto power. The potential
harm to American interests, both in terms of national security as well as American commerce, is palpable.
The ICANN and IANA Transition
End Game. Two years ago the Obama Administration announced its decision to allow a contract with the Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) to lapse. The practical implicaiton of that decision will be for
ICANN to assume sole responsibility for the development of policy over the naming and numbering function of the Internet.
That decision has some singificant implications for the operation of the network and raised concerns, both about ICANN's ability
to do the job technically and, more significantly, about its ability to manage the network in a way that maintained the network's
security, stability, and openness.
pushes to sue Obama for Internet 'surrender'. A Pennsylvania Republican and some outside groups want the House
GOP to sue President Obama to prevent the transition of the Internet away from U.S. government oversight. Rep.
Mike Kelly filed a resolution Friday [9/9/2016] that, if adopted, would allow Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., to ask a judge to block
the Obama administration from proceeding with the Internet transition, which is supposed to take place at the end of the
month. Conservative groups and activists asked House and Senate leaders to consider such a lawsuit last month, citing
provisions in recent appropriations bills that banned the Commerce Department from spending taxpayer money on the
transition. "The American people's Congress has prohibited this hasty surrender in law and the administration must
follow it," Kelly, a three-term Republican, said Friday.
Obama Internet giveaway a criminal conspiracy? The National Telecommunications and Information Administration
(NTIA) on June 9 announced a plan preparing to transition the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions to the
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) on September 30. The report proclaimed, "NTIA, along with
other U.S. Government agencies, has reviewed the plan... NTIA finds that the IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal meets the
criteria necessary to complete the long-promised privatization of the IANA functions." There is only one problem.
The relinquishment of the responsibility over the IANA functions is prohibited under Section 539(a) of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, enacted into law late last year: "None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to
relinquish the responsibility of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, during fiscal year 2016,
with respect to Internet domain name system functions, including responsibility with respect to the authoritative root zone
file and the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority functions."
the GOP stop Obama's internet giveaway? As the October 1 deadline approaches for the us [sic] to turn over control
of ICANN, the domain name nonprofit, to the international community, several congressional Republicans are vowing to fight the move
because they say it's dangerous and premature. [...] ICANN has not demonstrated the independence necessary to resist individual
countries from imposing their will on the internet. The danger is that ICANN will become a tool of powerful nations like China
and Russia, which would threaten internet freedom. Obama refuses to follow the simple, time-tested adage: "If it ain't
broke, don't fix it." This transfer is being done to kowtow to Arabs, the Russians, and the Chinese, who have their own
ideas of what "internet freedom" means, and it's not what our idea of the concept is.
Memo: Soros Foundation Eyed Stronger Internet Regulation in TPP Negotiations. A leaked document from
George Soros's Open Society Foundations reveals the organization was seeking to influence the positions of Latin American
governments in negotiating the Transpacific Partnership Agreement, or TTP. Soros's organization does not appear to
support the TPP outright, but expressed interest in influencing the sweeping internationalist treaty, including the treaty's
positions on Internet regulation. The document reveals the Foundations provided a grant to a Latin American group under
the project title "Promotion of Human Rights Standards in Latin American Internet Regulation."
has just one month to keep the internet under US control. When Congress comes back into session next Tuesday,
it will only have a few short weeks to accomplish one of the most important tasks before it: ensuring that control of the
internet does not fall into the hands of those who would actively censor it to the detriment of free speech and American
interests. On Sept. 30, the United States is poised to hand over control of the internet to the United Nations,
following a years-long push by the Obama administration, after the Department of Commerce sub-administration signed off
on the final plans to hand over control of the process on Aug. 16.
the Internet, Before Obama Abandons It to the UN. In Monday's [8/29/2016] Wall Street Journal, columnist
Gordon Crovitz sounds an urgent warning about President Obama's plans, during his final months in office, to fundamentally
transform the internet. It's an intricate tale, but the bottom line is that unless Congress acts fast, the World Wide
Web looks likely to end up under control of the UN. That would be the same UN that serves as a global clubhouse
for despotic regimes that like to wield censorship as a basic tool of power.
An Internet Giveaway
to the U.N.. When the Obama administration announced its plan to give up U.S. protection of the internet, it
promised the United Nations would never take control. But because of the administration's naiveté or arrogance,
U.N. control is the likely result if the U.S. gives up internet stewardship as planned at midnight on Sept. 30.
Soros Document Calls For Regulating Internet To Favor 'Open Society' Supporters. An internal proposed strategy
from George Soros's Open Society Justice Initiative calls for international regulation of private actors' decisions on "what
information is taken off the Internet and what may remain." Those regulations, the document notes, should favor "those most
supportive of open society." The Open Society Justice Initiative (OSJI) is part of the Open Society Foundations, Soros's
secretive network of political organizations. According to the organization's website, "The Open Society Justice Initiative
uses law to protect and empower people around the world, supporting the values and work of the Open Society Foundations."
Obama to Hand
Off Control of the Internet On October 1st. Lawrence E. Strickling, an NTIA (National Telecommunications &
Information) administrator wrote that without any "significant impediment", the transition will occur October 1. Let's
look at this rationally and clear-headed. This transition relates to DNS servers which are essentially the Internet's
directory of IP addresses to call upon. The handling of the directory of IP addresses is no longer going to happen
under American authority and instead be handled by "foreign authorities"? Who exactly are these "foreign authorities" —
and why does no one know? Boy, this sounds like a good idea! For an administration touted on transparency and change,
things are looking a little bit veiled right now.
end of the internet as we know it. The Commerce Department is finalizing the transition of control of the
internet from U.S. hands to a "multi-stakeholder" model that includes Russia and China. None of this was approved by
Congress. The administration is acting unilaterally to strip U.S. control of the internet and give it to totalitarians
and religious fanatics.
to hand off internet in under two months. The Department of Commerce is set to hand off the final vestiges of
American control over the Internet to international authorities in less than two months, officials have confirmed. The
department will finalize the transition effective Oct. 1, Assistant Secretary Lawrence Strickling wrote on Tuesday [8/16/2016],
barring what he called "any significant impediment." The move means the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, which is responsible
for interpreting numerical addresses on the Web to a readable language, will move from U.S. control to the Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers, a multistakeholder body based in Los Angeles that includes countries such as China and Russia.
Will the Senate
save the Internet? Advocates for the transition have long held the concern that failure to move forward would
in some way fracture the Internet, and that has been the rationale given for the U.S. to proceed with turning over the IANA
functions to a new governance body led by the current vendor, ICANN, which handles these and other functions on behalf of the
U.S. government. Last year, then-outgoing ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade stated that failure to transition the IANA functions
would result in fracturing. Chehade stated, "ICANN's community may fracture or fray slowly, becoming divided... The
technical operating communities using IANA may go separate ways..." But that is not the real danger. Let me be
clear, no multistakeholder system that can be devised will ever be as effective at protecting a free and open Internet as the
current United States government oversight system.
Cruz: Obama Plan to Give Up Internet Control 'Likely Illegal'. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) called on Congress to stop the
Obama administration from giving away control of the Internet with congressional authorization — a move Cruz said is likely illegal.
Since 1998, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a nonprofit organization that assigns domain names for the Internet and
manages IP addresses, has operated under a contract with the U.S. Commerce Department's National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
The NTIA plans to end its relationship with ICANN on Sept. 30.
They've apparently never heard, "If it works, don't fix it." Federal
regulation of Internet coming, warn FCC, FEC commissioners. Democrats targeting content and control of the
Internet, especially from conservative sources, are pushing hard to layer on new regulations and even censorship under the
guise of promoting diversity while policing bullying, warn commissioners from the Federal Communications Commission and
Federal Election Commission. "Protecting freedom on the Internet is just one vote away," said Lee E. Goodman, a
commissioner on the FEC which is divided three Democrats to three Republicans. "There is a cloud over your free
speech." Freedom of speech on the Internet, added Ajit Pai, commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission,
"is increasingly under threat."
White House has endorsed a plan to suppress ISIS images on the web. There seems to be little disagreement
between the parties on the fact that Islamic radicalization and attacks on our own soil are a bad thing. [...] So
what, if anything, should be done about it? The Counter Extremism Project (CEP), described as a "nonpartisan policy
group" in their promotional literature, thinks they have the solution. They're developing web based tools which purport
to seek out and allow the removal of any terrorist related images, videos and other content which might be used as recruiting
tools for Islamist terror groups. If you're already feeling a chill wind blowing from that brief description you're not
alone, but the White House seems to be all too ready to get onboard.
FCC's Internet Takeover Would Reduce Internet to a Public Utility. Yesterday the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals
upheld President Obama's so-called "net neutrality" regulations in a 2-1 decision. These are the rules that
re-classified the Internet as a "public utility" under a Depression-era law, and leave us on the hook for a massive new tax
increase and countless new regulations that are already having a dramatic negative impact on investment. The judges on
the D.C. Circuit wrote the decision simply pretending the regulations came from an expert agency entitled to deference based
on its expertise. They essentially decided to play along and ignore the widely reported fact that the order actually
came from White House political hacks and a decision based entirely on politics to pressure the FCC to ignore its own experts
to instead score a political win for the hard-left after the 2014 election landslide.
FCC Ruling, November Election Will Decide Future of Internet. On Tuesday [6/14/2016], the D.C. Circuit Court of
Appeals handed down a 2-1 decision upholding the 2015 Federal Communications Commission (FCC) decision to impose "Net
Neutrality" on Internet service providers, treating the Internet like a public utility. The controversial policy was
enacted last year, much to the delight of Google, of left-wing activists in Silicon Valley, and of their White House
allies. It was a reversal of FCC chair Tom Wheeler's stance, and was carried out with little transparency.
Hand The Internet Over To The U.N.. The U.S. quietly approved a plan Thursday [6/9/2016] to deliver oversight
of the internet gatekeeping functions from the U.S. government to a private group. It's been hailed as "privatizing"
the internet, but in fact it does no such thing.
agency endorses plan to cede Internet oversight. The US administration on Thursday endorsed a plan to cede its
oversight of the gatekeeper of Internet addresses to the broader online community. Commerce Department assistant
secretary for communications and information Lawrence Strickling told AFP that the proposal from the Internet Corporation
for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) meets the criteria set by the US administration.
Cruz proposes bill to keep U.S. from giving up internet governance role. Internet legislation proposed Wednesday [6/8/2016]
in the Senate would prohibit the U.S. government from relinquishing its role with respect to overseeing the web's domain name system, or
DNS, unless explicitly authorized by Congress. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), a division of
the Commerce Department, currently oversees control of the DNS, a virtual phonebook of sorts that allows internet users to easily browse
the web by allocating domain names to websites the world over.
administration backs plan to relinquish Internet control. The Obama administration is getting behind a plan
that would have the U.S. government relinquish its last bit of control over the Internet — a move Republican
lawmakers are fighting tooth-and-nail. The transfer was set in motion two years ago when a Commerce Department agency
said it would cede oversight over an obscure, but powerful, Los Angeles-based nonprofit called the Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).
Tech Giants Join EU to Censor the Internet. The world's biggest technology companies joined with the European Union to censor the
Internet, announcing this week an online "Code of Conduct" that will be used to remove and prosecute "illegal" speech, while promoting government
propaganda. Everything from the Christian Bible and the Islamic Koran to criticism of Islam or concerns about uncontrolled immigration could
fall under the vague new censorship rules. Alongside the censorship and propaganda, the EU touted "a robust system of enforcement" to effectively
apply "criminal sanctions against the individual perpetrators" of illegal speech. Critics, though, are speaking out, warning of the Orwellian
implications of having an unelected and unaccountable super-state attempting to overturn centuries of protections for civil liberties that are at
the core of Western civilization. [...] Among the participating firms are Facebook, Twitter, YouTube (owned by Google), Microsoft, and more.
circulates plan to stop U.S. Internet giveaway. A proposal being circulated by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas,
would block the plan to transfer control of a key component of the Internet before President Obama leaves office.
Cruz's "Protecting Internet Freedom Act" would direct the Department of Commerce to retain ownership of the Internet Assigned
Numbers Authority. The administration has sought to transfer the agency, which is responsible for administrative
functions that transform code into language on the Internet, to an international authority called ICANN. Lawmakers worry that
arrangement could empower countries like China and Iran to engage in more censorship, either at home or abroad.
Neutrality Will Regulate Internet Rates Despite Promises. When FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler launched the opening
salvo in the battle to regulate the Internet, he said time and time again that Net Neutrality would not be used to regulate
rates. Now he is arguing that restricting the FCC from regulating Internet rates will kill Net Neutrality. Brace
yourselves: Rate regulation is coming, and Net Neutrality and those who supported it are to blame.
FCC's Plan To Take Over The Internet Has Begun. "It's not a government takeover of the Internet." That was the mantra
of those who backed the Federal Communication Commission's "net neutrality" rules, which the FCC approved a little over a year ago. [...] The
rules were only meant to keep the Internet "free and open," advocates said. All the government was doing was blocking ISPs from
discriminating against users by charging more for faster speeds. But to impose "net neutrality," the FCC reclassified the Internet
so that it could regulate it in the same way it regulated the telephone monopolies. FCC chairman Tom Wheeler promised that —
despite the fact the FCC had just granted itself wide-ranging control over ISPs — it would use a "light touch" when it came to
domain handoff takes major step forward. A major step was taken Thursday in the U.S. government's plan to hand
off oversight of the Internet domain name system. A nonprofit international group approved a plan and forwarded it to
the Obama administration Thursday [3/10/2016] for review and approval. The group, the Internet Corporation for Assigned
Names and Numbers (ICANN), has historically been contracted out to manage the behind-the-scenes workings of the Internet that
pair up numerical IP addresses with their familiar Web addresses.
10 Lies in Obama's State of the Union. [#5] "We've protected an open internet...". Obama's policy of Net
Neutrality has turned Internet service providers into public utilities under an ancient regulatory regime. The result has
been a sharp decline in broadband investment and a much less free and open system. In addition, the Obama administration is
rushing to shift control of ICANN to the international community, which will ensure that the Internet is less free, and subject to
Defends Net Neutrality In Court As ISPs Continue To Challenge Its Authority. The Federal Communications Commission is compelled to defend its
regulations on net neutrality in the court in opposition to Internet service providers questioning the new rules. The hearing kicked off on Friday,
Dec. 4, in which the FCC defended its broadband regulations meant at putting a stop to favoritism on the Internet before the U.S. Court of Appeals in
Washington, D.C. The agency pushed out the new policy reclassifying broadband Internet providers as being "common carriers" under the Title II
of the Communications Act way back [in] February. The new agency's regulations could permit the government to control these providers akin to telephone
firms or other industries.
Pritzker: The Obama Crony Destroying the Internet. The Wall Street Journal's L. Gordon Crovitz reports Monday
[11/2/2015] that the Department of Commerce is unlikely to stop Los Angeles-based XYZ.com from enforcing Chinese censorship of
domain names around the world. These names include a list of 12,000 words to ban from Chinese web addresses. "Anyone
in any country in the world will be denied use of these domains if their names include words that trouble Beijing's repressive
leaders, Crovitz writes.
report on web harassment could open door to gov't control of Internet, critics warn. Buried at the end of a
wonkish UN report about problems women face online last month was a proposal that free speech advocates say could lay the
groundwork for a government grab of the web. The report, titled "Cyber Violence against Women and Girls: A Worldwide
Wake-Up Call," described the bullying, harassment and threats faced by female Internet users as "a problem of pandemic
proportion" — and suggested governments across the globe may one day need to use their "licensing prerogative" to
ensure that only Internet service providers "that supervise content and its dissemination" be "allowed to connect with the public."
questions constitutionality of Internet domain transition. Leaders of the Judiciary committees in Congress are
questioning whether the Obama administration's decision to give up oversight of parts of the Internet address system is
unconstitutional. The GOP lawmakers on Monday asked the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to explore whether the
handoff is allowed to take place without Congress's approval. They expressed concerned that the deal would involve the
transfer of government property — something the Constitution says Congress needs to approve first.
Feds refuse to reveal cellular
kill-switch plan. The federal government has a plan to kill all cell-phone service in certain areas when officials
decide it's necessary. But you aren't allowed to see the plan. And the fact that you cannot learn what might justify
its use or who has the authority to push the kill button is the focus of a new case before the U.S. Supreme Court. Pulling
the plug on local cellular service already has been done. In 2011, officials with the Bay Area Rapid Transit system in San
Francisco cut off service inside four transit stations for three hours after a BART security officer shot and killed a homeless
man and protests erupted in reaction. The shutdown order was made when a protest organizer sought to coordinate activists
via cell phone.
Fox News could be censored under new federal rules, experts warn. A Washington, D.C., appeals court is set to
hear arguments later this year on new net neutrality rules, which critics say could lead to government regulators censoring
websites such as the Drudge Report and Fox News. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit will hear oral arguments
against the Federal Communications Commission's rules on Dec. 4. A panoply of amicus briefs filed with the court
last week offer a preview of the arguments.
and Federal Threats to Internet Freedom Loom Large. The argument in favor of Net Neutrality goes something like this:
If the government doesn't step in, Internet Service Providers might hypothetically decide to give priority to some websites and online
services over others — perhaps forcing companies or websites to pay for faster content delivery to consumers. Is that
conceivable in a free market? Yes. Is it a problem? Not really. If that is what consumers and the market want,
what's wrong with it?
twist in telco giants' fight to destroy the FCC's net neutrality. When an entire page
of a lawsuit is taken up just listing the lawyers on the case, you know you have hit some vested
interests. And so it is with the opening arguments [PDF] of the US Telecom Association et al
versus the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC), aka status quo versus Open Internet. There
are seven petitioners in the case, most of them telecom associations (i.e., lobbyists) representing
a large number of other companies, and the brief runs to 159 pages with 95 pages of argument.
Free Stuff! Obama Hands Out More Freebies! The very generous Barack Obama is giving
our money to a new initiative which will provide a very expensive form of Broadband to poor
neighborhoods. He's calling it Connect Home, a pilot project to help "close the digital divide"
by bringing broadband to poorer communities. Mind you, most Americans can't get this yet. It's also
going to entire neighborhoods, not individuals which is a significant change not to be ignored in light of
Mr. Obama's Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule. He is defining expensive Broadband Internet
as a "necessity" and a human right. In providing this to the poor, he's depriving others. He's
redistributing our money and high-speed Broadband. At some point, the segments of America that are
paying for this will run out of money. The media is phrasing it as something Obama is doing when it
is our money that is doing it, not him.
Director: Government Must Have Access to Your Encrypted Data. The director of the FBI
doesn't want you to use technology to encrypt your personal data. He said that for your safety the
feds should have unrestricted access to everything you store in a cloud or a hard drive, write in an e-mail,
or send in a text. Security, he says, trumps privacy. Besides, only a criminal has something to
hide. Actually, what FBI Director James Comey told the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee is
that in order to stay a step ahead of the bad guys, the g-men should have access to any available technology
to decode encrypted data. And that the government should be the arbiter of when decryption is necessary
The Editor says...
Next, they'll want a copy of the key to the front door of your house. You don't have anything to hide, do you?
unveils high-speed Internet help for low-income homes. Calling the Internet a 21st
century necessity, President Barack Obama on Wednesday unveiled a program to bring faster Internet
connections to more low-income households, particularly to help students living in public and
assisted housing stay ahead in school.
Extending Broadband Internet Access to Public Housing Residents. The information
superhighway is heading straight into taxpayer-subsidized housing. The Department of Housing and
Urban Development on Wednesday [7/15/2015] announced an initiative to extend affordable broadband access to
families living in HUD-assisted housing. The project, launching in 27 cities and one tribal nation,
is called ConnectHome.
the Lifeline Phone Subsidy — Here Comes Obamanet. The Obama administration
Thursday [5/28/2015] announced a plan to expand the troubled Lifeline program, which subsidizes
phone service, to also include broadband coverage. Despite the enormous potential for even more
waste, fraud, and abuse in a program already famous for such fiscal irresponsibility, the Democrat-controlled
Federal Communications Commission is nonetheless likely to approve this proposal.
Commissioner: Internet Access Is Not a 'Basic Human Right'. Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) member Michael O'Rielly says it is "ludicrous to compare Internet access to a basic
human right." "Human rights are standards of behavior that are inherent in every human being,"
O'Rielly said Thursday [6/25/2015] in a speech to the Internet Innovation Alliance, a coalition of
business and non-profit organizations. "They are the core principles underpinning human interaction
in society. These include liberty, due process or justice, and freedom of religious beliefs.
"I find little sympathy with efforts to try to equate Internet access with these higher, fundamental
concepts," O'Rielly stated.
Neutrality Regulations Make Their Debut. At precisely 12:01 am Friday [6/12/2015],
the new net neutrality regulations took effect after the D.C. Appeals Court declined petitioner's request
for a delay in the case. The day prior, a three-judge panel ruled the petitioners failed to satisfy
the stringent requirements for a stay pending review. Had the stay been granted, the new rules would
have been put on hold until the broader court battle is settled. In denying the request, the new
FCC regulations took effect first thing this morning. This means the FCC has the power to regulate
ISPs, which are now classified as Title II telecommunication service providers and subject to common
take aim at net neutrality in spending bill. A House appropriations bill unveiled
Wednesday [6/10/2015] would prevent the Federal Communications Commission from using government funds to
implement net neutrality regulations until after a series of legal disputes are settled. That
could delay the controversial policy, which allows the agency to regulate the Internet like a public
utility, for an untold number of years. For net neutrality enthusiasts, that essentially spells
a death sentence.
neutrality rules will take effect on Friday. The new federal rules for net neutrality
were allowed to take effect on Friday after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit denied a motion to stay the regulation. "Petitioners have not satisfied the stringent
requirements for a stay pending court review," the three-judge panel said in its Thursday [6/11/2015]
decision, which allowed the rules to kick in Friday [6/12/2015] at 12:01 a.m.
must keep the Internet free. 12:01 a.m. Friday morning [6/12/2015] officially marked the end of
the "permissionless" Internet. The curtain has come down on the greatest deregulatory success story of all
time as a result of the Federal Communications Commission acting to regulate the Net like an old fashioned phone
monopoly with 81-year-old laws — starting on June 12, 2015. This is nothing more than
command-and-control government utility regulation packaged as something new called "net neutrality."
has an offer that AT&T can't refuse. Regulators routinely have to sign off on such mega-deals.
At least in theory, they do so in the interest of protecting the freedom of the marketplace from monopolistic
practices. But in this case, the regulators are not protecting consumers — instead, the Washington
Post reported last week, the Federal Communications Commission appears to be using this deal as a bargaining chip to
buy off one of the larger and better-funded sources of opposition to its Democratic commissioners' net neutrality
agenda. Essentially, it appears that AT&T will get its deal as long as it agrees to stop resisting and accept
the FCC's restrictions on its Internet service. It's a quid pro quo in which the regulators make trades to
increase their own power instead of protecting consumers.
Broadband: FCC Chairman Plans to Expand 'Obama Phone' Program to Internet. Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Tom Wheeler announced on Thursday [5/28/2015] that he
intends to expand Lifeline, popularly known as the "Obama Phone" program, to the Internet.
"I am circulating new proposals to "reboot" Lifeline for the Internet age," Wheeler wrote in a
blog post on the FCC's Website. He said the reboot would include "establishing minimum
standards of service for voice and broadband," in addition to subsidies for low-income consumers.
You need an Obama-modem to go with your Obamaphone: F.C.C.
Chief Seeks Broadband Plan to Aid the Poor. For 30 years, the federal government has
helped millions of low-income Americans pay their phone bills, saying that telephone service is
critical to summoning medical help, seeking work and, ultimately, climbing out of poverty. Now, the
nation's top communications regulator will propose offering those same people subsidized access to
broadband Internet. On Thursday [5/28/2015], that regulator, Tom Wheeler, chairman of the
Federal Communications Commission, will circulate a plan to his fellow commissioners suggesting
sweeping changes to a $1.7 billion subsidy program charged with ensuring that all Americans have
affordable access to advanced telecommunications services, according to senior agency officials.
Commissioner: Feds May Come for Drudge. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) member
Ajit Pai said over the weekend that he foresees a future in which federal regulators will seek to
regulate websites based on political content, using the power of the FCC or Federal Elections
Commission (FEC). He also revealed that his opposition to "net neutrality" regulations
had resulted in personal harassment and threats to his family.
does Team Obama want to give control of Web to "global multi-stakeholder community"? Later this year, our own government
plans to give away control of the Internet to "the global multi-stakeholder community." It would be hard to conceive of a plan
more pointless and potentially harmful. At issue is ultimate U.S. government control of a key part of the Internet: its
directory. Your ability to reach your bank when you enter its URL, for example, ultimately depends on an assigned web address
that is unique and registered.
outcry forces FEC Democrats to junk bid to regulate Internet, Drudge. The Federal
Election Commission, facing punishing criticism for suggesting that political activity on the
Internet should be regulated, rejected talk of new rules Thursday [5/21/2015], a victory for GOP
commissioners who feared Democrats were targeting conservative sites, even the Drudge Report.
During a public meeting, Democrats on the FEC said they were responding to the public outcry in
saying that no new rules are required.
Internet 'Needs Rules to Be Able to Flourish and Work Properly'. In a speech today
[5/18/2015] in South Korea, Secretary of State John Kerry said that the Internet "needs rules to be
able to flourish and work properly." This, according to Kerry, is necessary even for "a technology
founded on freedom." Speaking on behalf of the Obama administration, Kerry said that Internet
policy is "a key component of our foreign policy."
sees privatization of Internet management soon. The head of the nonprofit group that
oversees the world's Internet addresses expressed confidence Thursday [5/14/2015] that it would be
privatized and out of US government control by year's end. Fadi Chehade's comments came despite
criticism in the US Congress, where some lawmakers have resisted the plan to end Washington's key
management role in the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).
Ready for $11 Billion in 'Net Neutrality' Taxes. Not long after FCC chairman Tom
Wheeler swore that the FCC takeover of the Internet wouldn't result in new taxes or fees, it
appears likely that new taxes will show up on Internet bills in the near future.
Emergency': US to Slap Sanctions on Hackers. Cyber-attacks against the U.S. have
become so bad that President Obama today declared it a "national emergency" and announced the first
ever sanctions program designed specifically to go after foreign hackers. In an executive order
signed today and released by the White House, Obama said the "the increasing prevalence and severity
of malicious cyber-enabled activities originating from, or directed by persons located, in whole or
in substantial part, outside the United States constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the
national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States."
The Editor says...
This sounds to me like a pretense for some completely unrelated restriction on the internet.
controls what we buy, the news we read — and Obama's policies. A former
Google officer is the president's chief technology adviser. Google employees contributed more to
President Obama's re-election than did employees of any other company except Microsoft. Google
lobbyists met with Obama White House officials 230 times. By comparison, lobbyists from
rival Comcast have been admitted to the inner sanctum a mere 20 or so times in the same period.
Oh, and on Election Night 2012, guess where Google executive chairman Eric Schmidt was? Working
for the president. In the president's campaign office. On a voter-turnout system designed
to help the president get re-elected.
Welcome to a surrealistic world run
by Google. The mighty corporate techie giant with assets of $131 billion has nestled
so long among us it is almost like family. Website owners tell people who want things removed off
the net: "No can do 'cause Google is forever". The Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
rocked the online world world when its 313-page 'Net Neutrality' initiative was revealed last month.
But in reality, Net Neutrality was devised not by FCC but by Google.
neutrality: Obama's FCC puts Internet, American innovation at risk. The Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) released its disastrous new network neutrality rules earlier this
month, officially signaling to the world that the U.S. will adopt a policy destined to stifle
technological advancement and put network investment into neutral. By heeding President
Obama's call to make the Internet a government-regulated public utility, the FCC has adopted a system
equipped to regulate public utilities and monopolies, not the dynamic and fast paced Internet economy.
steps down after bullet ban controversy. The director of the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is stepping down following controversy surrounding the
agency's proposal to ban certain types of ammunition. The ATF announced Friday that Director
B. Todd Jones is resigning at the end of the month "to pursue other opportunities in the
Neutrality: Yes, Mark Cuban, Atlas Is Shrugging. Billionaire investor Mark Cuban
recently commented, about a push for new regulations on the Internet, that "In my adult life I have
never seen a situation that paralleled what I read in Ayn Rand's books until now with Net Neutrality."
He continued, "If Ayn Rand were an up-and-coming author today, she wouldn't write about steel or railroads,
it would be Net Neutrality." She certainly would, but if he thinks this is the first time real life
has imitated Ayn Rand's fiction, he needs to be paying a little more attention. Atlas has been
shrugging for a long, long time.
Chairman Concedes Future Internet Tax Is Possible After All. Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) Chairman Tom Wheeler acknowledged in congressional testimony today that an Internet tax —
which he had previously said would not be imposed — could be imposed in the future. Wheeler's
remarks came during a Tuesday [3/17/2015] appearance before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee,
where he was asked to shed light on the process by which the FCC passed rules last month regulating the Internet.
net neutrality regulations include one really scary sentence. At long last, the FCC
has released its 400-page tome of net neutrality regulations. [...] But at least one sentence of the
regulation is giving many analysts pause. "A person engaged in the provision of broadband
Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not block lawful content,
applications, services, or non- harmful devices, subject to reasonable network management," reads
page seven of the new Internet regulation adopted by the FCC. Who then, now that these
regulations are in effect, will determine which Internet content is lawful and unlawful?
the FCC Decide How Much You Pay for Internet? The Federal Communications Commission
has a new way to oversee how much companies can charge for Internet access, but swears it won't use
it. Can it be trusted? That's the potential billion-dollar question. Internet providers already
don't like last month's FCC net neutrality decision, saying it will lead to intrusive government meddling in their
businesses. But as they raise the alarm about the FCC's action, they are pointing to language they say could
result in government price controls.
neutrality enables Washington to say whose speech is free. Two weeks after the Federal
Communications Commission voted to regulate the Internet as a utility, the masters of the universe
at the FCC, three unelected Democrats, are finally allowing Americans to see the actual order on
exactly how they intend to ruin one of the major free speech and free market successes in the world.
Boy, do they have a plan. Their new rules for the Internet requires 313 glorious pages of vague,
regulating terminology, allowing the agency to make up the rules as it goes along. Ever since the
FCC started sidling up to the Internet like a dirty old man next to a supermodel, conservatives and other
free marketeers have been channeling Cassandra, warning the nation that "net neutrality" was a pretext for
the FCC to issue regulations putting them in charge of the Internet as a whole. That is just what
FCC Has Finally Released Its Net Neutrality Internet Regulations. After more than a
month of heated debate between regulators, lawmakers, companies and interest groups, the FCC on
Thursday [3/12/2015] finally released the Internet regulations the agency voted to adopt two weeks
ago. The agency's 313-page Open Internet Order is accompanied by an additional 70-plus pages
of individual statements by the five commissioners, two of whom dissented in the vote to adopt the
Minority Report Warns That New Internet Tax May Be Coming Soon. The Federal
Communication Commission's (FCC) two Republican members warned Americans that a new "Internet tax"
may be only months away in their dissent on the FCC's net neutrality decision, which was publicly
released Thursday [3/12/2015]. "Net neutrality proponents are already bragging that it will
turn the FCC into the 'Department of the Internet,' Republican Commissioner Ajit Pai wrote in an
exhaustive 63-page dissent that lamented the FCC's ruling for reasons ranging from higher taxes and
fees to the plan's questionable legality.
to hit 'delete' on net neutrality. Think about how the Internet has changed our lives
in the last few years alone. Would have been possible with the bureaucrats in Washington empowered
to oversee what service providers can and cannot do? We'd be lucky to even have dial-up service
today. It simply makes no sense to yoke the Internet of 2015 to any portion of the Communications
Act of 1934. The good news? This fight isn't over. As I mentioned earlier, we've been here
twice before, once in 2006 and again in 2010. Both times, net neutrality didn't survive a court
challenge, and that's where we look now.
Other Internet Power Grab Is to Expand Policy. February 26 was a particularly terrible
day — in a six-plus year history of terrible Barack Obama Administration days. That is the day
the Obama Federal Communications Commission (FCC) — without benefit of Congress — unilaterally
imposed on the free Internet the uber-heinous regulatory nightmare mess that is Title-II-Reclassification-Network
Neutrality. But that's not all the FCC — without any actual authority — did to the Web.
Obama is a lawless leader, choosing to rule by memorandum, regulation and executive order — he is not
a president; he is a king. [...] Most egregious is his impending takeover of the internet. Talk about
finding solutions to things that aren't broken. No one yet knows his plans for the future web —
it's finished, but it's secret. There are, however, two things that will be in the soup. You can bet
your bottom dollar there will be more fees and more taxes. Render unto Obama what is Obama's — and
it's all Obama's, so shut up and pay. The FCC wants to control access to internet bandwidth, who gets it,
when and how much, as well as pricing, taxes and fees. Did I mention taxes and fees? But what Barry
really wants is to control content.
tries to explain its apparent sudden flip-flop on net neutrality. A top Netflix exec
is probably wishing he'd stayed in bed. The company's chief financial officer, David Wells, told
an investor conference Wednesday [3/4/2015] that Netflix isn't "pleased" about the Federal Communications
Commission's recent vote on net neutrality, which slapped strong new rules on Internet providers.
It's a shocking admission for a company that led the charge on aggressive regulations for Comcast, Verizon
and other broadband companies. Last week, the FCC handed Web companies a big victory when it decided
to regulate Internet providers under Title II of the Communications Act — just like legacy
Mugged by Obamanet. When Google's Eric Schmidt called White House officials a few
weeks ago to oppose President Obama's demand that the Internet be regulated as a utility, they told
him to buzz off. The chairman of the company that led lobbying for "net neutrality" learned the
Obama plan made in its name instead micromanages the Internet.
'net neutrality' win, FCC's power needs to be dialed back. In one of the most
important decisions in its history, the Federal Communications Commission, a pernicious government
agency set up more than 70 years ago to regulate radio interference, may undermine key aspects of
the Internet. But most media outlets provided coverage of last week's controversial decision, a
3-2 vote along party lines, for just about one 24-hour news cycle. Many outlets described the new
policies as a victory for consumers over the Internet Service Providers, such as AT&T, Comcast and Verizon.
Who wins with
Obama's net neutrality? The Barack Obama Administration's Thursday Internet uber-power
grab is awful for just about every American. It will lead to dramatically more expensive Web
access — because of both raised service costs and huge new taxes. And we will see a
spiraling, regressive devolution of speed. It will be a return to the spinning wheel of Web-waiting
death. When government regulation increases — private investment decreases. When
investment goes — forward progress goes with it. And this Obama power grab is lots and
lots and LOTS of regulation.
Left Using IRS, FEC and FCC to End Free Speech. President of the Media Research Center, Brent Bozell
told an audience at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) on Friday [2/27/2015] the "radical left" is
using government agencies in "a relentless campaign to destroy the last vestiges of freedom in America."
Can We Impeach Now?
First Barack Obama decided to overreach and extend amnesty by executive order. [Scroll down] Then the FCC
decided to declare internet a public utility. They overreached, rushed it through, and committed to
as little transparency as possible to make it happen. Congress did nothing on this front and the FCC
decided to replace the Congress on the matter.
Neutrality Will Become the Internet's ObamaCare. Almost behind the public's back and
with little fanfare, the FCC acceded yesterday [2/26/2015] to an Obama administration demand and
voted that the internet be regulated like a public utility. Pro "Net Neutrality" activists hadn't
bothered to convince the public that the FCC needed expanded power to keep the internet "open," but
Democrats have the majority on the FCC. They claimed that more industry regulation was needed, but
destroying the free market which until now has driven innovation in communication and the internet
was hardly a victory for the little guy. Unless you just happen to have a blind faith in government
and government bureaucrats, it's hard to see the upside in allowing the federal government to throw
its suffocating embrace over the heretofore-dynamic internet.
are the consequences of the Net Neutrality rules? Now that the battle over net
neutrality is over — except for the inevitable legal braying and squabbling — what
difference is it going to make in your life? With everything from cars to Crock-Pots connected to the Internet,
high-speed Web access has become the water that nourishes all businesses. So it's not surprising that the
Federal Communications Commission's decision this week to regulate broadband Internet service as a public utility
(so-called Title II regulations) was preceded by a lot of spin and misinformation. Here's a
truth-or-consequences rundown of the popular Title II myths and what it all means to you.
The Truth About
"Net Neutrality". Paul Joseph Watson of Prison Planet and InfoWars explains how the
federal government is about to seize control of the Internet and most Americans don't even know
about it. [Video clip]
the FCC's 'Net Neutrality' Plan is So Great, Why Can't Anyone See It? If the FCC's
plan to "protect" net neutrality and rein in the power of greedy corporations is so fantastic, then
why haven't its 332 pages been released for public consumption? [...] Despite this mammoth change in
the function of the web, no Congressional debate took place, no bills were introduced and no
legislation was signed. The vast majority of Americans are unaware that this is even taking
place since the news networks are offering scant coverage.
Obama's Little Shop of
Horrors. Obama continues to feed on America's freedoms everyday, taking more and more,
never satisfied. Most recently, the FCC passed Net Neutrality Regulations. Obama and Democrats fully
supported the takeover of the Internet, demanding it become a public utility controlled by the
government, regardless of opposition from the American people. The FCC is supposed to be an
independent government agency, but as we are discovering, there are no boundaries honored by this
loom over tough new neutrality rules. Despite the Federal Communications Commission's
historic vote Thursday in favor of net neutrality, the fate of the Internet is far from settled.
The FCC's action triggered jubilation among open Internet enthusiasts, but the powerful telecom industry
is poised for a legal challenge to the new rules. And Republicans in Congress are pushing legislation
that would supersede the FCC's approach. In a 3-2 vote along party lines, the FCC acted to
implement net neutrality rules designed to ensure that Internet service providers (ISPs) treat all legal
content equally, eliciting howls of protest from the ISPs.
Sent Reddit a Hand-Written Note to Thank Users for Net Neutrality Push. While you were
all engrossed by CPAC and rampant llamas, the Federal Communications Commission today voted in favor
of new net neutrality regulations that, if fully implemented, would mean internet service providers
could not discriminate in which sites and services customers would get access to. Websites like
Reddit were at the forefront of net neutrality advocacy, and President Obama even voiced support of
it months ago.
Net Neutrality rules worst example of government intervention... ever. Of all the
government interventions by the Obama administration, the plan released Thursday by the Federal
Communications Commission to regulate the Internet is the worst. [...] The FCC's plan to muddy the
pure waters of the Internet pollutes the one free flow of information on the planet. And what hurts
as much as witnessing the pollution of the Internet with bureaucratic interference? With the
exception of the Republican FCC commissioners, most are being blasé about the whole thing.
can't protect free, open Internet by dusting off old regulations. The courts have
already overturned two sets of FCC rules, but this so-called "independent agency" is poised to vote
this week on its most aggressive rules yet. At the urging of President Obama, FCC Chairman Tom
Wheeler submitted a proposal that included more drastic changes and regulations than ever before.
This government takeover of the Internet follows the President's position that reclassification of
broadband services to Title II common carrier status — which were originally designed and
implemented to protect against 1930s monopolies — is the only option.
FCC set to approve strong net neutrality rules. The Federal Communications Commission
for the first time classified Internet providers as public utilities Thursday [2/26/2015], a landmark vote that
officials said will prevent cable and telecommunications companies from controlling what people see on the Web.
The move, approved 3 to 2 along party lines, was part of a sweeping set of new "net neutrality" rules
aimed at banning providers of high-speed Internet access such as Verizon and Time Warner Cable from blocking Web
sites they don't like or auctioning off faster traffic speeds to the highest bidders.
for Net Neutrality. Today's [2/26/2015] vote by a bitterly divided Federal
Communications Commission that the Internet should be regulated as a public utility is the
culmination of a decade-long battle by the Left. Using money from George Soros and liberal
foundations that totaled at least $196 million, radical activists finally succeeded in ramming
through "net neutrality," or the idea that all data should be transmitted equally over the Internet.
The final push involved unprecedented political pressure exerted by the Obama White House on FCC
chairman Tom Wheeler, head of an ostensibly independent regulatory body.
Department of the Internet.
More government control, tax hikes and a stop to innovation online — that's how opponents of President Obama's
call for so-called net neutrality described the FCC vote Thursday to regulate the internet under federal law.
Net neutrality is the concept that no service or website is given priority, or special pricing, over others by
internet service providers. While that idea has backers from all sides of the political spectrum, the
move to classify internet service as a public utility similar to home phone service is seen by many as a death
knell to the culture of fast-moving innovation online.
approves sweeping Internet regulation plan, Obama accused of meddling. On its surface,
the plan is aimed at barring service providers from creating paid "fast lanes" on the Internet,
which consumer advocates and Internet companies worry would edge out cash-strapped startups and
smaller Internet-based businesses. Chairman Tom Wheeler said it would ensure an "open, unfettered
network." But the rules, more broadly, would put the Internet in the same regulatory camp as the
telephone by classifying it like a public utility, meaning providers like Comcast or Verizon would
have to act in the "public interest" when providing a mobile connection to your home or phone.
Republican Commissioner Ajit Pai, who delivered some of the most scathing criticism of the plan Thursday
[2/26/2015], warned the policy represents a "monumental shift" to "government control of the Internet."
vote set for Internet rules. The vote — which is expected to fall 3-2 along
party lines — will usher in the next stage of the decadelong war over rules for people's
access to the Internet. In coming months, that new fight will play out in the court of public
opinion as well as the halls of Congress and the nation's judicial system. Congressional
Republicans have already unveiled legislation to replace the rules, and that effort is likely to
continue in coming weeks, when they hope the momentum will shift back in their favor. Lawmakers
have also raised concerns about improper coordination between the White House and the FCC. Major
cable companies have already said they are nearly certain to sue over the rules.
Ford Foundation shovel $196 million to 'net neutrality' groups, staff to White House.
Liberal philanthropist George Soros and the Ford Foundation have lavished groups supporting the
administration's "net neutrality" agenda, donating $196 million and landing proponents on the White
House staff, according to a new report. And now, as the Federal Communications Commission nears
approving a type of government control over the Internet, the groups are poised to declare victory
in the years-long fight, according to the report from MRC Business, an arm of the conservative media
watchdog, the Media Research Center.
John Thune Will Lean on FCC Over Net-Neutrality Rule. On the day the Federal
Communications Commission is poised to take a historic vote to reclassify the Internet as a public
utility, a major victory for open-Internet advocates, the chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee
had other ideas. He is bringing the five FCC commissioners before the committee in two weeks
to ask them, more or less, what they were thinking.
Ongoing Assault On The First Amendment. We're talking, of course, of the looming
decision by the Federal Communications Commission to declare the Internet a utility for regulatory
purposes and to impose "net neutrality" — a fancy word for government control —
on Internet and content providers. Such a declaration would give the government sweeping powers
to determine the content of the Internet and who will have access. As the proposed new rule
stands, all the FCC would have to do is make a finding that a certain practice may "harm" consumers
or a company. Then it could basically do whatever it wants to fix the situation.
Neutrality' Is a Problem, Not a Solution. The oldest trick in the collectivist
playbook is to create a problem through government regulations, let it stew for a while, and then
propose even bigger government as the only possible solution to the "crisis" it planted,
nourished, and harvested. We watched government tinkering in health care make it more expensive
and complicated, year after year... until the time was ripe to stuff the biggest, sloppiest, most
poorly-thought-out Big Government power grab of the modern era down our throats. Are we really
going to fall for that again with the FCC's new Net Neutrality regulations?
Doesn't Want an Open Internet, but a Government Regulated Monopoly. Will Obama oppose
the Comcast and Time Warner merger the way that he opposes Keystone? Of course not. You don't spend
that much time hanging out with the CEO of a company whose dreams you're going to shoot down. The fix
is in and it's a revealing fix. What Obama wants isn't an open or transparent internet. He wants a
cable monopoly for a terrible internet run by a friendly company that depends on government regulation and bribes.
He wants control of the internet not for the benefit of the public, but to centralize power over it.
Is the FCC
lawless?. The sad reality is that, without any convincing evidence of market failure
and consumer harm, the FCC is poised, on a 3-2 party-line vote, to expand its control over Internet
providers in ways that threaten the Internet's future growth and vibrancy. Here is the nub of the
matter: By choosing to regulate Internet providers as old-fashioned public utilities in order to
enforce "neutrality" mandates, the commission will discourage private-sector investment and innovation
for many years to come, if only as a result of the litigation that will be spawned and the uncertainty
that will be created.
House Chairmen Blast FCC Chairman's Refusal to Testify. [Scroll down] "The last time a rule of
this magnitude was voted on by the FCC, then-Senator Obama was motivated to call for transparency at the commission,"
the congressmen said. "We continue that call today." The FCC is set to vote on the proposed net neutrality
regulations on Thursday. However, no one outside of the commissioners and their staff are permitted to see
the regulations until they are passed. Even members of Congress are barred from reading the 332-page draft.
retreats on bill to block unprecedented 'net neutrality' regulations. With the Federal
Communications Commission poised Thursday [2/26/2015] to impose unprecedented regulations on the
Internet, congressional Republicans have quietly backed down on a plan to block the looming FCC
rules ahead of time with their own legislation. Republican lawmakers blamed Obama administration
officials, who they say have interfered in bipartisan talks to produce legislation that would ban
some of the onerous practices the FCC seeks to stop, but with far less government regulation than
the pending agency rules proposed.
drama for net neutrality. A Democrat on the Federal Communications Commission wants to
see changes that could narrow the scope of new net neutrality rules set for a vote on Thursday [2/26/2015].
Mignon Clyburn, one of three Democrats on the FCC, has asked Chairman Tom Wheeler to roll back some of his
provisions before the full commission votes on them, FCC officials said.
Move To Regulate Internet Has Activists' 'Fingerprints All Over It'. The Obama White
House has worked directly with online activists to pressure the Federal Communications Commission to
regulate the internet. The Commission is expected to vote on the president's "net neutrality" policy
on Thursday [2/26/2015]. According to White House visitor logs, on September 23, 2014, Obama
senior internet advisor David Edelman met with 30 netroots activists and executives from Spitfire
Strategies. Spitfire is a public relations firm that received over $2 million from the Ford
Foundation since 2009 to create PR and media strategy relating to net neutrality.
Chair Demands FCC Net Neutrality Gag Order Lifted. Chairman of the House Oversight
Committee Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) demanded yesterday [2/23/2015] that the Federal Communications
Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler make public the details of the proposed net neutrality regulations
that will regulate the Internet under the same rules as the old AT&T monopoly. Chaffetz also
asked the FCC Chair to appear and answer questions at the House Oversight hearing Wednesday [2/25/2015], prior
to the planned Agency vote on the draft rules now scheduled for Thursday. The 332-page final
draft FCC order was only delivered to the four other FCC commissioners three weeks ago.
Internet to Obamanet. Critics of President Obama's "net neutrality" plan call it ObamaCare
for the Internet. That's unfair to ObamaCare. Both ObamaCare and "Obamanet" submit huge industries
to complex regulations. Their supporters say the new rules had to be passed before anyone could read them.
Losing the Internet.
The administration's plan to create a "free and open Internet" means, as usual, the opposite of what
it says. As Gordon Crovitz explains in the Wall Street Journal, it is really a monumental,
bare-faced power grab. [...] The very success of the Internet doomed its independence. Like any
rich, glittering center of wealth that springs up in the desert sands, it would inevitably be coveted
by nearby chieftains. And if there's anything this administration — and to a lesser
extent any administration — hankers after it is power. So a-raiding they will go.
So here is prince Barack, at the tech city gates, demanding the keys.
regs will make Internet slow as in Europe, warn FCC, FEC commissioners. As the Federal
Communications Commission and Federal Election Commission toy with regulating aspects of the
Internet, critics on those agencies are warning that speed and freedom of speech are in jeopardy.
In a joint column, Federal Communications Commission member Ajit Pai and Federal Election Commission
member Lee Goodman, leveled the boom on the Obama-favored regulations, essentially charging that it
will muck up the freedom the nation has come to expect from the Internet.
Neutralize Obama's Hijacking of the
Internet. Barack Obama is knocking all little people in civil society off the Information
Highway — but leaving the coast clear for all Islamic terrorists. Average citizens who
depend on the Internet to get their message out will be 'regulated' off beginning three days from now,
but ISIS which recruits new members from off the 'Net will continue to send its threats and gruesome
YouTubes online. In fact, when all regulations from Obama's 332-page book of 'Net Neutrality' are
in place, only governments and terrorists will be free to blog and post.
lawmakers investigate White House net neutrality push. Congressional Republicans are
demanding to know how much the White House influenced the Federal Communications Commission while
the agency crafted net neutrality rules. The FCC has until Monday afternoon [2/23/2015] to
produce unredacted email messages, focused on net neutrality rules, between FCC staff and officials
with the Obama administration, U.S. Rep. Jason Chaffetz said in a letter to the FCC Friday.
Plan to Regulate the Internet Risks Content Control. This risk is dismissed as a myth
or even a "lie" by proponents of the president's plan. A few years ago an employee of Free
Press — a group founded by a Marxist college professor who famously said "the ultimate
goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from
control" — accused me of "a crackpot conspiracy" because I was concerned that economic
regulation could lead to content control. Those who live outside Obama's cult of personality take
a far more cautious view of today's federal government. A new poll by Rasmussen Reports found that
68 percent of registered voters are concerned that "if the FCC does gain regulatory control over the
Internet it will lead to government efforts to control online content or promote a political agenda."
FEC look to ruin the Internet. We knew this was coming. Within the last couple of weeks,
both the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Election Commission declared their intention to
regulate the Internet. Fascists always explain their actions as efforts to either make something more
efficient, "fair," or to supposedly "protect" their target. [...] Make no mistake: The Internet is
under assault and saving it is up to us.
'Net Neutrality' is Hijacking the
Information Highway. "Quickly and quietly", high-handed Barack Obama and the Democrats
are working on hijacking the Information Highway. Big Government takeover of the Internet will
become a fait accompli by February 26, 2015, with a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) vote.
By the time the public becomes aware of it, the Internet will already belong to Obama. Suffering
in silence with no means of communication to others is exactly what Obama wants on his mission for
his ever-expanding Fundamental Transformation of the Free West.
Power Grab. [FCC Chairman Tom] Wheeler, Obama and the rest of their Democratic Party
allies want to reclassify broadband as a telecommunications service and regulate ISPs like utility
companies, or "common carriers," rather than "information services" that fall outside FCC regulatory
power. The ostensible purpose of the change is to implement "net neutrality" rules. Net neutrality
is about preventing ISPs from blocking, slowing down, or diminishing the quality of applications and
websites, from charging them higher prices for providing prioritized access, aka "fast lanes," or
giving preferential treatment to their affiliates.
NSA/FBI will want you to "vaccinate"
your computer. Be very, very careful what you wish for. The exact same arguments for
forcing parents to vaccinate their children will be used to force everyone to "vaccinate" their computers
with NSA/GCHQ-approved spyware prior to being allowed to connect to the Internet. The Chinese are
nearly there already. Once everyone's computers have been "vaccinated", it [would then be considered]
"safe" to introduce Internet voting. From then on, a simple hack can silently steal elections.
Net neutrality: What you really need to know. After a year of discussion and
table-setting, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler this week submitted his
proposed set of rules for ensuring an open Internet. As is so often the case with rule-making, that
Net neutrality proposal is rubbing some powerful interests the wrong way. So it is that the
future of the Internet is at stake.
Commissioner: 'Unprecedented Involvement Of Executive Branch In Our Decision-Making'.
Republican Federal Communications Commission Commissioner Ajit Pai hosted a press conference on
Tuesday to discuss with reporters about his concern about President Obama's proposal "to regulate
the internet." Pai cited concerns ranging from the proposal causing heavy-handed FCC regulations on
the internet to the plan being a "gift to trial lawyers." Under the idea of net neutrality the
president, along with FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, is pushing the plan forward prior to the Feb. 26
FCC vote on the matter.
How about banning political discussions over the telephone? Is there any difference? Federal
Election Commission to Consider Regulating Online Political Speech. The Federal
Election Commission (FEC) is holding a hearing today to receive public feedback on whether it should
create new rules regulating political speech, including political speech on the Internet that one
commissioner warned could affect blogs, YouTube videos and even websites like the Drudge
Report. The hearing is a response to the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in McCutcheon v.
FEC last year, which struck down the FEC's previous cap on aggregate campaign contributions from
a single donor in an election cycle.
Keeps Its 'Open Internet' Plan Hidden From View. How's this for irony? The Federal
Communications Commission, which wants to regulate the Internet heavily to make it more "open," is
refusing to let the public see its proposed rules before the commissioners vote on them in two
weeks. Perhaps it's because, while talking publicly in reassuring tones about how the FCC merely
wants to secure "net neutrality," it's planning to do much, much more. That, at least, is what
Ajit Pai, one of the FCC's two Republican commissioners, is claiming.
FCC Commissioner: Public Is Being Misled About Net-Neutrality Plan. The Federal
Communications Commission is misleading the public about its 332-page plan to regulate the Internet,
a Republican member of the commission said Tuesday [2/10/2015]. The net-neutrality plan could in
fact open the door to new fees and taxes, as well as government control over the prices that
Internet providers charge their customers, Commissioner Ajit Pai told reporters. The claims echo
attacks from Republicans on Capitol Hill, who are also scrambling to thwart the new regulations.
For The Internet!. The Federal Communications Commission is seriously contemplating
whether to put one of the strongest sectors of the U.S. economy under laws that were originally
modeled after railroad regulation from early in the last century. On February 26, the FCC is set
to vote on whether to reclassify Internet service to fall under Title II of the Communications Act
of 1934. It's true that the act was amended in 1996 — but that was still clearly prior to
the emergence of the Internet you see before you.
Obama's FCC Overreaches Yet Again. Lacking support of the people's representatives,
President Obama's administration has usurped congressional authority and has, effectively, attempted
to rule by presidential decree enforced through regulatory agency mandate. [...] The FCC is trying
to impose many transformative regulations without following the proper regulatory process, and often
lacking the statutory authority to promulgate the proposed regulations in the first place.
Perhaps the most damaging part of the FCC's onslaught is the proposed Open Internet regulations,
which would impose a 1930s style regulatory structure on the web. These regulations are not only
inappropriate, they are harmful, because they view the 21st century Internet as a 20th century
FCC Member Warns Net Neutrality Is Not Neutral. Ajit Pai, the sole Republican
Commissioner on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), inferred in a Tweet that President
Barack Obama's secret, 332-page "Net Neutrality" document is a scheme for federal micro-managing of
the Internet to extract billions in new taxes from consumers and again enforce progressives' idea of
honest, equitable, and balanced content fairness.
Looking Into White House's Role in FCC's Net Neutrality Regulations. The secrecy
surrounding the Obama administration's plans for regulating the Internet has prompted a
congressional inquiry into whether the independent Federal Communications Commission or the White
House and its allies are calling the shots over the future of the nation's broadband networks. A
top adviser to Tom Wheeler, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), defended
Wheeler's decision to hide his latest draft of Internet regulations from the public until after the
agency voted on them at the end of the month during a public question and answer session on Twitter
held on Friday, Feb. 6.
looking into White House's role in FCC's net neutrality regulations. The secrecy
surrounding the Obama administration's plans for regulating the Internet has prompted a
congressional inquiry into whether the independent Federal Communications Commission or the White
House and its allies are calling the shots over the future of the nation's broadband networks.
A top adviser to Tom Wheeler, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), defended
Wheeler's decision to hide his latest draft of Internet regulations from the public until after the
agency voted on them at the end of the month during a public question and answer session on Twitter
held on Friday, Feb. 6.
Choking Telecom Innovation for 80 Years, FCC Plans to Take on the Internet. On
Wednesday [2/4/2015], FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler announced plans to regulate the Internet like a
utility and impose the "strongest open Internet protections ever proposed by the FCC." Under his
plan, the commission will prevent "paid prioritization, and the blocking and throttling of lawful
content and services." "All this can be accomplished," he argues in an essay published by
Wired, "while encouraging investment in broadband networks." It's all music to the ears
of the "net neutrality" crowd, who want to prevent ISPs from being able to freely manage their own
network traffic by using variable rates.
FCC Commissioner Slams 'Obama's 332-Page Plan To Regulate The Internet'. Republican
FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai on Friday raised the first of many criticisms to come about FCC Chairman
Tom Wheeler's aggressive net neutrality plan distributed to commissioners Thursday [2/5/2015], which
Pai described as "President Obama's 332-page plan to regulate the Internet." In a statement
released Friday, Pai lamented the fact that the 332-page plan, which he tweeted a picture of himself
holding next to a picture of Obama, won't be released to the public until after the commission votes
on its implementation later this month.
FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler:
This Is How We Will Ensure Net Neutrality. After more than a decade of debate and a
record-setting proceeding that attracted nearly 4 million public comments, the time to settle the
Net Neutrality question has arrived. This week, I will circulate to the members of the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) proposed new rules to preserve the internet as an open platform for
innovation and free expression. This proposal is rooted in long-standing regulatory principles,
marketplace experience, and public input received over the last several months.
Neutrality Plan, F.C.C. Chief Sees Internet Service Regulated as Public Utility. For
the last year, Tom Wheeler, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, has been working on
new rules to ensure so-called net neutrality, or an open Internet. Over that time, his hints and
comments have shown a steady shift toward stronger regulation — and a more direct
confrontation with the cable television and telecommunications companies that provide high-speed
Internet service to most American homes. But on Wednesday [2/4/2015], Mr. Wheeler went further
than some industry analysts had expected and even beyond the recommendations of President Obama, who
in November urged the commission to adopt the "strongest possible rules," in a surprising public
admonition to an independent agency.
chair proposes 'bright-line' net neutrality rules. Federal Communications Commission
Chairman Tom Wheeler confirmed Wednesday he's seeking strong net neutrality rules that regulate
broadband service like a utility, matching a vision laid out by President Barack Obama and setting
up a high-stakes standoff with the telecom industry and congressional Republicans.
House Claims Power to Regulate, Tax Internet Without Congress. The White House dropped a bombshell
on Thursday [1/15/2015] by announcing that FCC already has the authority to take over regulating and taxing the
Internet without Congressional approval. Under "network neutrality" proceedings, the FCC could extend its
16.1% fee on interstate telecommunications services and relay fees to the Internet. The action would more
than double the "universal service" revenue it collected in 2014, from $8 billion to $16 billion.
Neutrality Compromises the Internet's Future. Perhaps President Obama envisions that
the Internet is operated by Ernestine, the condescending telephone operator played by Lily Tomlin on
Laugh-In. Otherwise, it is difficult to justify why he would want to hobble the 21st century
broadband industry with regulations designed in the early 20th century. Even FCC Chairman Tom
Wheeler earlier this year wrote, the FCC is "not going to take over the Internet," or "dictate the
architecture of the Internet." And yet, the FCC is now under pressure to follow President
Obama's statement on November 10 to regulate the Internet under obsolete 1930s laws.
calls for government-run Internet service stoke GOP ire. President Obama's call for
more cities and towns to create their own broadband Internet services to compete with private
companies like Comcast is meeting stiff opposition from many Republicans. Unlike the president's
previous proposals this week to bulk up U.S. cybersecurity and protect Americans' identities
online — which were largely welcomed on Capitol Hill — he waded into hotly
partisan waters on Wednesday [1/14/2015] by unveiling a plan to eliminate state laws limiting local
government-run Web connections.
proposal offers Internet rules of the road. For the past decade, a debate has raged in
Washington and across the country about the best way to protect an open, unfettered Internet. The
increasing use of smartphones and web-connected products and services make finding the right answer
more important than ever. [...] We need unambiguous rules of the road that protect Internet users
and can help spur job creation and economic growth. The rules we propose would prohibit blocking
and throttling (the selective slowing of data), and also ensure that Internet service providers could
not charge a premium to prioritize content delivery.
neutrality takes new twist as Congress appears ready to step in. A political battle in
Washington, D.C. is heating up as the Federal Communications Commission strongly hints its new Net
neutrality rules, which will be voted on next month, will include President Barack Obama's directive
to reclassify broadband as a utility. On Wednesday, FCC chairman Tom Wheeler said during a
discussion at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas the FCC plans to vote February 26 whether
to reclassify Internet service providers as common carriers under the Title II of the Communications
Urges Congress to Block Obama Proposed 'Net Neutrality' Rules. The Republican Liberty
Caucus has urged Congress to intervene to prevent the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from
adopting President Obama's so-called "Net Neutrality" rules, which would stifle free speech,
technological innovation and competition in the marketplace.
the Internet becomes a public utility, you'll pay more. Here's why. The Federal
Communications Commission is in the middle of a high-stakes decision that could raise taxes for
close to 90 percent of Americans. The commission is considering whether to reclassify broadband as a
telecommunications service and, in doing so, Washington would trigger new taxes and fees at the state and local
level. The agency would like to make Internet service a public utility, placing broadband under Title II
regulation of the Communications Act of 1934. This move would make broadband subject to New Deal-era
regulation, and have significant consequences for U.S. taxpayers.
to vote on net neutrality rules in February. The U.S. Federal Communications Commission plans
to vote on new net neutrality rules during its February meeting. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler will bring a
proposal to a vote during the commission's Feb. 26 meeting, FCC spokeswoman Kim Hart said Friday [1/2/2015],
following a report in the Washington Post. It's unclear, however, what form those rules will take.
Hart declined to comment further on the net neutrality order Wheeler plans to circulate in February.
of a Free Internet? In 2015, the Obama administration plans to hand over control of
ICANN — the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers — to
international governance. ICANN oversees the superstructure of the Internet, and the American
Department of Commerce oversees ICANN. The plan for handing our authority to the global community
would mean oversight by censors and despots in China, Russia, and Iran.
Henry Grills Earnest: Where Does WH Get 'Moral Authority' to Condemn Torture? Fox's Ed
Henry put White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest on the spot today about why the Obama
administration believes it has the "moral authority" to condemn torture when they're overseeing
drone strikes. Henry said that drone strikes have ended up killing innocents, so he asked, "How
do you have moral authority when innocent civilians are killed by drones?" Earnest argued there's a
difference because "there is significant care taken" to reduce civilian casualties. The Fox
reporter pointed out that such "care" doesn't stop it from happening anyway.
set of crony capitalists do you prefer? Net neutrality is not the simple "government
intervention versus laissez-faire" debate so depicted by both Republicans and Democrats. Net
neutrality, once you peel the onion, is really a dog-eat-dog battle between the incumbent cable/telephone
monopolies (often referred to as "the duopoly") and Internet application providers, ranging from Google to
the smallest start-ups.
Neutrality Compromises the Internet's Future. Perhaps President Obama envisions that
the Internet is operated by Ernestine, the condescending telephone operator played by Lily Tomlin on
Laugh-In. Otherwise, it is difficult to justify why he would want to hobble the 21st century
broadband industry with regulations designed in the early 20th century. Even FCC Chairman Tom
Wheeler earlier this year wrote, the FCC is "not going to take over the Internet," or "dictate the
architecture of the Internet." And yet, the FCC is now under pressure to follow President Obama's
statement on November 10 to regulate the Internet under obsolete 1930s laws.
Gruber's ObamaCare, the Net Neutrality They're Selling Isn't the One They'll Foist Upon Us. Unless you only get your news via the
Jurassic Press — or you are a government school victim who as a result doesn't pay attention to anything at all — you are
now intimately familiar with the on-camera stylings of Jonathan Gruber. Gruber is a college professor, and virulently anti-American —
please pardon the redundancy. He teaches alleged Economics at the allegedly esteemed Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) —
when he's not gleaning nearly $6 million in consulting fees from the federal government. And he is a primary architect of ObamaCare.
Neutrality Power Grab is Worse Than Obamacare. [Scroll down] So dead was the notion of Net Neutrality legislation
that — despite the Democrats taking over in 2007 — the Purveyors of the Pathetic abandoned their
attempts at persuading the People's representatives and set their sights on the FCC. Where, again, the number of
votes they needed to accrue was a much more manageable three — and, again, amongst folks who do not have to
face those nasty elections. So after two years of quietly building the fraudulent case for unilateral FCC Net
Neutrality regulatory fiat — the Media Marxist Nirvana arrived.
Obama Net Neutrality Internet Regulations are From 'Era of the Great Depression'. Texas Gov. Rick Perry is the
latest presidential hopeful to go after President Obama on his plan to regulate the Internet. On Wednesday [11/12/2014], the
Republican criticized a Monday announcement from Obama calling for strict Federal Communications Commission regulation of the Internet
as a way to ensure the fair treatment of Internet traffic by Internet service providers.
official warns Obama-backed net neutrality plan would bring 'immediate' Internet tax.
Internet users would be forced to pay a new federal tax on their monthly bills if the government
approves regulations recently endorsed by President Obama, a member of the Federal Communications
Commission predicts. Commissioner Mike O'Reilly addressed what's known as "net neutrality" at a
Washington seminar on Friday [11/14/2014]. He spoke after Obama backed stricter rules by calling for preventing
service providers from charging more for speedier service and for regulating them like telecommunications
companies under a decades-old law.
What 'Net Neutrality' Is.... And What To Think About It. Unless you're a dork, you will have no idea
what "net neutrality" means, although chances are you've seen a headline about it in the last few days.
Fortunately for you, I am a dork. So let me explain as simply as I can what it's all about —
and what you should think about it.
veers left after red wave. President Obama has taken significant steps to the left
since his party's devastating losses in the midterm elections. In a surprise, he announced a
major deal on climate change with China during a trip to Beijing Tuesday [11/11/2014]. That followed another
unanticipated move — a Monday statement pressuring the Federal Communications Commission to adopt new
net neutrality rules for the Internet.
the Internet threatens entrepreneurial freedom. Never before has it been so easy to
turn an idea into a business. With a simple Internet connection, some ingenuity and a lot of hard
work, anyone today can create a new service or app or start selling products nationwide. In the
past, such a person would have to know the right people and raise substantial start-up capital to
get a brick-and-mortar store running. Not anymore. The Internet is the great equalizer when it comes
to jobs and opportunity. We should make a commitment, right now, to keep it that way. The next
generation of Internet-connected devices, apps and services will generate trillions of dollars of
global economic growth in the years ahead. And Americans are perfectly poised to take maximum
advantage — if the government doesn't take those opportunities away in the form of
crushing taxes, rules and regulations.
chair distances himself from Obama on Net Neutrality. That would be the Democratic,
Barack Obama-appointed FCC chair, who spent yesterday backpedaling from his boss on a major
policy announcement. Obama went so far as to push out a video demanding unilateral action from the
FCC on Net Neutrality, the latest White House distraction from the disastrous midterm elections and
an attempt to show that Obama is still relevant.
Internet invasion. Leave it to President Obama to try to lasso the galloping freedom
of the Internet with the "strongest possible rules." If he succeeds, expect to see competition
and innovation collapse. The president Monday [11/10/2014] urged the Federal Communications Commission to
declare broadband Internet service a public utility that would be heavily regulated. The president fears
the Internet will become divided into fast and slow lanes, with broadband providers such as Verizon and AT&T
charging heavy-content companies such as Netflix more for speedy service.
call for an open Internet puts him at odds with regulators. Hours after President
Obama called for the Federal Communications Commission to pass tougher regulations on high-speed
Internet providers, the agency's Democratic chairman told a group of business executives that he was
moving in a different direction. Huddled in an FCC conference room Monday [11/10/2014] with
officials from major Web companies, including Google, Yahoo and Etsy, agency Chairman Tom Wheeler
said he preferred a more nuanced solution.
on 'net neutrality' just another power grab, says Motley. President Obama's push for
regulators to reclassify the Internet continues to draw reaction. He said this week that Internet
providers shouldn't be allowed to cut deals with online services like Netflix, Amazon, and YouTube
to move their content faster. Meanwhile, the president also suggested federal regulators should
reclassify the Internet as a public utility under Title II of the 1934 Communications Act.
at Night: Post-election, Barack Obama endorses far left extremism at FCC. Back in June
I warned about the latest plan by the Net Neutrality extremists. They're playing a shill game where
one side promotes one illegal idea, the Open Internet order already thrown out by the Courts, and
the other side promotes something even more extreme, a total hijacking of the Internet through a
procedure called Title II Reclassification. Monday [11/10/2014], Barack Obama endorsed that
extremist procedure, which would redefine the Internet as a phone service, and regulate the entire
Internet under 1930s-era big government control.
calls for more regulation of Internet providers, industry fires back. President Obama
threw down the gauntlet Monday with cable companies and Internet providers by declaring they
shouldn't be allowed to cut deals with online services like YouTube to move their content faster.
It was his most definitive statement to date on so-called "net neutrality," and escalates a battle
that has been simmering for years between industry groups and Internet activists who warn against
the creation of Internet "fast lanes." The president's statement swiftly drew an aggressive response
from trade groups, which are fighting against additional regulation, as well as congressional Republicans.
urges net neutrality; Cruz calls it 'Obamacare for the Internet'. President Obama has
called on federal regulators to toughen proposed net-neutrality rules for Internet traffic,
including taking the controversial step of changing the way the law treats broadband providers so
they are subject to stricter utility-like regulation. In a two-page statement and a two-minute
online video Monday, Obama came out in favor of the toughest possible regulation of Internet service
providers on an issue that has flooded the Federal Communications Commission with a record of about
4 million public comments.
Reclassification: President Obama Tosses Another Grenade After Second Election Shellacking. President
Barack Obama this morning released a statement calling for his administration's Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) — allegedly an independent agency — to execute a unilateral, complete rewrite of existing
law. He wants reclassification of how the Internet is regulated — so as to then impose network
neutrality. Twice before the FCC has tried to impose net neutrality — twice it was unanimously
rejected as overreaching by courts.
Saving the Internet.
ABC News says: "Net Neutrality: How President Obama Wants to Rescue the Internet". Business Insider says, "President
Obama wants to reclassify the internet as a utility, according to a new statement from the White House. This
would allow the Federal Communications Committee to enforce heavier restrictions on it and protect net neutrality."
[...] So do you want president Obama to 'save the Internet'? It depends on how bad you think the Internet is
now, and how much better you believe it will become when Obama saves it.
The only way the internet will remain 'free and open' is if Obama keeps his hands off it. Obama
calls on FCC to keep Internet 'free and open'. President Obama urged the US government
to adopt tighter regulations on broadband service in an effort to preserve "a free and open
Internet." In a statement released Monday, Obama called on the Federal Communications Commission
to enforce the principle of treating all Internet traffic the same way, known in shorthand as Net
neutrality. That means treating broadband services like utilities, the president said, so that
Internet service providers would be unable "to restrict the best access or to pick winners and
losers in the online marketplace for services and ideas."
Core Seizes Control of Future Internet Education. While the Common Core program is
overtly directed at public, private and home elementary and secondary education, it quietly captures
higher education as well, since control of the high school exits provides control of the college
entrances. Additionally, a bill now in Congress carries the Obama administration proposal to
regulate private colleges that provide career training; that plus Common Core represents a fair
start toward total federal control of U.S. education. It seems telling that so comprehensive
and far-reaching a shift in a democracy is not seen as newsworthy.
deadlock keeps Internet free from broadcast campaign ad regulations. The Federal
Election Commission deadlocked in a crucial Internet campaign speech vote announced late last week,
leaving online political blogging and videos free of many of the reporting requirements attached to
broadcast ads — for now. All three Republican-backed members voted against
restrictions, but they were opposed by the three Democrat-backed panel members, including Vice
Chairwoman Ann M. Ravel, who said she will lead a push next year to come up with rules for
government political speech on the Internet.
on FEC move to regulate Internet campaigns, blogs, Drudge. In a surprise move late
Friday, a key Democrat on the Federal Election Commission called for burdensome new rules on
Internet-based campaigning, prompting the Republican chairman to warn that Democrats want to
regulate online political sites and even news media like the Drudge Report. Democratic FEC Vice
Chair Ann M. Ravel announced plans to begin the process to win regulations on Internet-based
campaigns and videos, currently free from most of the FEC's rules. "A reexamination of the
commission's approach to the internet and other emerging technologies is long over due," she said.
Democrat pushes for controls on Internet political speech. The FEC deadlocked in a
crucial Internet campaign speech vote announced Friday, leaving online political blogging and videos
free of many of the reporting requirements attached to broadcast ads — for now. While
all three GOP-backed members voted against restrictions, they were opposed by the three Democratic-backed
members, including FEC Vice Chair Ann M. Ravel, who said she will lead a push next year to try to
come up with new rules government political speech on the Internet.
Push for New Heavy Regulations on Internet Postings, Drudge, and Blogs. As the media
prepared to vacate newsrooms for the weekend, Democrats snuck in a last minute proposal that the
Federal Elections Commission (FEC) be allowed to heavily regulate political content on internet
sites such as Youtube, blogs, and the Drudge Report. Obama FEC Vice Chairperson Ann M. Ravel
announced late on Friday that the FEC was preparing new regulations to give itself control over videos,
Internet-based political campaigns, and other content on the web. She insisted that, "A reexamination
of the commission's approach to the internet and other emerging technologies is long overdue."
feds' 'truthy' new chill on free speech. Earlier this week, the federal government's
National Science Foundation (NSF), an entity created to encourage the study of science —
encouragement that it achieves by awarding grants to scholars and universities — announced
that it had awarded a grant to study what people say about themselves and others in social media.
The NSF dubbed the project "Truthy," a reference to comedian Stephen Colbert's invention and hilarious
use of the word "truthiness." The reference to Mr. Colbert is cute, and he is a very funny guy,
but when the feds get into the business of monitoring speech, it is surely no joke; it is a nightmare.
It is part of the Obama administration's persistent efforts to monitor communication and scrutinize the
expressions of opinions it hates and fears.
Sponsors Truthy Study of Twitter. Ajit Pai, a member of the Federal Communications
Commission, just wrote an eye-opening op-ed on how the government is supporting a study of your
tweet content. This time the agency of interest is not the NSA, it's the National Science Foundation
(NSF) — an institution that was founded to "promote the progress of science; to advance
the national health, prosperity and welfare; and to secure the national defense." According to Pai,
the NSF has already spent $1 million to fund a project to collect and analyze your Twitter data —
including (and perhaps focusing on) political data.
Pelosi urges FCC to reclassify broadband as a utility. A good number of politicians have recently
made statements in favor of net neutrality, but House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is going further than most of
them today [9/8/2014] and asking that the Federal Communications Commission reclassify broadband as a utility using
Title II of the Communications Act — exactly what net neutrality advocates have been pushing for.
The NSA and GCHQ Campaign
Against German Satellite Companies. Treasure Map is a vast NSA campaign to map the
global internet. The program doesn't just seek to chart data flows in large traffic channels, such
as telecommunications cables. Rather, it seeks to identify and locate every single device that is
connected to the internet somewhere in the world — every smartphone, tablet, and computer —
"anywhere, all the time," according to NSA documents.
This is why it may be hard to use the Web today.
Today, September 10, a coalition of extremists and cronyist rent-seekers are going to join together to 'protest' freedom of enterprise, by
having a fake slowdown of the Internet. In particular Netflix, already known for lying about congestion issues, will join this attempt
to deceive the American people into thinking we need, right now, a massive expansion of government regulation onto the Internet. Don't be fooled.
Internet Control [is] As Bad As Feared. Faced with international passions whipped up
by Edward Snowden's leaks — often framed inaccurately by those seeking to amplify his revelations
into something more nefarious — [the Obama administration] agreed to complete the handover of
Internet regulation to the United Nations earlier this year, a move which will become final in a year.
U.S. Should Reject the U.N.'s Authoritarian Control of the Internet. The explosion of
Internet capabilities, specifically over the past seven years, has engendered seismic shifts in
societies around the globe. This dynamic game changer challenges the economic and political status
quo by providing a venue for sharing ideas and practicing innovation. According to a 2011 report by
the McKinsey Global Institute, the Internet "accounted for 21 percent of the GDP growth in mature
economies" from 2007 to 2011, and greatly benefited "consumers and small, upstart entrepreneurs."
Together with other economic, political, and social benefits, the value of an unchained Internet is apparent.
government wants to wiretap online communications — or in some cases hack them. In 1994, the government
passed the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, which mandated that phone companies make their systems wiretap-ready.
Richard "Dickie" George, a former NSA technical director until he retired in September 2011, recalled how in the mid-1990s, "in the early
days of CALEA," the NSA tested several commercial phone systems with intercept capabilities and "we found problems in every one."
Making the systems hack-proof, he said, "is really, really hard."
is why the government should never control the internet. Net neutrality rules have
been sold for a decade as a way to keep the Internet "open and free" by keeping Internet service
providers (ISPs), such as phone and cable companies, from blocking or degrading Web sites. Its
advocates have argued that ISPs have an economic incentive to act anti-competitively toward
consumers and competitors. In a common hypothetical they cite, ISPs would slow — or
buffer — traffic for Netflix unless it unfairly pays for more access points, or "off
ramps," and better quality of service. In truth, however, market failures like these have never
happened, and nothing is broken that needs fixing.
The senate is still trying to jam through
its hugely controversial cybersecurity bill. The Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of
2014 "incentivizes the sharing of cybersecurity threat information between the private sector and the
government and among private sector entities," according to a press release published on Sen. Dianne
Feinstein's website on Tuesday. "It responds to the massive and growing threat to national and
economic security from cyber intrusion and attack, and seeks to improve the security of public and
private computer networks by increasing awareness of threats and defenses."
FCC's Net neutrality plan is much worse than it looks. We've spent the past few weeks
with at first some knowledge of the FCC's "Slow Lane" plan (to call it "Fast Lane" is to be
disingenuous), and later with the full plan. In that time, there has been a massive outpouring of
disagreement — clearly plenty of it on this side of the screen. But with more time spent
thinking about this awful plan come greater distaste and outright concern that this terrible set of
guidelines may actually end up as the law of the land. For instance, this plan turns ISP peering
points and their own internal network interconnections into straight-up revenue generators in the
worst possible way.
Tries (Again) to be Lord of the Internet. The Federal Communications Commission this
week voted 3-2 to establish new net neutrality rules that would prevent broadband networks from
selectively blocking traffic, but allowing those companies to enter into deals with content
providers for preferred access to their networks in "commercially reasonable" ways. Scott
Cleland, policy advisor for The Heartland Institute and chairman of NetCompetition, says this
development indicates the FCC is moving ever closer to regulating broadband under
"Title II" — as if it was a utility, such as telephone service.
"The primary problem of Title II regulation is it would abruptly decelerate the
fast-speed of Internet business to the slow-speed of government," Cleland said. "
In addition to turning the Internet into a worldwide surveillance platform, the NSA has
surreptitiously weakened the products, protocols, and standards we all use to protect ourselves.
By doing so, it has destroyed the trust that underlies the Internet. We need that trust back.
Internet ID Plot Being Tested in Two States. A plot by the Obama administration to
impose Internet IDs on Americans is now officially being rolled out, with pilot programs for the
controversial online "driver's license" scheme already beginning in both Michigan and Pennsylvania.
According to the White House, the virtual "Identity Ecosystem" being funded and pushed by the
federal government is supposed to make the Internet more "secure" and "convenient." Critics across
the political spectrum, however, are warning that the Orwellian scheme only makes it more
convenient for the feds to spy on people, control the public, and suppress dissent.
Cruz bill would ban 'FCC's latest adventure in net neutrality'. Sen. Ted Cruz,
R-Texas, wants Congress to ban "the FCC's latest adventure in 'net neutrality,'" saying the
proposed changes to Internet regulations would damage the industry. "A five-member panel at the
FCC should not be dictating how Internet services will be provided to millions of Americans," Cruz
said in a Wednesday afternoon [5/14/2014] statement. "I will be introducing legislation that
would remove the claimed authority for the FCC to take such actions, specifically the Commission's
nebulous Sec. 706 authority.
Is the Internet a
Public Utility? Is the Internet a public utility? And what would happen if federal
tech regulators classified it as one? Those are the questions at the heart of debate over net
neutrality — the concept that all information that travels over the Internet should be given equal
access and equal priority. Today, those questions are playing out in the ongoing fight over the
Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) proposed Internet traffic rules.
votes on net neutrality, allows prioritized lanes. With at 3-2 vote on Thursday
[5/15/2014] — and FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, appointed by President Obama last fall,
casting the deciding vote — the agency approved proposals that call for equal treatment
of all legal data traffic on the Internet. Critics of the rules complain that they wouldn't block
wealthy content providers from paying for special treatment. Now the FCC wants all the parties
involved — and since the Internet is involved, that means virtually everyone —
to comment on how the agency should proceed.
moves ahead with Internet 'fast lanes' in net neutrality rules. The Federal
Communications Commission voted Thursday to move ahead with Chairman Tom Wheeler's controversial
plan to overhaul net neutrality and allow Internet providers to charge websites for faster service.
The commission voted 3-2 to take up the proposal for Internet "fast lanes," though the two Democrats
who joined Wheeler in voting yes, Jessica Rosenworcel and Mignon Clyburn, expressed major
reservations. Wheeler stressed the vote was only a first step and vowed that the agency
will not allow people's Internet services to be slowed down.
FCC to cripple the
Internet. The Federal Communications Commission thinks the Internet in the United
States can be run at two speeds. Backtracking from an earlier proposal, the FCC now believes
it will be just fine to let Internet service providers (ISPs) control what you access online, with
a few exceptions that the FCC would police. While this new proposal might not kill the Internet,
as it exists now, it would certainly cripple it — at least for American consumers and
GOP warns FCC could 'derail' Internet. Top House Republicans are telling the Federal
Communications Commission to tread lightly with new rules governing the way Internet companies treat
customers. Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), Majority Whip
Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and Conference Chairwoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) warned FCC
Chairman Tom Wheeler on Wednesday that issuing expansive rules would "needlessly inhibit the
creation of American private sector jobs, limit economic freedom and innovation, and threaten to
derail one of our economy's most vibrant sectors."
lawmakers urge FCC to ditch effort to regulate Internet. House Republican leaders are
calling on the Federal Communications Commission to back off proposed open Internet rules, warning
that allowing service providers to control content on their networks threatens to "derail" the
Internet. [...] "At a time when technology businesses need certainty to innovate, this is not the
time for the FCC to engage in a counterproductive effort to even further regulate the Internet," the
lawmakers wrote to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler.
by 'Net Neutrality'? Read This, a WSJ Primer. Net neutrality is the principle that all
traffic on the Internet should be treated equally — broadband providers shouldn't be able to pick and
choose which websites consumers can access. Is that the plan? Not really. Mr.
Wheeler's plan, which he calls "open Internet" rules, would ban broadband providers from blocking or
slowing down access to websites or services. However, his plan would allow the providers to
strike deals with content companies for preferential treatment, like if Amazon paid AT&T so their
streaming video service reached consumers without interruption.
the U.S. Regulate Broadband Internet Access as a Utility? The days of dial-up are long gone, and thanks to
faster connections, Americans have come to rely on the Internet for business, personal communication and entertainment.
But the fact that high-speed Internet service has become so vital to society has sparked a debate about how strictly the
government needs to regulate it. The Federal Communications Commission currently has some power to regulate broadband,
but not to the extent it does utilities, and its attempts to enforce "net neutrality" — the principle that all
Internet traffic should be treated equally — have been tossed out in court.
Reveals Clinton White House Paranoia Over Free Internet. A heavily redacted memo from then-President
Bill Clinton's White House, released last week as part of a vast cache of papers from the Clinton Library, revealed
that the disgraced administration was frantic about the rise of the free Internet and its implications. The
radical document expresses paranoia about the fact that Americans — especially those on what it calls
the "right wing" — could now bypass the establishment media to spread the truth and ideas, all of
Administration Opposes Bill to Delay Transfer of Internet Powers. The Obama administration has come out
against legislation that would temporarily keep certain Internet management functions under U.S. control. The
U.S. government plans to transfer oversight of the Internet's address system to the "global community" next year.
Republicans fear the move could allow Russia, China, or other authoritarian regimes to seize power over the Internet and
even censor websites.
domain deregulation could fragment World Wide Web into 'Splinternet'. Last month, the
National Telecommunications and Information Administration, which is under the Commerce Department,
announced that it would lessen the government's role in overseeing website addresses. The nonprofit
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers will help guide the transition. Critics say the
administration is ceding control to foreign countries. Although few nations besides North Korea
can afford to cut themselves completely from the Internet, digital rights advocates caution that
[Lutfi] Elvan's comments reflect how governments are threatening to chill online liberties. At
stake are the innovation and free exchange of information that have transformed global culture and
business over the past two decades.
Grab for the Web. The Obama administration still doesn't seem to understand the whirlwind it reaped
with its decision to give up stewardship of the open Internet. The first Internet governance conference
since that surprise March announcement was held last week. The State Department issued a statement before the
conference urging everyone to avoid the issue: "We would discourage meeting participants from debating the
reach or limitations of state sovereignty in Internet policy." But deciding who gets to govern the Internet
was precisely why many attendees from 80 countries came to last week's NetMundial conference in Brazil.
soon, we could all be using the Dark Net. The term "Dark Net" is shorthand to describe the hidden and
encrypted part of the internet beyond the reach of normal browsers, accessible only using the anonymous browser Tor.
Its protected by a clever traffic encryption system which makes it very difficult to locate the servers which host
sites — called Tor Hidden Services — and the IP addresses of the people the visit them.
Tor used to stand for The Onion Router, and so some call this world "Onionland". Anonymity and freedom rule
Onionland, not censorship.
Reversal: Obama may not
surrender control of the Internet after all. We told you a few weeks back that the
Obama Administration was prepared to take an astonishing step of surrender, even for this crew, in
giving up control of the Internet's domain name system. That would threaten the Internet's
independence as it would create an opportunity for regimes far less friendly to freedom to step in
and gain power and influence. Well, this idea was so horrendous that even Bill Clinton, in
addition to 35 Republican senators, spoke up and told the administration not to do it, as well as a
great many other voices.
Obama must reverse decision on Internet control. Whether through taxes or net neutrality regulations, the Obama
administration has seized every opportunity to expand federal control over the Internet. But at least until now, we've
always been able to rely on Washington to defend the Internet as a global beacon of freedom and democracy. Unfortunately,
this seems to be changing, as the White House recently announced plans to transition from supervising the Internet's architecture
and may shift some of these responsibilities to countries like Russia and China, which would portend disaster for advocates
of political dissent and Internet freedom.
March to the Future is Destroying America. The progressive march to the future is destroying America. What
the Democrats and the progressives are doing behind the scenes is a more frightening and unjustified power grab than Putin's
on the Ukraine. [...] [I]n spite of the dysfunction of our House and Senate there is a more pervasive danger — and
it is the people who are behind the scenes — people who in the dead of night write laws and bills that no one
seems to know what [...] is in them. Or decisions that give up America's sovereignty to an organization
that has now changed what its initial purpose once was to an institution preparing for a one-world government, The United
Nations. So the freest, most stable nation in the world gives up the Internet to forces that could advance it being
stifled? Does this make sense?
Republicans worry about Internet freedom; Democrats put total faith
in non-existent international bureaucracy. I have yet to hear any convincing argument from preventing
some degree of authoritarian mischief from the Administration, other than "trust us, we'll never let that happen."
If you like your free Internet, you can keep your free Internet. No one will take it away from you,
period. [...] What's so crazy about doing this slowly and carefully, with the option to conclude that we
shouldn't do it at all, when the decision is irrevocable?
Democrats Coming Out Against Admin's Web Plan. Two more key Democrats are questioning the Obama
administration's decision to cede some of America's control over the Internet. Sen. Edward Markey (D-MA)
told Breitbart News there should be a "high burden" for making such a change and that he's reviewing the decision,
while Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) said he's inclined against the change.
Keep the Internet free.
[T]he Internet has become one of humanity's greatest treasures. It must now be protected as such.
For, while the Internet has given much to people all over the world, it has also posed a great threat to those
governments that seek to subjugate and control their people. Many of these governments — 42 to
be exact — have already taken action to limit or restrict their people's access to the Internet.
Many of them have demonstrated a desire to take this a step further by exercising control over the way
the Internet is governed internationally. The United States must vocally and vehemently oppose any
attempt to allow the Internet to fall under the control of foreign governments or international organizations
like the United Nations.
'one world' fantasy for the internet. Internet users beware. We are about to surrender our freedom
of speech — and, quite possibly, put our national and economic security at risk. Last month, in a move
that most people outside the Beltway barely noticed, President Obama announced plans to relinquish U.S. control over the
administration of the Internet to a community of "global multi-stakeholders." Translation? Obama is putting
the infrastructure of the Internet up for grabs. And, inevitably, those who do not share America's core values and
respect for freedom will be the first ones to reach for it.
But ICANN Can't.
Critics on the right worry that the Obama administration is giving away the Internet to foreigners. It's an
understandable concern, given the administration's general approach to foreign policy.
Bill Clinton defends American control of Internet domain name system.
Former President Bill Clinton presided over a star-studded panel Friday evening, voicing his preference that the United
States maintain control of the Internet's domain name system, which will soon be ceded to an international body.
Clinton appeared on stage for a Clinton Global Initiative event with Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Jimmy Wales, the
co-founder of Wikipedia, among others, to discuss how social change could come about through online engagement.
"Whatever you think our country has done wrong, the United States has been by far the country most committed to keeping
the Internet free and open and uninterrupted," Clinton said at Arizona State University.
Obama says internet access should be 'universal right'. Michelle Obama has declared that access to the
internet should be a universal right, in a rare and controversial foray into the world of international politics
during a cultural visit to China. The US first lady, who is on a week-long trip to the communist state with
her daughters and mother, risked upsetting her hosts in Beijing by declaring access to information as a birthright.
During a speech at Peking University's Stanford Centre, she called for greater freedoms while refraining from a
direct attack on the controls over information in China.
banned as first lady touts free speech. First lady Michelle Obama told students that freedom of speech
should be a universal right during her extravagant, no-press-allowed tour of China — a hypocritical move
that will surely draw the ire of critics, according to an expert. "That is troublesome. That goes beyond
hypocritical, and I think the American media and the international media has every right to call her and the Obama
administration on that — that they permitted that to happen," said Tom Whalen, a political history professor
at Boston University. [...] The first lady stopped at Peking University in Beijing yesterday [3/22/2014] during a
weeklong trip that was billed as cultural rather than political.
Department of Internet Gambling? A war over online gambling is about to spill out in Congress as opponents
move to restore a long-standing Internet gambling ban and block Uncle Sam from creating a sprawling new federal department
to police the web. Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., plan to introduce legislation next
week to challenge two bills introduced earlier this session that would either create an "Office of Internet Poker Oversight"
in the Commerce Department or a broader "Office of Internet Gambling Oversight" in Treasury. Those bills, also
sponsored by Republicans, were inspired by states eager to cash in on gambling and the Justice Department's abrupt
December 2011 move to re-interpret the 1961 Interstate Wire Act that effectively banned Internet gambling.
to examine Internet governance. The House Commerce Committee will hold a hearing next month to examine the Obama
administration's recent move to relinquish oversight of the technical back end of the Internet, the committee announced Tuesday
[3/18/2014]. [...] The hearing comes after last week's announcement by the Department of Commerce's National Telecommunications
and Information Administration that it will relinquish its oversight role of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA),
which manages the technical side of the Internet's domain name system.
Denies 'Abandoning the Internet'. A top Commerce Department official pushed back Wednesday [3/19/2014] against
concerns that the Obama administration is opening the door to an Internet takeover by Russia, China, and other authoritarian
regimes. The fears stem from the Commerce Department's announcement last Friday that it plans to give the Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, an international nonprofit group, control over the technical system that allows
computers to connect to Web addresses.
The Editor says...
Apparently Mr. Obama doesn't see anything wrong with communist countries taking over the internet, because he was
raised by communists. I suspect he has the same antipathy for capitalism that the rest of us have for communism.
Handing Over the Keys
to the Internet. For the uninitiated, this is tech-speak for "the basics." The "DNS's authoritative root zone
file" is effectively a master directory of website addresses, kept in one place to avoid duplication and to guarantee that
when everybody types "nationalreview.com" into their browser, they get the same page; [...] As you might imagine, it matters
a great deal who is in charge of this compendium, for whoever controls it can use the thing essentially as a global on/off
switch. As it stands, a tyrant is able to restrict access to certain parts of the Internet in his own country, but he is
unable to make a page or a server or a service disappear completely.
Surrenders U.S. Internet Control To Globalists. U.S. officials plan to relinquish federal control over the
administration of the Internet to something called the "global Internet community," which is full of tyrants to whom the
free flow of information is a threat.
U.S. Steps Back, Will Russia and China Control the Internet? The United States is planning to give up its last
remaining authority over the technical management of the Internet. The Commerce Department announced Friday that it will
give the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), an international nonprofit group, control over the database
of names and addresses that allows computers around the world to connect to each other. [Obama] Administration officials
say U.S. authority over the Internet address system was always intended to be temporary and that ultimate power should rest
with the "global Internet community."
The Editor says...
Until today, when have you ever heard anyone claim that "U.S. authority over the Internet address system was always
intended to be temporary"?
You Bought His
Ticket; He Took You for a Ride. Perhaps there is some true justice in the revelation today that Barack Obama,
apologist to the world for American greatness, has just given a huge part of that scientific and engineering eminence to a
world body that has no legal claim to all that which has come from America's technological genius. Yes, Silicon Valley,
it's true, your messiah is telling you, "You didn't build that." How does it feel to have your legs cut from
beneath you by this global leveler who has no regard for the huge amount of endeavor and intellect that has gone into this
world-changing technology you have created?
The Administration Just Weaken Internet Security And Set The Stage For A Global Web Tax? The Obama administration
on Friday [3/14/2014] announced plans to relinquish U.S. control over management of the Internet to the "global Internet community."
While the announcement of the plan was sure to please international critics (and some Democrats), it created concern among business
leaders and others who depend on a smoothly functioning web. Oh, and it may lead to a global web tax, as well. [...] The
Department of Commerce announced the decision to give up control of the Internet's core infrastructure, in part, as a result of
international pressure following revelations by Edward Snowden about the NSA's global surveillance program.
triggers GOP backlash. The Obama administration's decision to relinquish oversight over the group that manages
the Internet's architecture has raised an early red flag with Republicans, who blast the move as a threat to free speech.
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers has managed the Web's domain-name system under contract with the U.S.
government for more than a decade — but the Los Angeles-based nonprofit has worked to transform itself into a global
organization free of U.S. ties.
ICANN 101: Who Will
Oversee the Internet? The Commerce Department's National Telecommunications and Information Administration
said Friday it plans to give up control over the body that manages Internet names and addresses. The action means
that the U.S. government will relinquish its oversight of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or ICANN,
which manages a number of technical functions that help computers locate the correct servers and websites. Here are
some basics of what's happening. [...] How did the U.S. get oversight of it in the first place? The Internet was
pioneered in the U.S., and for a long time the folks that helped invent it were also in charge of managing it. Until
1998, a computer scientist named Jon Postel at the University of Southern California managed a host of functions related
to Internet names and addresses, collectively known as IANA (Internet Assigned Names Authority). When Mr. Postel
died in 1998, the Commerce Department issued a contract to ICANN to manage the IANA functions.
transfer of Internet control years in the making, fueled by foreign pressure. The decision was announced nonchalantly,
in trademark Washington fashion on a Friday afternoon: The U.S. government will cede its last bit of control over the Internet.
The government has maintained that influence through contracts with the organization that administers the Internet, a Los Angeles-based
nonprofit called the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or ICANN. But a Commerce Department agency announced
Friday that it would relinquish control over ICANN, presumably when its contract expires in September 2015. The office said it wants
the group to next convene "global stakeholders" to come up with a transition plan — a transition to what remains unknown.
Hiding Behind 'Global Internet Community' the ravening
United Nations Wolf. Like the bully taking candy away from the proverbial baby, high-handed President Barack
Hussein Obama is giving away the Internet that is in no way his to give. His latest act of out-and-out thievery graduates
him from the most unpopular American president of all time, to Enemy of the Free World Numero Uno. [...] The Information Highway
known as the Worldwide Web has been the main form of communication for everyday people, and now Obama is taking it away from
an America he loathes and, just as been long feared, is handing it over to the United Nations. Make no mistake, the
falsely named "global internet Community" they're trying to sell is the ravening wolf in sheep's clothing.
U.S. to relinquish remaining control over the Internet. U.S. officials announced
plans Friday [3/14/2014] to relinquish federal government control over the administration of the Internet, a move that pleased international
critics but alarmed some business leaders and others who rely on the smooth functioning of the Web. Pressure to let go of the final
vestiges of U.S. authority over the system of Web addresses and domain names that organize the Internet has been building for more than
a decade and was supercharged by the backlash to revelations about National Security Agency surveillance last year.
The Editor says...
Barack Obama announced (on a Friday, of
course) that he is relinquishing U.S. control of the internet to an international body yet to be
announced — probably the UN — because
he hates America and wants
to wreck the economy any way he can. This
malicious act can now be added to the long list
of impeachable offenses that have accumulated over
the last five years.
U.S. to relinquish remaining control over the Internet. U.S. officials
announced plans Friday to relinquish federal government control over the administration of the Internet, a move that pleased
international critics but alarmed some business leaders and others who rely on the smooth functioning of the Web. Pressure
to let go of the final vestiges of U.S. authority over the system of Web addresses and domain names that organize the Internet
has been building for more than a decade and was supercharged by the backlash last year to revelations about National Security
Agency surveillance. The change would end the long-running contract between the Commerce Department and the Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a California-based nonprofit group. That contract is set to expire next
year but could be extended if the transition plan is not complete.
US to relinquish control over
Internet management system. The U.S. government on Friday announced it is taking steps to relinquish control over the back
end of the Internet. The Department of Commerce announced it is beginning a process to transfer control over the technical system that
operates the Internet's domain name system, which ensures that Internet users can get to the websites they're looking for. Currently,
the National Telecommunications and Information Administration — an agency with Commerce — oversees that technical system,
named the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA). Historically, it has contracted the operation of IANA out to the Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Number (ICANN) on a biennial basis. The current contract is set to expire in September of 2015.
U.S. To Give Up Key Internet Governance Role.
Obama administration officials moved late Friday to end the U.S.'s role in overseeing Internet domain names and addresses, announcing plans to
relinquish its role by the end of next year and turning the keys over to the global Internet community. Commerce department officials
announced that the U.S. government would relinquish its role overseeing Internet addresses in favor of a to-be-determined global body.
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) has managed the use and governance of domain names and Internet addresses
for the U.S. government since 1998, when it was awarded the task by the Commerce Department. Based in Los Angeles, ICANN oversees
the Internet's address system and has moved in recent years to open up new domain names.
U.S. Government to Give Up
Key Internet Powers. Facing international pressure, the U.S. government said Friday it will give up control over important
technical aspects of the Internet. The Commerce Department will no longer oversee the Internet Corporation of Assigned Names and
Numbers, a nonprofit group that manages the Internet's address system. Larry Strickling, the assistant secretary of Commerce for
communications and information, said the "global Internet community" will have the final say over the database of names and addresses
that allows computers around the world to communicate with each other. The Internet was invented in the United States, and the country
has long maintained a central role. But as the Internet has grown, other countries have demanded a greater voice in its governance.
Obama hits a restraining wall. A federal appeals
court struck down the administration's attempt to impose new rules on the Internet, and the Supreme Court, based on questioning by the justices — not always
a reliable guide to their intentions — appears likely to tell Mr. Obama that, as important as he is, he can't make an end run around the Constitution to
appoint certain senior officials in the executive branch.
Democrats offer bill demanding government study on Internet hate speech. Thirteen House Democrats have proposed legislation
that would require the government to study hate speech on the Internet, mobile phones and television and radio. [...] The Hate Crime
Reporting Act, H.R. 3878, is meant to update a 20-year-old study from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration
(NTIA). That study, delivered to Congress in 1993, looked at hate speech on radio, TV and computer bulletin boards.
The Editor says...
If "hate speech" is outlawed on the internet, it will then be only a matter of time before it is prohibited on the telephone,
and ultimately in any public place. The danger here is that the definition of "hate speech" will be written by those on
the political left, and the law will be enforced by Big Brother's heavy-handed goons.
Court ruling overturns Net
Neutrality, threatens online access, experts warn. Thanks for watching that YouTube video! That will be 50 cents,
please. Sound unrealistic? It's actually a distinct possibility, after a Federal appeals court on Tuesday [1/14/2014]
struck down an FCC ruling meant to prevent an Internet service provider — the company you pay for online access —
from prioritizing some website traffic over others. And because that rule was wiped off the books, those ISPs are suddenly able
to do just that.
Google: Surge in pressure from
govts to delete chunks of the web. Today [12/19/2013], the advertising giant said that, in the first six months of 2013, it
received 3,846 demands from public officials to remove 24,737 personal blog posts, YouTube videos and other pieces of content it hosts.
That's up 68 percent on the second half of 2012. And according to the web giant, which has just published its latest transparency
report, 93 requests focused on content that was critical of people in public office.
Court: Homeland Security Must Disclose 'Internet Kill
Switch'. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) is seeking "Standard Operating Procedure 303," also known as the "Internet
kill switch" from Homeland Security. The protocols govern shutting down wireless networks to prevent the remote detonation of bombs. The
broad government power to shut down communications networks worries civil libertarians. However, the agency argues the protocols must be kept
secret to protect national interests and the safety of individuals. EPIC filed a FOIA request for the protocols in July 2012. The Department
of Homeland Security originally said it could not find any records on the kill switch.
Obama, Julius Genachowski ignore law to regulate the Internet. In the Comcast case,
the FCC admitted that nothing in federal law grants the government the express authority to
regulate cable Internet services. Instead, Obama's FCC argued that it has an "ancillary
authority" to regulate broadband thanks to section 4(i) of the Communications Act of 1934.
More Legal Trouble for FCC's Open
Internet Order & Net Neutrality. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals 3-0 decision to overturn the FCC in Comcast v. FCC/Tennis Channel spells
more trouble for the ultimate legality of the FCC's Open Internet Order. That decision spotlights that three additional D.C. Circuit Appeals Court's judges
do not agree with the FCC's reading of the law and the facts concerning lawful network discrimination.
Memo To Dick Durbin:
All Americans Are Journalists. Congress, when controlled by Democrats, already has the mainstream media under its thumb.
So it's not ABC, NBC, CBS, the New York Times and the Washington Post that Durbin is worried about. It's the bloggers, tweeters and Facebook
users that he wants to control. [...] With the mainstream press in their pockets, what Durbin and others truly fear are citizen journalists and the
free and open dissemination of ideas that threaten the political class' agenda.
Dear Chairman Wheeler, Please Stop the Attacks on the
Internet. As Taxpayers, we are paying for the government's lawyers to defend the defenseless. And as Internet users, we are all
paying again. All the time, money and effort the industry has to waste attempting to undo the FCC's overreach could and would be much better
spent improving for us their goods and services — and thus the Internet.
Obama: Increase in domestic
terrorism fueled by Internet. During his foreign policy speech Thursday afternoon, President Obama warned that domestic terrorism
would increase in the modern age of the Internet. "[T]his threat is not new," Obama said. "But technology and the Internet increase its
frequency and lethality." Obama warned Americans that materials on the Internet could influence people to commit terrorist acts. "Today,
a person can consume hateful propaganda, commit themselves to a violent agenda and learn how to kill without leaving their home," he said.
The Internet Sales Tax Rush.
Every time Congress has taken a serious look at proposals to boost Internet sales taxes, it has rejected them. That's probably why
pro-tax Senators are trying to rush through an online tax hike with as little consideration as possible.
To Attack the Internet, Obama Admin is About to
Lie About It, Again. The mostly regulation-free Internet has become a free speech, free market Xanadu. So of
course President Barack Obama and his Left want to regulate the daylight out of it. In their efforts to do so, they will spin any
tale to try to engender any public support for new Web regulations. For instance, the Barack Obama Administration is likely about
to totally fabricate a U.S. mobile broadband assessment report.
Broad New Powers in Digital War. A confidential legal review has just decided that the President should have broad
power to issue preemptive cyber attacks, says the NYT. [...] But some fear the Obama Administration is going too far —
especially in arguing that presidents should have preemptive strike power in conflicts where preemptive action isn't clearly necessary.
The Left's Warped Definition of 'Internet Freedom' and
an 'Open Internet'. The Left has long demanded the implementation of their definition of an "Open Internet" and "Internet Freedom."
Sounds great, right? Who could be opposed to that? Then again, who could be against a "Fairness Doctrine?" Or "Network Neutrality?"
All represent terrible government policy. But the Left is very good at naming very bad policies.
Another job for which Obama has no qualifications: Obama Is Now America's Hacker in Chief.
As the possibility of destructive cyberwarfare inches towards reality, the government is scrambling to figure out who holds the keys to America's
malware arsenal. Obviously, it's President Obama. The New York Times just published the findings of an investigation into a
secret legal review that set out to determine who actually had the power to order a cyberattack.
New Year's Resolutions: Power Grab the Internet — and Your Wallet. It's the New Year, the pre-dawn of President Barack
Obama's second term — in which he is free to be more "flexible," and is resolved to engage in even more illegal, unilateral power
grabs. Long on the Obama-Leftist power grab hit list has been the Internet. Pre-Obama, the 'Net was just about regulation-free —
and thus became a free speech, free market Xanadu.
The UN's ITU and the Internet: A Cautionary
Tale. As the United Nations heads deeper into its Internet grab, a.k.a its 11-day telecom treaty conference, in Dubai,
things aren't going so well for America and the friends of freedom. The Hill reports that "A joint proposal from the United
States and Canada aimed at keeping Internet regulations out of a global telecommunications treaty failed to secure early approval
from other countries on Tuesday" — though talks may continue along these lines.
U.N. Readies Attack on
Internet as Obama Dithers. While talk of the United States tumbling over a so-called "fiscal cliff" dominates news cycles
in the nation's capital and other major cities, on the other side of the planet, the United Nations is quietly but relentlessly pressing
to take control of the Internet. It is being aided in this illicit endeavor by various totalitarian regimes, and by many smaller
states that routinely use their strength in numbers to bash America.
The Fate Of The Free Internet Goes
Up For Vote In December. The fate of the free Internet will be decided at a private meeting in Dubai on December 3. UN
member nations will argue for or against a plan that would give control of the Internet to the ITU, instead of the current NGO multiple stakeholder
approach. Some within the US government have already voiced their opposition, and now the EU is joining them. Wired UK reports that the
European Parliament has issued a resolution against a potential takeover of the Web by the ITU.
U.N. Readies Attack on
Internet as Obama Dithers. While talk of the United States tumbling over a so-called "fiscal cliff" dominates news cycles
in the nation's capital and other major cities, on the other side of the planet, the United Nations is quietly but relentlessly pressing
to take control of the Internet. It is being aided in this illicit endeavor by various totalitarian regimes, and by many smaller
states that routinely use their strength in numbers to bash America.
Global Governance Begins on December
14. The International Telecommunications Union (ITU), an imprint of the UN, is holding its World Conference on International
Telecommunications (WCIT) from December 3-14, 2012. The stated purpose of the WCIT is to update the UN's "global treaty" on
telecommunications to deal more directly and comprehensively with the internet. Knowing who controls the UN, it is not hard to see
that a primary aim of the updated "treaty" will be to give credence to the regulation and monitoring of online activity in ways that are
desirable to the (authoritarian) majority of member states.
Congressman proposes 2-year ban on bills about
Internet. In an unusual step, a U.S. congressman is proposing a two-year ban on all new federal legislation regulating the
Internet. Rep. Darrell Issa, a Republican from California who has been an advocate for Internet freedoms, has posted online a draft
of his legislation, the Internet American Moratorium Act of 2012. The bill would "create a two-year moratorium on any new laws,
rules or regulations governing the Internet."
Will thugs rule the
web? If delegates have their way at next week's World Conference on International Telecommunications in Dubai, the man in
charge of the Web will be a Soviet-trained apparatchik from Cold War days. Don't count on the Obama-appointed US delegate to stop
the threatened changes in how the Internet works, and how much power governments have to decide what their citizens see on the World Wide
Web. Pushing the agenda at Dubai are Russia and China. And anything China, Russia and the United Nations agree on can't be
good for America — or the cause of freedom.
Free Internet Under Fire. A Russian government proposal to
amend a U.N. treaty at a meeting of the world body's World Conference on International Telecommunications in Dubai next week contains a
provision that calls for bringing "IP-based networks" under U.N. control. The U.N. treaty, called the International
Telecommunications Regulations (ITR), is currently limited to regulating international telecommunications services. The
Russian proposal to amend the treaty has the support of other non-democratic states such as China and Iran.
The U.N.'s Internet Sneak Attack.
Who runs the Internet? For now, the answer remains no one, or at least no government, which explains the Web's success as a new technology.
But as of next week, unless the U.S. gets serious, the answer could be the United Nations.
Let the U.N. Seize The Internet? The U.N. plans to control the tool that tyrants fear most — technology
that promotes free speech and intellectual freedom — by imposing a global tax in the name of fairness.
Aw Shucks, Why Not Let the UN Control the Internet?
The UN, in one way or another, has been eyeing the internet for years as a potential font of cash and lever of control. And the UN these days is the kind of
place where Iran now chairs the Non-Aligned Movement, which consists of 119 member states plus the Palestinians — and accounts for well over half the
membership of the UN General Assembly. All the usual old troubles apply: The UN remains an unaccountable, murky bureaucracy, lending itself to the
manipulations of its worst members.
Obama signs secret directive to help thwart cyberattacks. President Obama has
signed a secret directive that effectively enables the military to act more aggressively to thwart cyber attacks on the nation's web of
government and private computer networks. Presidential Policy Directive 20 establishes a broad and strict set of standards to
guide the operations of federal agencies in confronting threats in cyberspace, according to several U.S. officials who have seen the
classified document and are not authorized to speak on the record. The president signed it in mid-October.
UAE Clamps Down On The Internet.
As we recently discussed, the world is seeing what amounts to a global clamp down on internet freedom, spurred in part (but not entirely) by the
various revolutions that have occurred in the Arab World over the past several years. Having said that, not all restrictive censoring governments
are created equal. While we in the West have our censors and internet detractors too, one need only look at what is occurring in China, Thailand,
or Saudi Arabia for that matter to see how fearful some governments are of an internet in which free ideas are exchanged.
Internet is the alternative to 'government media complex' that controls the news. During part one of his farewell speech to Congress, Rep. Ron Paul
insisted that the internet remain free, as it is an important alternative to the "government media complex." "The internet will provide the alternative to the
government media complex that controls the news and most political propaganda," Paul stated. "This is why it's essential that the Internet remains free of
Transcript of Ron Paul's farewell
address to Congress.
Showdown set on bid to give UN control of Internet.
When delegates gather in Dubai in December for an obscure UN agency meeting, fighting is expected to be intense over proposals to rewrite global telecom rules to
effectively give the United Nations control over the Internet. Russia, China and other countries back a move to place the Internet under the authority of the
International Telecommunications Union, a UN agency that sets technical standards for global phone calls.
The Government Wants To
Know How Fast Your Internet Is. Apparently the FCC, which has been licking its chops at the idea of regulating
the internet for some time now, has set up a new bandwidth test site and they want Americans to go there, provide the agency
with an address and do a bandwidth test. The FCC is going to keep track of the testing, and the addresses are apparently
needed to correlate internet speeds to geographic locations.
Obama: As Weak on Global Internet
Takeover as on Global Islamist Uprising. The Barack Obama administration has been engaged in non-stop global bungle-buffoonery. And that's
giving them the benefit of the doubt — it may be that these horrific anti-American Interest results are their intention. [...] Looming before us is a
prospective titanic international attack on American Internet interests. The Web wing of the UN is the International Telecommunications Union
(ITU) — and they in December will vote on whether or not to power grab much greater control of all things 'Net.
ambassador: Internet fee proposal gaining momentum. U.S. Ambassador Terry Kramer warned on Friday [10/12/2012] that a proposal to give a
United Nations agency more control over the Internet is gaining momentum in other countries. Proposals to expand the U.N.'s International
Telecommunications Union's (ITU) authority over the Internet could come up at a treaty conference in Dubai in December.
Stop UN Regulation of the Internet. Behind
closed doors, the nations of the world are negotiating a treaty — initiated by Russia and China — to regulate the Internet
through the United Nations. There are only two reasons we know about these talks in the first place. One is through a WikiLeaks
anonymous posting by a participant in the talks and the other is that a signing ceremony has been scheduled in Dubai in December of this year.
Reid Seeks Federal Online Gambling
Law. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada is trying to get Congress, after the November elections, to pass into law language
that would preempt from the states the right to regulate Internet gambling and would instead provide for federal regulation of this activity.
Executive order on cybersecurity is 'close to completion'. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano on Wednesday [9/19/2012]
said the cybersecurity executive order that the White House is drafting is "close to completion." At a Senate Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs Committee hearing, Napolitano said the executive order is "still being drafted in the inter-agency process" and "is
close to completion depending on a few issues that need to be resolved at the highest levels."
The Editor says...
This whole country is "close to completion", thanks to people like Janet Napolitano, who think it's normal and permissible for a president to rule by
executive order, bypassing the Congress.
FCC Chair Defends Regulations, Calls FCC a 'Cop on the Beat'.
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Julius Genachowski defended his agency's role in regulating broadband Internet, saying that the FCC
needed to act like a "cop on the beat." "We need to protect and promote competition," Genachowski said at a speech to media firm Vox Communications
in Washington on Tuesday [9/25/2012].
Trashing the Constitution.
Constitution Day is Monday, Sept. 17, so I compiled a non-exhaustive list of the ways Barack Obama has violated the Constitution. [...] [For
example,] Allowing the FCC to grab the Internet. The Telecommunications Act gives the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) authority
over wire and broadcasting, but not broadband. Congress and a federal appeals court rejected the FCC's claims of authority, yet the FCC
released "net neutrality" rules in December 2010. This violates the First Amendment's protection of free speech. The FCC has
no more authority over the Internet than it does over the musings of Vice President Joseph R. Biden.
Obama's Internet tax. The government
doesn't handle technology well. When Uncle Sam comes into contact with something new, his first instinct is to impose familiar
regulations and taxes regardless of whether doing so makes any sense. So it's no surprise the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) plans to apply telephone-era rules to the Internet, making it more expensive than ever to log in to keep in touch with
friends and family. In late July, the FCC — a relic from the New Deal — moved to replace the Universal
Service Fund with the cheerily titled "Connect America Fund."
FCC backpedals from Internet
tax. The Federal Communications Commission is rapidly backpedaling from a proposal to tax broadband Internet service after a
public outcry over the issue. Democrats and Republicans at the agency are now blaming each other for pushing the idea in the first place.
Spread the bandwidth around. FCC eyes tax on Internet
service. The Federal Communications Commission is eyeing a proposal to tax broadband Internet service. The move would
funnel money to the Connect America Fund, a subsidy the agency created last year to expand Internet access. The FCC issued a request for
comments on the proposal in April. Dozens of companies and trade associations have weighed in, but the issue has largely flown under the
"If you do not have the right to speak freely about food,
what do you have a right to speak freely about?" From Licensing to Censorship.
Every day, millions of Americans dispense advice to friends, relatives, and complete strangers through blogs, websites, and a
variety of online publications. And each time they do so, many of these Americans could be risking substantial fines
and perhaps even imprisonment. [...] Across the nation, more than eight hundred different professions require a state license.
Among those professions are: manure spreaders in Iowa, upholsterers in Utah, and florists in Louisiana.
The Internet Tax: Another Government Assault On
Prosperity. Across America politicians of both parties will tell you the number one issue facing our country is job creation. They're
right — yet what they continually refuse to acknowledge is that creating these jobs is not their responsibility. Government's role in
economic development should always be passive — confining expenditures to core functions while keeping taxes low in an effort to allow the
optimum conditions for private sector growth. "Get out of the way," in other words.
The Obama Administration is Killing
the Internet. Bad policy after bad policy. Often illegally imposed. As a result, the Tech Sector — 1/6 of our nation's economy,
as big as health care — is hemorrhaging jobs. [...] And our Internet service would be better, faster and cheaper were it not for this Administration.
White House considers executive
order, leaves Internet takeover a possibility. The White House has left open the possibility of enacting its Internet agenda via executive order
after the failed effort to bring the Democrat-supported cybersecurity bill to a full vote in the Senate last week. In response to a question from The
Hill, a Washington, D.C. political newspaper, about whether President Obama was considering advancing his party's cyber-plan through an executive order, White
House Press Secretary Jay Carney didn't rule out the possibility.
New Hampshire fights Internet sales tax. A bill pending in Congress
would turn New Hampshire businesses that sell over the Internet into tax collectors for other states if they have more than $500,000 in remote sales.
"By imposing collection requirements on businesses that have no physical presence outside of their home state, the legislation under consideration stands
to erode existing protections on state sovereignty," U.S. Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., said at a Senate Commerce Committee hearing Wednesday [8/1/2012].
Ayotte is a member of the committee.
No Internet Taxation Without
Representation. Our nation was born from the idea of "no taxation without representation" — that
citizens should not be taxed by governments in which they have no political voice. Yet now lawmakers in Washington
want to overturn that bedrock principle in order to extract more revenues from American consumers. The Marketplace
Fairness Act recently introduced in the Senate would require online retailers to collect and pay sales taxes to states
where they have no physical presence or democratic recourse.
sales tax likely cost every internet shopper an extra $125 a year. Internet shoppers could soon be hit with a new
sales tax, making online purchases up to 11 percent more expensive. Congress is considering new legislation that
would allow states to force sales tax on internet purchases, which would help make up states' budget shortfalls. Meanwhile
Amazon, the world's largest internet retailer, is making deals with individual states to collect sales taxes regardless of what
The Editor says...
Opposing, resisting, or even blocking the President's agenda is not a refusal to act. The President indicates that he is
determined to get his way through unmitigated tyranny if necessary. And why shouldn't he? The current Congress
doesn't have the collective backbone to stop him.
GR8, Obama Is Texting Me. Friday,
July 6 was the day many Americans were on an extended 4th of July vacation and paying more attention to barbecuing and lighting fireworks
than the news. Obama seized the day to bypass Congress and release an executive order whereby he effectively gave himself control over
the infrastructure that supports your smartphone, internet, radio, TV and satellite dish. This infrastructure includes "...wireline,
wireless, satellite, cable, and broadcasting, and... transport networks that support the Internet..." according to the website for the
Department of Homeland Security's National Communications Systems. The President argues that that he "must have the ability to
communicate at all times and under all circumstances" for the sake of "national security and emergency preparedness (NS/EP)." There's
one teensy weensy problem with this executive order: It's unconstitutional.
Too technical? Net Neutrality Violates the First and
Fifth Amendments. In December 2010, the FCC adopted Preserving the Open Internet, a "network neutrality" order regulating
broadband internet access service. Issued under authority (ostensibly) derived from 24 disparate provisions of federal communications
law, Preserving the Open Internet is predicated on three basic rules: transparency, no blocking, and no discrimination.
Broadly speaking, "transparency" requires broadband providers to "disclose network management practices, performance characteristics, and
terms and conditions of services." The "no blocking" rule forbids fixed broadband providers from "blocking lawful content,
applications, services, and non-harmful devices." Meanwhile, mobile broadband providers are restricted from blocking "lawful
websites" and certain applications. The "No Discrimination" rule prohibits broadband providers from unreasonable discrimination in
transmitting lawful network traffic.
Grain of salt: This comes from a Russian news site. Battle for internet on, Big Brother at the gate.
The battle over control of the internet is not just about the freedom of speech, but our global future. It is the choice between a Big
Brother and democracy unseen before, insists Rick Falkvinge, the founder of the Swedish Pirate Party.
Tilting at the UN Windmill.
Lots of people like the Internet, right? Well, good news! The U.N. wants to take it over. The International
Telecommunications Union, a U.N. organization, is secretly debating proposals to claim jurisdiction over the Web and take it
out of America's hands. The major forces behind this push: authoritarian regimes eager to censor their domestic
Internet and monitor their citizens. Russia and some Arab countries, reports the Wall Street Journal's Gordon Crovitz,
want the power to read private email. Others want to tax cross-border Web traffic. And countries like China are
working hard to bribe, bully or barter votes in favor of the U.N. takeover.
In Obama's America, A Somewhat
Less-Free Press. You owe it to yourself to do an online search, and read about [Cass] Sunstein and the ideas that he advances
in his book. In particular, many of the thoughts that Mr. Sunstein expresses about the internet seem consistent with present-day behavior of
both the Obama Administration, and the Obama re-election campaign. Perhaps most disturbing is Mr. Sunstein's vision for the future of web
content, as he argues for a so-called "notice and take down" law. Under this provision, those who operate websites — The Washington
Post, radio stations, private bloggers, and perhaps even you, yourself — we would all be required "take down falsehoods upon notice" from
the U.S. government.
Next Six Months
Could Determine Fate of the Internet, FCC Commissioner Warns. Actions taken — or not taken — by
proponents of online freedom within the next six months will decide the fate of the Internet, according to Federal Communications
Commission commissioner Robert McDowell. "Six months separate us from the renegotiation of the 1988 treaty that led to insulating
the Internet from economic and technical regulation," McDowell, a Republican, told lawmakers during a hearing on Capitol Hill last week.
U.S. officials to further
discuss possible U.N. plans to takeover Internet. United States officials are expected to take further action next week to address
the threat of a U.N. takeover of the Internet. The House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology is scheduled to
hold a hearing Thursday [5/31/2012] to discuss the various international proposals to regulate the Internet, which are backed by Russia, China
and several former Soviet satellite countries. India and Brazil are also on board with the idea of reforming the "multi-stakeholder
process" that currently regulates the Internet.
UN to Regulate the Internet? House of
Representatives Set to Examine Bill Next Week. The Hill is reporting that the United States House of Representatives is due to
consider an international proposal that would give the United Nations more control over the Internet sometime next week. Backed by China,
Russia, Brazil, India and other members of the international body, the proposal is drawing fire on both sides of the aisle in Congress, as
members of the Obama administration even move to criticize it.
introduce measure to fight UN regulation of the Net. A bipartisan group of lawmakers on the House Energy and
Commerce Committee introduced a resolution on Wednesday urging the Obama administration to oppose efforts to give the United
Nations more control over the Internet. Proposals to give the UN's International Telecommunication Union (ITU) more
control over the governance of the Internet could come up at a conference in Dubai in December. The move is backed by
China, Russia, Brazil, India and other UN members, but is opposed by lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, as well as the
Returns to the International Agenda. A long running debate over regulating the Internet is set to
intensify in the coming months, culminating in a December meeting of a United Nations agency that some governments
think should control what has been the most open and effective communications tool in history. Past attempts
by countries like Russia, India and China to expand international authority — through the U.N. —
over the Internet have been unsuccessful, but are expected to make a reappearance at the World Conference of International
Telecommunications (WCIT) in Dubai.
councilman rails against 'Big Brother on the Internet' bill. New York City Councilman Daniel Halloran isn't
pleased that fellow Republicans in the New York state legislature are trying to ban anonymous online speech. "This
is an unconstitutional attempt by New York State to play Big Brother on the Internet," said Halloran. "Will it
soon be illegal to publish an anonymous novel or distribute an anonymous work of art?"
The Editor says...
I've never heard of a novel by an anonymous author, and the only anonymous works of art I've seen around town were
spray-painted on highway bridges and telephone poles.
EU Plans to Impose National
Internet IDs. While the European Union — many of whose member states are facing dire economic crises —
struggles to convince the world of its significance and necessity, it has taken on a controversial new agenda: Internet control.
Reports indicate that the EU will soon be creating a mandatory electronic ID system for all citizens of the European Union. The
EU's Digital Agenda Commissioner, Neelie Kroes, asserts that the legislation will promote "the adoption of harmonized e-signatures,
e-identities and electronic authentication services (eIAS) across EU member states."
Net Neutrality Fails the Reality Test. Network
Neutrality is disastrous Internet policy, cooked up in the fevered swamps of university faculty lounges and Media Marxist grievance group offices. Every
encounter with Reality has been for Net Neutrality and its proponents an abysmal failure. Net Neutrality is Socialism for the Internet — it
guarantees everyone equal amounts of nothing.
Feds pressing for Internet control.
After the backlash Congress faced earlier this year from Internet activists over the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), one might hope
members had learned a lesson, and would actually carefully consider legislation that would dramatically impact the fundamental privacy
of the magnificent communications mechanism that is the Internet. Alas, it is not to be. No sooner had the dust
begun to settle from the SOPA mess than the House began once again to ram through unnecessary legislation with serious privacy
implications for users of the Internet, in the hallowed name of "cyber security."
CISPA Bill Picking Up Sponsors Ahead of Vote Next Week. CISPA was pushed through following
public outrage over SOPA and PIPA, two sneaky attempts to undermine internet freedom earlier this year under
the guise of protecting the copyrights of Hollywood and its transnational "entertainment" corporations.
CISPA is far worse than its forerunners. It would amend the the National Security Act of 1947 —
legislation that created the national security state and the CIA — and centralize "information sharing"
between government agencies, intelligence agencies, and the Pentagon.
Obama's Internet police.
It's the same old story. Ever since the Internet became popular, politicians have looked for a way to sink their
claws into it. They hate the idea that the public might communicate and engage in commerce largely free from
governmental red tape. So President Obama last month announced a Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights to give Uncle
Sam more of a role in shaping the online experience.
Security Officials Caught Hiding Online Spying Program from Congress. Writers aren't the only
group to be watched by the never-blinking eye of Homeland Security. According to the report, "anchors,
newscasters, or on-scene reporters who are known or identified as reporters in their post or article or who
use traditional and/or social media in real time to keep their audience situationally aware and informed" may
also be spied on and have their "usernames and passwords" recorded for future reference. How many people
might be shoe-horned into one of those categories if the federal government decided it wanted to put them under
Quiet as UN & Dictators Push to Control Internet. A new effort to hand control over the Internet to the United Nations
is underway as oppressive regimes such as the communist dictatorship ruling mainland China clamor for more censorship and regulation
of the World Wide Web. The Obama administration has remained silent so far, having failed to even select a leader to defend U.S.
interests at upcoming talks on the subject. But critics of the global move are already striking back, warning that transferring
Internet governance to the UN would be a massive blow to freedom and prosperity for the whole planet.
Quiet as UN & Dictators Push to Control Internet. A new effort to hand control over the Internet
to the United Nations is underway as oppressive regimes such as the communist dictatorship ruling mainland China
clamor for more censorship and regulation of the World Wide Web. The Obama administration has remained
silent so far, having failed to even select a leader to defend U.S. interests at upcoming talks on the subject.
But critics of the global move are already striking back, warning that transferring Internet governance to the UN
would be a massive blow to freedom and prosperity for the whole planet.
Department of Homeland Security Is Searching Your Facebook and Twitter for These Words. The Department of Homeland Security
monitors your updates on social networks, including Facebook and Twitter, to uncover "Items Of Interest" (IOI), according to an internal
DHS document released by the EPIC. That document happens to include a list of the baseline terms for which the DHS — or more
specifically, a DHS subcontractor hired to monitor social networks — use to generate real-time IOI reports.
reveals keywords feds monitor on Facebook, Twitter. Have you ever wondered if the government — or more
specifically, the Department of Homeland Security — is monitoring your Twitter or Facebook posts? If the answer's
"yes," give yourself a pat on the back because you're right and not simply paranoid. There's even a list of keywords for which
subcontractors hired by the DHS check social networks.
EPIC Obtains New Documents on DHS Media Monitoring, Urges
Congress to Suspend Program. EPIC has submitted a letter to Congress following a hearing on DHS monitoring of social
networks and media organizations. In the letter, EPIC highlights new documents obtained as a result of a FOIA lawsuit and
points out to inconsistencies in DHS' testimony about the program. Though DHS testified that it does not monitor for public
reaction to government proposals, the documents obtained by EPIC indicate that the DHS analysts are specifically instructed to
look for criticism of the agency and then to redirect reports that would otherwise be circulated to other agencies.
Forcing Private Companies to Have Board Votes on Illegal Policy. Another day, another Barack Obama
Administration totalitarian diktat. In other words, whatever Obama wants — by any means necessary.
Behold Obama's Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Which last week handed down from on-high a mandate
that telecommunications companies AT&T, Verizon and Sprint MUST have Board votes on Network Neutrality.
powers for president dropped from cybersecurity bill. A comprehensive cybersecurity bill introduced
Tuesday [2/14/2012] abandons proposals that would give the president emergency powers over the nation's networks. ... Public
apprehension about the possibility of handing the White House a "kill switch" for the Internet has dogged the cybersecurity
debate, fueled by a proposal that would have codified emergency powers for the president in the event of a catastrophic
enacted or pending online tax rules: Attention, online shoppers. The days of tax-free online
shopping may be coming to an end. More than a dozen states have enacted legislation or rules to force online
retailers to collect sales taxes on purchases, according to tax publisher CCH. Similar legislation is
pending in 10 states.
to continue Internet coup with new cyber bill. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, following a recent
anti-piracy legislative debacle with SOPA and PIPA, will lead his second effort of 2012 to push Internet-regulating
legislation, this time in the form of a new cybersecurity bill. The expected bill is the latest attempt by
the Democrats to broadly expand the authority of executive branch agencies over the Internet. Details
about the bill remain shrouded in secrecy.
A World Tax?
Keep Your Eyes on the Internet. [Scroll down] The internet is the perfect vehicle to fund
such programs because it's global in nature and it's easily accessible to anyone with a computer or a smartphone
no matter where he or she lives. What does that mean in practical terms? It means that we are moving
toward a global government with teeth. By that I mean a global political body with taxing and enforcement
powers. As things stand now, the U.N. is a paper tiger because it depends on the goodwill of governments
around the world to operate, but if a global governing authority had direct access to a substantial tax revenue
stream, things would change with lightning speed.
administration seeks more eavesdropping on Internet. President Barack Obama and his national
security team are seeking to expand the government's role in eavesdropping on the Internet including emails,
social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter, as well as BlackBerries. According to reports, the
Obama White House plans to submit a bill after the new congress takes over both houses next January that would
require all online services that provide communications between users to be enabled to comply with federal
America in 10 Easy Steps. [#4] Set up an internal surveillance system. Obama has set
up and is setting up a heavy internet surveillance. DHS has special spy technology capable of seeing
through walls and has vans cruising city streets, spying on Americans indiscriminately. And don't forget
Obama's "Truth Squad" in Missouri, where elected Democrats were cruising the internet looking for examples of
"misrepresentations" and threatening to use legal means to suppress opponent's "Lies."
Is Not a Human Right. Over the past few years, courts and parliaments in countries like France
and Estonia have pronounced Internet access a human right. But that argument, however well meaning, misses a
larger point: technology is an enabler of rights, not a right itself. There is a high bar for something
to be considered a human right. Loosely put, it must be among the things we as humans need in order to lead
healthy, meaningful lives, like freedom from torture or freedom of conscience.
access not a human right,' says 'Father of the Internet'. "Internet access is not a human right,"
wrote Vinton Cerf in an OpEd in the New York Times on Thursday. Cerf is a prominent computer scientist who
worked on the DARPA project that gave rise to the Internet, and is revered as the "Father of the Internet."
Cerf, who wrote the piece in response to the United Nation's drive towards declaring Internet access a human right,
is Google's Chief Internet Evangelist. He argued that "technology is an enabler of rights, not a right itself."
"Quash Dissent" on Internet. Critics of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) have pointed
to its provisions that permit the indefinite detention of American citizens, without charges and without trial.
Additionally, the measure violates individual liberties in another way: by waging war on the Internet. A major
component of the criticism against the NDAA is that it labels all of the United States as a "battlefield" in
the "War on Terror," thereby treating virtually all American citizens as potential terrorists. But in
addition to that, buried deep in the massive paperwork of the bill is a provision that would allow the Pentagon
to treat the Internet as a "battlefield" as well, in order to "defend our Nation, Allies and interests."
commissioner delivers warning on threat to 'Internet freedom'. The United States is unprepared
for an international fight that's brewing over whether the Internet will remain free from government regulations
or fall increasingly under the control of emerging global powers, Federal Communications Commissioner Robert
McDowell warned Monday. "The proponents of Internet freedom and prosperity have been asleep at the
switch," Mr. McDowell, the lone Republican serving at the FCC, told editors and reporters at The Washington
Times. "Or maybe I should say asleep at the router."
The Editor says...
Aha! There's only one Republican Commissioner at the FCC. That's the problem!
At Stake In the Net-Neutrality Fight: Two fundamental issues lie at the heart of the contentious
battle over the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) attempt to establish "network neutrality" regulations
over the freewheeling Internet. Freedom of speech is not one of them. ... This fight, like most fights in
Washington, is about power and money. Do we really want to empower a political agency to regulate the most
vibrant marketplace of products, people, and ideas that has ever bubbled up from the genius of a free people?
It is naive to think that, once the FCC gets a foot in this door, rate regulation will not follow as the ultimate
means to achieve the vague and shifting goal of "fairness."
in party-line vote rejects measure to overturn FCC net-neutrality rules. The Senate rejected
a bid to overturn the Federal Communications Commission's controversial net neutrality rules on Thursday [11/10/2011]
in a party-line vote. The measure passed the House in April, but failed in the Senate on a vote of
52 to 46. It needed 51 votes to pass and was not subject to a filibuster. The
White House threatened earlier this week to veto the measure if it cleared the Senate, which came as no
surprise since President Obama made net neutrality part of his campaign platform.
Net-neutrality claims 'ridiculous'. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) punctuated several hours of
Senate floor debate on net neutrality Wednesday afternoon by forcefully dismissing arguments that
overturning the Federal Communications Commission's rules would jeopardize the freedom of the Internet.
Rubio went through a litany of innovations and achievements of the technology industry in recent years,
including the expansion of broadband, tablet computers, mobile devices and the creation of jobs despite
the recession, noting all took place before the FCC's Open Internet Order.
will veto legislation to overturn FCC Internet regulation. The White House delivered a widely
expected statement Tuesday [11/8/2011], saying that it will veto any legislation to overturn the Federal
Communications Commission's "Open Internet" regulations. Texas Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison
recently called that legislation a "jobs proposal," stating to a D.C. audience that net neutrality sets up the
FCC as the Internet's government gatekeeper and would hamper private sector growth.
Excess and Abuse. [Phil] Kerpen discusses in detail the FCC's adoption of net neutrality
regulations on December 21, 2010. The foundation for those regulations is that the companies
that invest in and build the Internet infrastructure can't be trusted to manage it, arbitrarily favoring
some users over others. So the government needs to step in and manage it, eventually taking over
control of the Net. Of course, the experience has been that under private management in the competitive
market, the Internet has been the freest institution in the world. But wherever the government has
stepped in to control the web, that freedom has been restricted or squelched.
UN Internet agenda
tied to George Soros. Frank La Rue, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression who
made summer headlines when he proclaimed Internet access as a basic human right, conducted his research and
delivered his conclusions with the support of organizations funded by liberal financier George Soros, The Daily
Caller has learned. La Rue's statements on Internet freedom caused alarm among conservatives who believe
"net neutrality" is a vehicle for a government takeover of the Internet.
Next Up for
Nationalization: the Internet. Following the nationalization of investment banks, Fannie
and Freddie, consumer banks, and private insurance companies, taxpayers are likely asking: What's left
for the federal government to nationalize? How about the Internet? Network neutrality, or net
neutrality, is the beneficent-sounding name for sweeping new government regulatory power that would prohibit
Internet service providers from innovating in their own networks.
slams net neutrality rules. "I'm very disappointed that the FCC has decided to move forward with its
misguided net neutrality order," [Senator Kay Bailey] Hutchison said. "Companies and industries that use
broadband communications have flourished over the last decade without government intervention, yet the FCC has
chosen to 'fix' a problem that does not exist."
FCC: Your Internet belongs to
us. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) filed a final version of its net neutrality
rules Thursday [9/22/2011], one year after they voted to pass the framework defining the principles of an 'open Internet.'
The vote on the framework was passed on partisan lines, 3-2. The rules, published on the Federal Register's
website, will go into effect November 20th. Touted as a major victory for a free and open Internet
by FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, Republicans have begun building a last-ditch challenge to a principle they
believe will kill markets.
panel approves broadened ISP snooping bill. Internet providers would be forced to keep logs of their
customers' activities for one year — in case police want to review them in the future — under
legislation that a U.S. House of Representatives committee approved today [7/28/2011].
declares the Internet a war domain. The Pentagon released a long-promised cybersecurity plan Thursday [7/14/2011]
that declares the Internet a domain of war. The plan notably does not spell out how the U.S. military would use the Web
for offensive strikes, however. The Defense Department's first-ever plan for cyberspace calls on the department to expand
its ability to thwart attacks from other nations and groups, beef up its cyber-workforce and expand collaboration with the
FCC sends net
neutrality rules to White House. The Federal Communications Commission sent its semi-final
draft of net neutrality rules to the White House for approval Thursday, bringing the controversial Internet
rules one step closer to enforcement.
AG to sue FCC over 'net neutrality'. Wading into another fierce ideological battle, Virginia
Attorney General Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II has announced plans to sue regarding new federal regulation
of the Internet and has urged other states to jump on board his fight against "net neutrality."
House to cut access to half of federal websites. As part of the Obama administration's
campaign to promote transparency, the White House announced today it intends to eliminate the public's
access to half of the federal government's websites within the next year. The White House said there
are nearly 2,000 websites operated by the federal government, which it said confuses people. ... White House
officials didn't say how the administration will determine which web sites to cut. But the president is
creating an 11-member "government oversight and accountability board," comprised of current executive branch
officials, "to help federal agencies improve their performance."
The Editor says...
Oh, good. More czars! How much will that cost?
Behind Net Neutrality? A FOIA request by the advocacy group Judicial Watch show that there may
have been more behind net neutrality than we were first led to believe. The organization announced on
Thursday [6/2/2011] that it uncovered documents showing that the FCC worked with a left-leaning organization
who campaigned to regulate the internet.
Anti-Free Press Group Consulted with FCC to Push Obama's Internet Takeover. Judicial
Watch has obtained documents that show that Free Press, a progressive group funded by George Soros and
other leftist benefactors was colluding with the FCC to push through its plan for the government control of
the internet known also known as net neutrality. In December 2010, the FCC voted 3-2 to pass its net
neutrality program, despite the fact just seven months earlier a federal appeals court ruled that the FCC
had exceeded its authority in seeking to regulate the Internet and enforce "net neutrality" rules.
Republican slams Free Press 'collusion' with FCC commissioner on net neutrality. Rep. Marsha
Blackburn (R-Tenn.) strongly condemned what she described as "collusion" between media reform group Free
Press and members of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on net-neutrality regulations, an issue
she has taken a lead role in opposing. Her comments come a day after the conservative watchdog group
Judicial Watch released emails between Commissioner Michael Copps and his aides and members of Free Press.
The emails showed Free Press lobbying the aides to advocate strongly for net-neutrality policies, which Copps
debates president's power during cyber-attack. Senators squared off with Obama administration
officials Monday [5/23/2011] about plans to give the president emergency powers to protect vital U.S.
electronic networks from attacks by hackers, cyberterrorists and foreign governments. ... "I must say this
baffles me," said Sen. Susan Collins, Maine Republican, of the administration's plan to rely on the 1934
statute. Ms. Collins accused administration officials of relying on "outmoded yet potentially sweeping
authorities granted in the Communications Act of 1934" that gave the president the power to take over radio
stations in a time of national emergency.
'Process Reform' Should Be About Reducing FCC Power. The Barack Obama Administration has at their
dictatorial behest a LOT of rogue Agencies, Departments and Commissions. ... And perhaps none of the Administration's
Big Government divisions has since the election been more illegally active than the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
Doctrine for the Internet? Given the premises of both Obama and the FCC, how much of a stretch
is it to establish a Fairness Doctrine for the Internet? Or government-mandated public service announcements
on private websites? In principle, this would be no different from what the government has already done
to radio and television through the FCC. Plus, given the arbitrary nature of the FCC's powers, government
could do a lot more to control both broadcast and the Internet content. ... Political websites required to offer
equal time for different points-of-view (that is to say, for Democratic liberal and socialist ones)? In
principle, there's nothing to stop it once Obama and the government take control of broadband.
The Editor says...
How do you measure "equal time" in a medium that is not constricted by time? Radio and TV stations
dispense their programming at a fixed rate. If you buy 30 seconds of advertising time, that
advertisement is gone when the 30 seconds has expired. On a web page, the adverising (if any)
stays in view during your your entire visit. Please note once again that akdart.com carries no paid
advertising, and is completely free of annoying pop-up tabs and windows. The Editor hopes you
find that to be a refreshing change from the ordinary. Tell your friends.
Bill Clinton: Create Internet agency.
Bill Clinton doesn't like all the misinformation and rumors floating on the Internet. And he thinks
the United Nations or the U.S. government should create an agency to do something about it.
Caps Cometh. With its vision of millions of users engaging in live video chat across the
Internet, the Microsoft-Skype deal is one more business plan that treats broadband as basically an
FCC Internet Regulation:
Not So Fast. In the House, HJ37, the resolution to disapprove the FCC action, has been approved
on a floor vote of 238 to 174. Last December, under cover of the holidays and the spectacle of
the lame duck Congress, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) defied a federal court and enacted an
internet regulatory takeover. In answer, the House began moving House Joint Resolution 37 through
committee. The resolution will cancel the FCC rulemaking and bring the policy discussion back to
Congress. Thus, the FCC and the House of Representatives have begun a classic Separation of Powers
struggle. The debate involves a simple yet critical question: is policy established by an elected
Congress or imposed by appointed agency bureaucrats?
FCC chief to Congress: Leave Net neutrality alone.
The head of the Federal Communications Commission will warn Congress not to repeal the controversial Internet regulations enacted last
December, CNET has learned. Undoing the agency's Net neutrality rules will "increase uncertainty, decrease investment,
and hurt job creation," FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski will say, according to a draft of his prepared remarks.
The Editor says...
The FCC reports to Congress. Nobody at the FCC is in a position to tell the Congress what to do.
administration unveils online ID system. A plan to create a national online identity system was
launched today [4/16/2011] to help combat cyber crime. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke claimed the move will protect
Internet consumers from fraud and identity theft. Unveiling the scheme, he insisted the cyber ID was
not a Big Brother plan by the government to snoop on web users.
Administration Unveils Internet ID Plan. The Commerce Dept. unveiled a plan Friday to create
a national cyber-identity system that would give consumers who opt in a single secure password and identity
for all their digital transactions. The National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace (NSTIC)
will be a voluntary system designed to protect consumers from online fraud and identity theft —
which hit 8.1 million people last year, at a total cost of $27 billion. The problem: The
current system of half-remembered passwords jotted down on post-it notes and based on pets and maiden names
simply isn't good enough.
The Editor says...
Must we all lose our liberty and relative anonymity, just because there are so many fools who
select weak passwords? This sounds to me like a plan to create an Internet User License.
Internet Freedom: A
Time for Choosing. As the Internet becomes more important, the claims on it increase.
Those claims cannot all be met. It is a time for choosing. Defining the Internet as the sum of
the design decisions that are now ubiquitously deployed, the Internet deeply embeds American values.
Just as close examination of DNA explicates sources in bio-history, close examination of Internet's methods
of communications does the same.
approves legislation to repeal FCC net neutrality regulations. The House of Representatives voted
Friday afternoon [4/8/2011] to repeal the Federal Communications Commission's net neutrality regulations. The
Republican-supported legislation passed by a vote of 240-179, with six Democrats and two Republicans
bucking their parties. During debate, Michigan Republican Rep. Fred Upton, who chairs the Energy and
Commerce Committee, said that "the Internet is not broken, and this bill will ensure that the FCC will not
in your browser. Administration officials are determined to grab hold of the Internet —
for your protection. The latest scheme will be the subject of a Senate Commerce Committee hearing
Wednesday [3/16/2011] on "The State of Online Consumer Privacy." Regulators claim various online
nuisances such as spam, identity theft and other privacy invasions cry out for government intervention.
It's a classic Washington power grab for the digital era. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and
Department of Commerce kicked off the latest push in December with reports that suggest Internet commerce
is doomed unless Uncle Sam steps in to "coordinate" the private sector's efforts.
White House Helped Draw Up Net Neutrality Rules. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski is denying a
charge that White House officials improperly influenced the commission's net neutrality rules. In a
November 2009 letter to Genachowski, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said media reports suggest "that Obama
administration officials had knowledge of and potentially contributed to [the] crafting of" the controversial
net neutrality rules.
Battles Looming Over
First Amendment Rights. With all of the takeovers of various aspects of society by the Obama
administration, none are as perilous as the one takeover we could be on the brink of — namely
the First Amendment. It is under assault in so many very real ways, and the media are largely silent
about it. That is because they are aware of the goals, and they share them. The goal is to silence
conservative and Republican voices, to regulate the Internet, to favor certain news organizations —
in essence to pick winners and losers when it comes to First Amendment rights and freedom of speech.
Tyranny vs. the Internet.
For those who aspire to tyranny, those who seek to control and dictate to the people, to undermine and limit
the people's freedoms, to expand their own power at the expense of the people's liberties — in a
word, those whose ambitions and machinations cannot stand the light of day among a free people — an
uncontrolled, free internet is an intolerable obstacle and threat. As surely a these ambitious people
will work and are working to deprive the people of their firearms — the people's ultimate means to
resist government tyranny — they will work, they must work, to deprive them of the free flow of
information. The free flow of information is essential to liberty. The power to control and limit
the flow of information is essential to tyranny.
Allows Feds to Take Over Private Networks During Cyber Attacks. The federal government could
take over private firms' networks in the event of a widespread cyberattack in the United States, under a
broad infrastructure security bill introduced in the Senate this week. The draft bill, co-sponsored by
Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), gives the Department of Homeland Security authority
to keep "critical infrastructure" up and running during a "cybersecurity emergency," Wired reported.
Uprising Over Internet Regulation. Just as a majority of Americans now opposes the Administration's
increased spending and government intrusion into the free economy, a clear majority opposes the President's move
to assert authority over the Internet. According to a recent Rasmussen poll, 53 percent of Americans
oppose FCC regulation of the Internet — and only 27 percent support such regulations. In
fact, support for Internet regulations has plunged by 22 points just since June 2008.
A bill to shift cybersecurity to White House.
Forthcoming legislation would wrest cybersecurity responsibilities from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and
transfer them to the White House, a proposed move that likely will draw objections from industry groups and some
"Big Brother" Obama Coming After the
Internet. The White House will have new powers to access private online data, regulate
the cyber security industry and even shut down Internet traffic under the provisions of Senate bills
No. 773 and 778, introduced by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.V. It's called the Cybersecurity
Act of 2009.
Proposal Could Put Heavy Restrictions on Internet Freedoms. The days of an open, largely
unregulated Internet may soon come to an end. A bill making its way through Congress proposes to
give the U.S. government authority over all networks considered part of the nation's critical infrastructure.
Under the proposed Cybersecurity Act of 2009, the president would have the authority to shut down Internet
traffic to protect national security.
New Cybersecurity Regime Proposed.
Introduced just last week in the Senate, rather quietly, was the new Cybersecurity Act of 2009. Proposed by
Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.) and Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), the legislation, in part, calls for the
establishment of a national cybersecurity adviser, a cyber czar as it were. ... [Scroll down] Some experts have
interpreted this rather cryptic paragraph to mean that perhaps a unique digital ID will be required of each user,
not only not protecting civil liberties, but instead making each user and said user's Internet activities much
easier to track, limit, and ultimately shut down.
Surveillance State. According to civil liberties watchdogs, the Obama adminstration has already
staked out claims of executive power which exceed that of the Bush administration.
Privacy May Be a Victim in Cyberdefense
Plan. A plan to create a new Pentagon cybercommand is raising significant privacy and diplomatic concerns,
as the Obama administration moves ahead on efforts to protect the nation from cyberattack and to prepare for possible
offensive operations against adversaries' computer networks. President Obama has said that the new cyberdefense
strategy he unveiled last month will provide protections for personal privacy and civil liberties. But senior
Pentagon and military officials say that Mr. Obama's assurances may be challenging to guarantee in practice...
Internet! Cass Sunstein, a Harvard Law professor who has been appointed to a shadowy post that will grant him
powers that are merely mind-boggling, explicitly supports using the courts to impose a "chilling effect" on speech that
might hurt someone's feelings. He thinks that the bloggers have been rampaging out of control and that new laws
need to be written to corral them.
Bill would give president emergency control
of Internet. Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S.
Senate bill proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the
Internet. They're not much happier about a revised version that aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West
Virginia Democrat, have spent months drafting behind closed doors. CNET News has obtained a copy of
the 55-page draft of S.773, which still appears to permit the president to seize temporary control of
private-sector networks during a so-called cybersecurity emergency.
Could Obama Rule The Web? What
do you think the response would be from our ideological counterparts if they found out George W. Bush
could use the excuse of some national emergency to take control of the Internet? Whether or not it could
really be done is another issue, but the libs would be having collective aneurysms.
control of the Internet: The Senate Commerce Committee wants to hand control of the Internet
over to the Obama White House. Increased government intervention isn't the answer to the nation's
An Unconstitutional Internet
Power Grab. [Scroll down] The original introduced in April was so bad that it was quickly
deemed legislative garbage and sent back for complete re-work. This revised version was meant to address the concerns
of lawmakers, trade groups and citizens by narrowing its focus and refining its goals. Instead it has
unleashed a flood of criticism (mostly on the internet, mind you) on how this would give the government
a "kill switch" for the Internet whenever they deem there to be a national crisis or emergency.
Would Obama hit the internet kill switch? Tyrants
have always been keenly aware of the importance of propaganda. The enormous agitprop machinery, a central feature of all totalitarian
regimes, exists to misinform rather than inform; its primary task is to keep the subjugated people in the dark. The Soviet rulers
regarded their extremely expensive effort to jam foreign radio broadcasts to be money well spent, for they understood that their propaganda
could be effective only if shielded from competition with real information.
Could The Feds Seize The
Internet? A Senate bill lets the president "declare a cybersecurity emergency" relating
to "nongovernmental" computer networks and do what's needed to respond to the threat. Didn't they
just collect our e-mail addresses?
What's really wrong with the Cybersecurity
bill? The problem with S.773 is not what it purports to do but the fact that Barack Hussein
Obama happens to be the president of the United States. Despite the fact that the United States is at
least nominally a democracy and citizens have the right to go to the polls and freely vote every two or four
years, Obama and the Democrats in Congress are governing exactly like a fascist state. They impose their
will regardless of how many Americans oppose it. Whether their policies and actions actually make the
country better off are of no consequence.
The Internet power grab by the Obama White
House. A Senate bill (S.773) if passed would give the President of the United States the
authority to declare a "cyber emergency" and close down the Internet by disconnecting users. In
addition, it will require professional IT people to be certified by the federal government, something that
angers many IT technicians and those who believe in the First Amendment. Americans are being deceived
by the news media and their elected officials in Washington, DC and it's Americans who will suffer from that
deception, according to information technology experts.
U.S. as Traffic Cop in Web Fight. The
U.S. government plans to propose broad new rules Monday that would force Internet providers to treat all Web traffic
equally, seeking to give consumers greater freedom to use their computers or cellphones to enjoy videos, music and other
legal services that hog bandwidth. The move would make good on a campaign promise to Silicon Valley supporters like
Google Inc. from President Barack Obama, but will trigger a battle with phone and cable companies like AT&T Inc. and
Comcast Corp., which don't want the government telling them how to run their networks.
The Editor says...
The White House is in no position to tell any private company how to run its business, whether it's Chrysler
or Comcast. If ordinary Americans tolerate this kind of interference, it will only get worse.
Obama Bytes. Federal Communications
Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski will announce today his intent to put in place rules that would allow the federal
government to regulate the Internet. ... "We couldn't give them a Guantanamo shut down, or ending the Patriot Act, so
this is the immediate payoff to MoveOn and Free Press and the those guys who worked so hard for us during the campaign,"
says a White House source.
Bad News for
Broadband. In his first major policy speech yesterday, the head of the Federal Communications
Commission proposed new government rules for how Internet service providers handle traffic on the Web. ... The
reality is that the Obama Administration wants the government to replace Internet operators as the Web's
the 'Net. Broadband growth is leveling out in the U.S., and suppliers increasingly grow only by
stealing customers from each other. Two-thirds of Comcast's new broadband subscribers signed up in a
recent quarter were defectors from DSL. "Churn" is the biggest challenge to broadband profitability,
especially as competition drives down margins.
Net 'Neutrality' is Government Theft. Despite
the claims of Al Gore, the Internet was not, like the light bulb or the telephone, the invention of one person.
But rather the Internet is the ultimate example of widely dispersed creativity, investment, and response to consumer
demand — the essence of Adam Smith's "invisible hand" — which is bettering the
lives of people around the world, rich and poor, black and white, in dozens of languages, forever. And it
comes as no surprise that Democrats want to regulate it.
Internet Security in the Age of
Obama. Internet security is no longer for the paranoid only. James Lakely recently wrote ... an
article about our New Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski, and his desire to quell the
internet. This was followed by another [American Thinker] article regarding Obama's Czar of Chillin'. What
we need are methods and means to deal with such threats. How to hide in plain sight, or encrypt and obscure
The Strange Philosophy Behind the Movement
for Net Neutrality. The election of Barack Obama as president ushered in a new era of regulatory zeal
in Washington, with both Congress and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) determined to solve alleged problems
with access to and management of the Internet. Advocates of "network neutrality" have the federal government's
ear and seem closer than at times past to achieving their goal of greater government control over the Internet.
Their success would change the online experience of every American.
U.S. regulatory czar nominee wants Net
'Fairness Doctrine'. Barack Obama's nominee for "regulatory czar" has advocated a "Fairness
Doctrine" for the Internet that would require opposing opinions be linked and also has suggested angry e-mails
should be prevented from being sent by technology that would require a 24-hour cooling off period.
The Editor says...
Since when is the government in the business of regulating anger? How is he going to know if I'm
angry when I send an email? How does the "regulatory czar" feel about angry phone calls?
Heavyweights Push Net Neutrality. A group of top Internet execs, including the CEOs of Google, Amazon,
Twitter, Facebook, and eBay have sent a letter to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski in support of net neutrality. ... The
FCC is due to release its proposed net neutrality rules on Thursday [10/22/2009].
Hurdles Remain As FCC Ponders Internet Data
Rules. With Democrats in charge in Washington, supporters of so-called "net neutrality" rules seem poised to
finally push through requirements that high-speed Internet providers give equal treatment to all data flowing over their
networks, CBS station KPIX-TV reported.
Expanding Net of Online Regulations. [Scroll down] The FCC would essentially require ISPs
to charge consumers the same for internet activity that uses a lot of bandwidth, like downloading music, as
they do for activity that uses relatively little bandwidth, like reading text on a web page.
votes to move net neutrality rules forward. The Federal Communications Commission unanimously voted to
open the proceeding that could lead to open-Internet regulations, although the two Republican commissioners dissented
on whether rules are warranted.
moves on Net neutrality rules. While technical, the issue of network neutrality — or Net
neutrality — has sparked a furious, expensive lobbying war, as well as a raging debate in cyberspace
over the government's role in setting the rules of the road for the Internet, with some even arguing
that the right to free speech in the Information Age is at stake.
attack FCC's net neutrality proposal. The opposition to the FCC's net neutrality
proposal is wasting no time voicing their resistance and getting their proverbial ducks in a
row. Almost simultaneously with the FCC's action on net neutrality, Verizon chairman and
CEO Ivan Seidenberg criticized the commission's proposal in a speech at SuperComm in Chicago.
Obama's Media Control Strategy.
You may not have noticed that the Obama Administration, in addition to trying to seize control of the health
care and energy sectors, is implementing a national "broadband plan" to redefine the media and transform
America's system of government. It's designed, they say, to provide "open government and civic
engagement." But it looks increasingly like an excuse for the federal government to control the
Internet and access to information and even tell us what is truth.
Is Net Neutrality a
FCC Trojan Horse? On Thursday [10/22/2009], Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman
Julius Genachowski is expected to unveil draft rules aimed at imposing network neutrality obligations on
Internet Service Providers (ISPs). In the excitement surrounding the announcement, however, many have
overlooked the fact that the this rulemaking is built on a shoddy and dangerous foundation — the
idea that the FCC has unlimited authority to regulate the Internet.
Internet Freedom — Beware Obama's Net Neutrality. It doesn't seem possible that the
tens of millions of Americans that use the Internet daily would put up with a government takeover of the
Internet. I sure hope they don't. It should be an epic struggle. Nonetheless, just in case
the American public doesn't acquiesce to strict government control of the Internet, there's a bill in
Congress (S. 773), sponsored by Senator Jay Rockefeller, to give the President complete control of the
Internet to preserve cybersecurity in case of "emergency."
Neutrality enforcement may reach into your computer. The internet legislation policy will
encompass three key positions. First the government wants to make sure everyone has access to the
internet and have set aside $7.2 billion in stimulus dollars for construction. ... This will not only be
tricky, but very expensive because there are not enough subscribers in rural areas to pay for the hundreds of
miles of cable that must be put in place. Providing internet access for all residents would be a first
for the country. In the past, government didn't ensure every citizen had a radio during World War II,
or televisions in the 1950s or even cable in the 1980s. Why internet? The second platform is
social justice or classic redistribution of wealth. And finally the third is controlling internet
"Net Neutrality" Nets
Out to Government Control. Masked beneath the comfort language of the net neutrality bill are
provisions that will effectively turn over management of the internet within the United States to the federal
government via the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). It's a power for which the FCC hungers.
Perhaps it envies China. So there's nothing neutral about the Obama administration's push
for net neutrality. "Neutrality" is a D.C. comfort word for control.
The Strange Philosophy Behind the
Movement for Net Neutrality. The election of Barack Obama as president ushered in a new era of
regulatory zeal in Washington, with both Congress and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) determined
to solve alleged problems with access to and management of the Internet. Advocates of "network neutrality"
have the federal government's ear and seem closer than at times past to achieving their goal of greater
government control over the Internet. Their success would change the online experience of every
Neutrality Fight Causing New Rifts On the Left. In the wake of reports that the Obama
administration may be inching away from a national broadband policy that encompasses strong net neutrality
provisions, observers of the ongoing net neutrality debate say that a major rift may be developing between
big-name groups on the left.
Declaring 'Open Season' on Internet Freedom? The FCC, in proposing to change the definition
of an "open Internet" from competition-driven to government-driven is setting a very dangerous precedent;
that it is acceptable for countries to preemptively regulate the Internet for what might happen in the
future, even if they lack the legitimacy of constitutional or legal authority to do so, or even if there is
thinnest of justification or evidence to support it.
The Plan to Silence
Dissent. One provision of S.773 would grant the president authority to "declare a cybersecurity
emergency and order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic" including that on private systems
designated as critical. Not surprisingly, the bill gives the president wide discretion in designating
private systems as "critical." Would an H1N1 pandemic qualify as such an emergency allowing the
president to shut down voices opposing his socialized medicine plans? Another provision of the bill
is to federally-license certain information technology professionals making it illegal for those not
holding such a license to access any IT systems.
FCC looks at
ways to assert authority over Web access. The FCC, which regulates public access to telephone and
television services, has been working to claim the same role for the Internet. The stakes are high, as the
Obama administration pushes an agenda of open broadband access for all and big corporations work to protect their
enormous investments in a new and powerful medium.
FCC Overreach. The
FCC and the rest of the federal apparatus should keep their hands off the Internet. The Web is doing fine
without the "help" of Washington. There are no compelling reasons for the government to be involved.
It has neither the moral nor constitutional authority to interfere with peaceful, noncriminal private affairs
that are voluntarily entered into.
FBI wants records kept of Web sites visited.
The FBI is pressing Internet service providers to record which Web sites customers visit and retain those logs for two
years, a requirement that law enforcement believes could help it in investigations of child pornography and other serious
crimes. FBI Director Robert Mueller supports storing Internet users' "origin and destination information," a bureau
attorney said at a federal task force meeting on Thursday [2/4/2010].
The Editor says...
Laws like this are almost always sugar-coated with something about "protecting America's children."
The FBI has phrased their demand in such a way that in order to oppose this idea now, you have to appear
to endorse kiddie porn.
Obama is Wrong about Net Neutrality and His Scheme Must Be Defeated: As Capitol Confidential
noted the other day, net neutrality is an issue that that is dear to the left, but has flown under the radar
of most Americans. It's a rather technical and arcane subject, but can be summed up rather simply:
Net neutrality rules enforced by the Federal Communications Commission would allow government bureaucrats to
micromanage the Internet...
Former Obama aide: 'Anonymity is over' on Web. A former
White House official believes "anonymity is over" in the blossoming world of Internet commerce. When
asked as part of the Pew Center's latest Web survey how online businesses and services might treat users'
identities 10 years from now, former National Economic Council member Susan Crawford predicted:
"We'll be known to others as a condition of doing all we want to do."
Taking Title to the Internet.
In the fight over the Obama Administration and Federal Communications Commission's attempts to regulate the
Internet via a policy known as "net neutrality," a court case involving a cable company and an online company
that enables Internet content sharing is forcing the Obama Administration to look for new ways to gain control
of Internet networks.
Cybersecurity bill to give president new emergency powers.
The president would have the power to safeguard essential federal and private Web resources under draft Senate
cybersecurity legislation. According to an aide familiar with the proposal, the bill includes a mandate
for federal agencies to prepare emergency response plans in the event of a massive, nationwide cyberattack.
The president would then have the ability to initiate those network contingency plans to ensure key federal or
private services did not go offline during a cyberattack of unprecedented scope, the aide said.
The Editor says...
How would you know if such a "cyberattack" took place? You'd have to take Obama's word
for it. And by now, I think we all know how good his word is.
US government rescinds 'leave
internet alone' policy. The new approach is a far cry from a US government that consciously
decided not to intrude into the internet's functioning and growth and in so doing allowed an academic network
to turn into a global communications phenomenon.
What the "cyber-emergency" bill is really
about: [Climategate] set the criminals behind the curtain on their heels. Again. And
that's when the Wizards of Oz had an epiphany. It dawned on them that to further their agenda — controlling
the globe's food, fiber, water, minerals, money, land, information, people, jobs, hope, and their planned world
government they'd been maneuvering towards — in the secret manner they've been accustomed to lo these many
decades, they were going to have to somehow take control of what was being fed onto the Internet and failing
that, the Internet itself.
US government rescinds 'leave
internet alone' policy. The US government's policy of leaving the Internet alone is over,
according to Obama's top official at the Department of Commerce. Instead, an "Internet Policy 3.0"
approach will see policy discussions between government agencies, foreign governments, and key Internet
constituencies, according to Assistant Secretary Larry Strickling...
FCC Plan Calls for 'Additional Funding' for New 'Public
Media'. The Federal Communications Commission's National Broadband Plan calls for Congress to
spend more tax dollars than it currently does on public broadcasting in order to push PBS-style government-funded
journalism onto the Internet to compete with private-sector Internet journalism. The plan, submitted to
Congress on March 15, envisions so-called Internet-based public media as the 21st century successor to the
local public broadcasting television and radio stations of today.
The Editor says...
The internet is already a public medium. One thing this country doesn't need is "government-funded
journalism", because it will inevitably become a fountain of propaganda. Many "internet journalism"
sites — like this one — are non-commercial. Is anyone, other than government
propagandists, concerned about unfair and imbalanced journalism on the internet?
taxation is on the way. The Obama Era has become a protracted, nightmarish Whack-A-Mole
game of tax increases and bureaucratic self-enlargement. In sector after sector of American life,
another scheme to expand government and wrench more earnings from Americans' pockets pops up. Its
next targeted sector? The Internet.
"Socialize" Equals Censorship: The Government
Takeover of the Media. The Federal Communications Commissions Chief Diversity Officer,
Mark Lloyd, wants government to socialize the media. ... Lloyd advocates billions in new taxes on the
private media, while the Founders reviled the 1765 Stamp Act, which sparked the chain of events climaxing
in the Revolution, in large measure because it taxed the press. Lloyd calls for federal regulations
over commercial broadcast and cable programs regarding political advertising and commentary, educational
programs for children and even the number of commercials they can run, while the Founders solemnly
declared that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech.
The FCC Doesn't Need to Be.
As exercises in bureaucratic hairsplitting go, it is tough to beat the sheer audacity of Federal Communications
Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski's recent declaration, "I've been clear repeatedly that we're not going
to regulate the Internet." In reality, between its recently released National Broadband Plan and proposed
Net neutrality guidelines, that's exactly what the agency is planning to do.
FCC has no power to regulate Net neutrality. The Federal Communications Commission does not have
the legal authority to slap Net neutrality regulations on Internet providers, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.
A three-judge panel in Washington, D.C. unanimously tossed out the FCC's August 2008 cease and desist order
against Comcast, which had taken measures to slow BitTorrent transfers before voluntarily ending them earlier
Court Ruling Threatens FCC's Net Neutrality Scheme.
In a unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
overturned a 2008 FCC order saying that Comcast could not block P2P applications, essentially the first step
in the FCC's plan to implement the Orwellian-named scheme called Net Neutrality, based on an argument that
Internet Service Providers must treat all content "equally."
the Internet. A federal appeals court ruled this week that Congress never granted the Federal
Communications Commission authority to impose "network management" regulations on Internet service providers
and that the FCC's overly "expansive view" of its power did not merely strain the outer limits of its authority
but "seeks to shatter them entirely." In real terms, this rebukes the commission for its effort to order
high-speed Internet service providers such as Comcast to treat equally all traffic that flows through their
the Internet, One Way or the Other. For the past several years, the Left has breathlessly
claimed that without the imposition of government oversight and control, the Internet as we know it will
cease to exist. Just try and follow the Left's logic for a moment. The Internet — whose
ingenious development and explosive growth has occurred almost entirely free from the heavy hand of the
government — will cease to exist as we know it without the heavy hand of government?
Secret Power Grabs: The FCC was smacked down in court last week in Comcast v. FCC, which held that the
Commission has no jurisdiction to regulate the Internet. Yet FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, a close
friend of Obama's, is now considering Internet regulations of an even more extreme nature and by an even more
dubious mechanism — reclassifying the Internet as a phone system to regulate it like an old-fashioned
Net Neutrality Further
Neutralized. News that Colin Crowell was resigning his post as a senior adviser to FCC Chairman
Julius Genachowski sent shock waves through Washington late yesterday. Crowell, who prior to going over
to the FCC was one of the most influential Democrat legislative and policy advisers on Capitol Hill when it
came to telecommunications and Internet policy, was believed by many to be one of the most vocal advocates
inside the FCC for regulating the Internet and imposing "Net Neutrality," which is to the Internet what
Socialism is to private property.
to make move on net neutrality. The FCC will announce on Thursday [5/6/2010] that it still plans
to pursue tough net neutrality rules, opening a new front in an ongoing legal battle that could come to define
the commission under Chairman Julius Genachowski. A senior FCC official said Wednesday that the chairman
"will seek to restore the status quo as it existed" before a federal court stripped the commission of the
authority to regulate broadband providers and set rules that mandate open Internet.
Increasingly, some groups contend there's a crisis in journalism, even to the extent of advocating government
support of news organizations. The dangers to freedom inherent in the concept of government-funded ideas
and the impact on critique and dissent seem not to bother them. Meanwhile, the Federal Communications
Commission plays along. Its Future of Media project seeks "to help ensure that all Americans have access
to vibrant, diverse sources of news and information that will enable them to enrich their families, communities
FCC now wants to reclassify the Internet as a telephone system. The
FCC Goes for the Nuclear Option. As I have repeatedly warned and noted on www.ObamaChart.com,
when Congress blocks the Obama administration, the White House always finds a way to get around the normal
policy-making process and pursue its agenda by other means. Today's reclassification assault on the
Internet is the latest — and perhaps the most egregious — example. In its effort
to imposing crippling net neutrality regulations on the Internet — an idea with very little support
from the American public or Congress — the Obama administration first turned to the FCC simply to
pretend Congress has given it authority to regulate.
to seek net neutrality using new legal framework. Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
Chairman Julius Genachowski on Thursday [5/6/2010] announced his agency would seek to regain its lost grip on
broadband by applying some of the rules that govern everything from phone companies to Internet providers.
slams FCC for 'takeover of Internet'. House Republican Leader John Boehner (Ohio) is using
language from the just-completed healthcare debate to blast the FCC's attempt to rein in broadband providers.
Boehner accused the agency Thursday [5/6/2010] of pursuing a "government takeover of the Internet," just hours
after FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski unveiled the plan, which would place broadband providers under some of
the same rules that have long governed phone companies.
New U.S. Push to
Regulate Internet Access. In a move that will stoke a battle over the future of the Internet,
the federal government plans to propose regulating broadband lines under decades-old rules designed for
traditional phone networks.
Obama's Attempt To
Take Control Of The Internet. Quite frankly, the government does not have the expertise, common
sense, or restraint necessary to handle this kind of legislation. That means if it were to go through,
it would almost be guaranteed to expand over time. You can also be sure that this power would lead to
abuse. Moreover, it's extremely ironic that this is even being proposed given all the carping we heard
about the Patriot Act and some of the other tactics being used by the government over the last 8 years.
This is considerably more dangerous and intrusive than anything that was done during the Bush years.
Broadband Reclassification: An Agency Out of Control. The FCC's latest attempt to expand
its powers in the name of consumer protection will undermine the future of broadband and distort the
communications marketplace. Title II reclassification of Internet providers will yet again place
the FCC in dubious legal territory, especially since today's broadband market is as competitive as ever and
growing more so all the time. Competition and consumer choice come from innovation and market entry, not
from regulation and reclassification.
Julius Caesar of
the Internet. A federal appeals court ruled last month that the Federal Communications Commission
lacks the authority to regulate the Internet. No worries, mate. This week the Obama Administration
chose to "reclassify" the Internet so it can regulate the Web anyway. This crowd is nothing if not
Obama planning a Dept of Truthiness?
Is the Obama Administration preparing the ground for a Ministry of Truthiness? The President's latest
wide-ranging speech at Hampton University made a halt at a very strange outpost, before moving on to
education. Obama, it seems, is vexed by the idea of conspiracy theories. Apparently people aren't
thinking the right thoughts. Obama's internet Yoda, Professor Cass Sunstein, is also besotted with the
idea. Two years ago, Sunstein proposed what you might call an 'active government solution' to conspiracies.
What you need to know
about the FCC's broadband plan: So is the Federal Communications Commission really going to place
common carrier restrictions on Internet service providers? Well, yes, but not too many of them. FCC
Chairman Julius Genachowski Friday said he would move to reclassify ISPs as common carriers, while at the same
time insisting that ISPs be exempt from the vast majority of regulations in the current common carrier rules.
Obama's Internet nanny.
The Obama administration refuses to take no for an answer in its desire to control the Internet. Last month,
the U.S. Court of Appeals Court for the District of Columbia delivered a unanimous and unambiguous repudiation
of the Federal Communications Commission's attempt to dictate how a cable company should run its business as an
Internet-service provider. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski responded last week by proposing a "third way"
around the court decision: He will redefine the Internet as if it were a telephone.
would require FCC report before reclassifying broadband. A Florida congressman has introduced
legislation to require the U.S. Federal Communications Commission to deliver a detailed cost-benefit analysis
to Congress before moving forward with a plan to reclassify broadband as a regulated common-carrier service.
Leave Them Tubes Alone.
As there is no real problem with the Internet, it's not surprising that some of our top minds have been working
diligently on a solution. In a 2001 interview (one that only recently has gone viral and caused a brouhaha),
Cass Sunstein, now the nation's regulatory czar, is overheard advocating for government to insist all websites
offer opposing viewpoints -- or, in other words, a "Fairness" Doctrine for the Web. This was necessary
because, as hundreds of millions of Internet users can attest, ferreting out competing perspectives online
is all but impossible.
Congress rebukes FCC on Net neutrality rules.
The Federal Communications Commission's plan to impose Net neutrality regulations just became much more difficult
to pull off. A bipartisan group of politicians on Monday told FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, in no
uncertain terms, to abandon his plans to impose controversial new rules on broadband providers until the
U.S. Congress changes the law.
Congress to Consider Updating Communications Law. Democrats in the U.S. House and Senate said
they will consider proposals starting next month to update the law that has regulated telephone, cable and
broadcast companies for the past 14 years. The lawmakers will begin "a process to develop
proposals" to revise the 1934 Communications Act, which was last rewritten by Congress in 1996, leaders of
two committees said today [5/24/2010] in an e-mailed statement.
74 Democrats defy Obama
man's net neut plans. Seventy-four Democratic members of the US House of Representatives have
sided with telcos in the ongoing dust-up over the Federal Communications Commission efforts to preserve net
Democrats' Actions Confirm FCC Has No Authority to Regulate Broadband. Four senior
congressional Democrats inadvertently confirmed Monday that the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) — which, under Chairman Julius Genachowski's leadership has been trying for months
to impose contentious net neutrality rules — lacks the authority needed to regulate the
Bill Gives Obama 'Kill Switch' To Shut Down The Internet. 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.
Engulfing the Internet.
[Scroll down] "The American public really has no idea how devastating these policies are going to have
on free speech and the Internet," says a Republican Senate staffer. "If they are able to impose these
regulations, they would be able to impose a host of different regulations that would limit free speech online
and essentially give the left the upper hand. First the auto industry, then health care and the financial
services industry, now this."
could boost power over broadband firms. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) moved
closer to boosting its authority over broadband providers on Thursday [6/17/2010] in a controversial vote
that the panel's Democrats said would protect consumers and its Republicans contended would freeze
investment in broadband networks. The commission voted 3-2 to open an inquiry into how the
industry is regulated, the first step toward giving the agency the authority to police broadband
service providers such as Comcast, Verizon and AT&T.
Does the Internet
Need a 'Kill Switch'? A proposed bill could effectively give the president an Internet "kill
switch." Senator Joseph Lieberman has proposed the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act (PCNAA),
a bill that would give the president the power to control or even shut down the Internet in emergency
FCC Moves to Regulate Internet. The
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted on Thursday to begin the formal process of bringing the Internet
under greater federal control — a move sought by both President Barack Obama and FCC Chairnman Julius
Genachowski — even though federal law calls for an Internet "unfettered by Federal or State regulation."
Can Obama Shut Down the Internet? Is cyberspace about to
get censored? Confronting threats ranging from Chinese superhackers to the release of secret documents on
WikiLeaks and other whistleblowing websites, the Obama administration may be on the verge of assuming broad new
powers to regulate the Internet on national-security grounds. The powers are granted to the White House
under a bipartisan bill that was introduced in the Senate only last week but is already moving quickly through
Congress toward passage.
FCC set to reconsider broadband
regulations. Federal regulators are reconsidering the rules that govern high-speed Internet
connections — wading into a bitter policy dispute that could be tied up in court for years.
Moves to Regulate the Internet. The Federal Communications Commission is set to begin a move to regulate
the Internet. According to CNSNews.com, by a "3-2 party-line vote on Thursday at the FCC," the agency "began
the formal process of reclassifying the Internet as a telecommunications service instead of an information
service — it's current classification." Currently, as an information service, the FCC can
exercise only "ancillary" authority, which does not allow it to regulate the Internet directly. If
the Internet is reclassified, the agency would gain greater regulatory control.
Internet kill switch plan approved by US Senate. A US Senate committee has approved a
wide-ranging cybersecurity bill that some critics have suggested would give the US president the authority to
shut down parts of the Internet during a cyberattack. Senator Joe Lieberman and other bill sponsors
have refuted the charges that the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act gives the president an
Internet "kill switch." Instead, the bill puts limits on the powers the president already has to cause
"the closing of any facility or stations for wire communication" in a time of war, as described in the
Communications Act of 1934, they said...
The Editor says...
Now for the bad news: We're always in a "time of war".
Homegrown Terrorism Begins at Homeland
Security Department. The most totally biased and inefficient government official at any level
is unquestionably Janet Napolitano the Homeland Security Agency Secretary. She really isn't even
capable of being a secretary to the Secretary. And I might add, she is one scary woman. ... Unable
(or unwilling?) to provide adequate protection to the American people, Ms. N now wants to monitor the
Internet communications industry.
Citizen Dissent: The internet kill switch. [Scroll down] A bill proposed by progressive
Senators Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), and Thomas Carper (D-Del.) recently passed that
the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs with the support of the Administration,
would give the President the power to turn off the internet for a period of four months before the shut
off can be reviewed by congress.
TSA to Block "Controversial Opinion"
on the Web. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is blocking certain websites from
the federal agency's computers, including halting access by staffers to any Internet pages that contain a
"controversial opinion," according to an internal email obtained by CBS News. ... The email does not specify
how the TSA will determine if a website expresses a "controversial opinion."
Regulate the Internet. In recent years, the question of whether and how the government should
regulate the Internet has moved to the forefront of the telecommunications debate. Before we can answer
that question, we must look at existing law to determine whether Congress has even granted the government
Future of the News.
It's a frightening thought: government takeover of the media. But having tightened their grip on
health care, financial services, and energy, it's only logical that the Democrats should turn their attention
to the media. Discussions underway at the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Communications
Commission point toward a dangerous new effort to regulate what Americans read and hear. The takeover
under discussion would apply across the board to print media, radio and television, and the internet.
The result of proposed regulations would be nothing less than an end to free speech in America.
Pushing to Expand Warrantless Access to Internet Records. This morning's Washington Post
reveals that the Department Of Justice has been pressuring Congress to expand its power to obtain records
of Americans' private Internet activity through the use of National Security Letters (NSLs). NSLs,
you may remember, are one of the most powerful and frightening tools of government surveillance to be
expanded by the Patriot Act.
Uncle Sam Wants
You to Have an Online ID. The Identity Ecosystem would allow Americans to choose to obtain a
single authenticated ID for online transactions. Like a passport, this single ID could travel with
them online and be used to access everything from e-mail, to online health records and banking information.
Furthermore, the Identity Ecosystem would only reveal the least amount of information necessary for each
The Editor says...
It is easy to predict how this will evolve into a national ID card: If the online ID
successfully identifies everyone (uniquely) on the internet, it will become mandatory for online
transactions. When it is accepted as proof of identification at pharmacies, it will become
mandatory there, too. Banks — ditto. Once it becomes necessary for license
renewal or income taxes, the adoption will be complete.
Internet traffic talks collapse. U.S. regulators halted closed-door negotiations about net neutrality
rules with phone, cable and Internet companies on Thursday [8/5/2010] after reports of a side deal between
two participants, Verizon Communications Inc and Google Inc, surfaced.
ObamaCare for the Internet.
With housing, automakers, banking, student loans, and health care checked off the list, next on Team Obama's
agenda is the National Broadband Plan, better known as Net Neutrality. Quite simply, it is a plan allowing
the federal government to take over the nation's telecommunication platform, giving the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) centralized control of the internet. The fact that the FCC has no legal authority to regulate
internet providers has not deterred administration efforts to regulate all electronic speech, news, and information.
Press under-reported amount spent lobbying Congress, FCC, and the NTIA. Free Press, the
public face of the net neutrality movement, is a moral see-saw when it comes to transparency. The
think tank and lobbying group has publicly slammed the FCC for meeting behind closed doors with net
neutrality opponents like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T, and has called the FCC's transparency pledge "lip
service" to the concept of open government.
group challenged by ties to MoveOn.Org, ACORN. A bipartisan coalition in favor of net neutrality
has lost a key conservative supporter amid signs that the issue is becoming more divisive. The Gun Owners
of America (GOA) severed ties with the net-neutrality coalition Save the Internet after a conservative blog
questioned the association with liberal organizations such as ACORN and the ACLU.
comment time on Net Neutrality. The FCC has champed at the bit to find ways to regulate the
Internet under chair Julius Genachowski, garnering rebukes from both the courts and from Congress for overstepping
its authority. So their decision to request more comment time on their latest Net Neutrality proposals may
seem a bit strange, given a distinct sense of aggressive acquisition of jurisdiction from the FCC during the
Geopolitics Muddle Control Of Cyberspace? Trouble may be brewing in cyberspace a year after the
U.S. loosened its oversight over the nonprofit Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers.
ICANN manages the Web addressing system that enables computers to connect to each other as well as Web site
domains. Ahead of the International Telecommunications Union's Plenipotentiary Conference in Mexico next
month, there's concern that Geneva-based ITU may try to get more involved in Internet governance and managing
the domain name system (DNS), which uses IP addresses to identify Web sites, computers and services connected
to the Internet.
bill' is back. During the summer, a proposed "cybersecurity" bill co-sponsered by Senators Joe
Lieberman, Susan Collins, and Tom Carper stirred up a large amount of controversy because of its provision that
would allow the government to shut down portions of the internet for up to four months without congressional
approval if a so-called "cyber emergency" occured.
FCC again resumes its unauthorized internet agenda. The estimable John Eggerton of Broadcasting &
Cable reports: ["]The (Federal Communications Commission-FCC) is issuing a public notice to "improve the
FCC's understanding of business broadband needs," calling it the "next step" advancing the FCC's small
business broadband agenda.["] Only one problem with this FCC assertion. They're not supposed to
have a small business broadband agenda. Or a broadband agenda. Or any sort of Internet agenda
[Emphasis in original.]
Net Roll. Last week the Internet Governance Forum met in Vilnius, Lithuania, with the goal of
"developing the future together." At the meeting, the Council of Europe proposed a treaty to establish
12 "principles of Internet governance." The idea behind the treaty implies the Internet is broken or
troubled and needs to be placed under the control of governments. It is not.
Just like he promised not to raise taxes... Obama
vows to preserve open Internet. During his address to the United Nations General Assembly on
Thursday [9/23/2010], President Obama promised the United States would continue to support a "free and open Internet"
and would call out nations that censor content.
U.S. Wants Broader
Internet Wiretap Authority. The Obama administration is developing plans that would require all
Internet-based communication services — such as encrypted BlackBerry e-mail, Facebook, and
Skype — to be capable of complying with federal wiretap orders, according to a report published
who support net neutrality caught between industry, Tea Party. House Republicans who support
net-neutrality legislation could face political consequences for "regulating the Internet" from Tea Party
activists. While telecommunications groups appear ready to provide cover for Republicans who want to
support the legislation, the Tea Party movement that has defeated several incumbent Republicans in primaries
this year has been skeptical of net-neutrality proposals backed by Democrats.
Slam Internet 'Censorship' Bill Ahead of Key Senate Panel Vote. Internet entrepreneurs are in a
panic over a fast-tracking Senate bill they say will censor the Web, stifle Silicon Valley startups, damage
the United States' credibility on free speech and ultimately trigger the creation of an alternate-universe
Internet. The West Coast engineers say they were blindsided last Monday [9/25/2010] when the Combating
Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act was introduced in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Beware the Cyberscare.
The same people who brought you the global warming and Y2K scares have dreamed up a scheme to assert greater
federal control over the Internet in the name of cybersecurity. According to Reuters news agency, Senate
Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, intends to pass legislation on the subject authored by Sen. Joe
Lieberman, Connecticut independent, and Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV, West Virginia Democrat.
The forthcoming effort will trade the freedom of an important communications medium for the illusion of safety.
administration to appoint 'web privacy czar'. US President Barack Obama would reportedly introduce a
more aggressive approach towards Internet privacy, pushing new laws and appointing a czar to oversee the initiative.
The battle over more government control of the Internet has been raging for years, as civil liberties groups have
expressed concern over government intervention in private-sector computers.
prepare to fight possible FCC net-neutrality push by year's end. Republicans are preparing to make
things very difficult for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) chairman if he tries to push ahead on net
neutrality in December. Chatter that the agency may move to create net-neutrality rules before year's end
has put the GOP on high alert, crafting plans this week how it would oppose any such effort.
may regulate Internet lines days before Christmas. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has
a Christmas gift in store for the phone and cable industry: it may move ahead on its controversial
net-neutrality regulations three days before Christmas. An FCC source confirmed on Friday [11/19/2010] that
the commission plans to push its December meeting back by a week, meaning it will fall on the 22nd of the month.
That's the same meeting in which analysts say the agency may move forward on its controversial net-neutrality proposal.
Official — The FCC Will Vote to Take Over the Internet in December. Details have been sketchy,
and successive reports often contradictory, but what follows is what seems to be looming over us in December. FCC
Chairman Julius Genachowski appears to be preparing to dramatically increase the FCC's regulatory role over the Internet.
He is doing so without the necessary Congressional authority — which he himself acknowledges he doesn't have.
Security seizes domain names. The investigative arm of the Homeland Security Department appears to be shutting
down websites that facilitate copyright infringement. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has seized dozens of
domain names over the past few days, according to TorrentFreak. ICE appears to be targeting sites that help Internet
users download copyrighted music, as well as sites that sell bootleg goods, such as fake designer handbags.
Net Neutrality and Your Internet
Bill. The Wall Street Journal reports today [12/2/2010] that the Federal Communications
Commission's (FCC) plan to impose net neutrality will include an authorization for Internet providers to meter
net usage and charge more to those who move more data around on the Web. Today the average customer pays
for a certain minimum level of bandwidth, regardless of how much data he interacts with. Under net neutrality,
he will be charged for a capped amount of data per month, beyond which he will pay extra.
FCC plan to oversee Internet draws GOP fire. Attracting immediate fire from congressional Republicans,
the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission on Wednesday outlined a modified "net neutrality" plan that
would expand the federal government's power to regulate traffic over the Internet.
Who Runs the Internet:
What Lobbying Is Really All About. Rather than trying to understand the issue's confusing contours,
you should instead look at the key question: who benefits? The truth is that net neutrality is about
who controls broadband — the pipe through which we now connect to the Internet.
Wave goodbye to Internet
freedom. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is poised to add the Internet to its portfolio of
regulated industries. The agency's chairman, Julius Genachowski, announced Wednesday [12/1/2010] that he
circulated draft rules he says will "preserve the freedom and openness of the Internet." No statement could
better reflect the gulf between the rhetoric and the reality of Obama administration policies.
Why is Homeland Security
Seizing Domain Names? I find it bizarre (and somewhat alarming) that the Department of Homeland Security
has apparently taken as its mission the enforcement of copyright laws, and is seizing domain names of websites that
reportedly violate copyrights. ... But what does this have to do with Homeland Security? There are laws in place
to handle copyright violations. The fact that Homeland Security takes upon itself the seizure of websites is
alarming. Once they establish this precedent, it can be expanded to include shutting down any website (including
this one) that incurs its wrath, since there appears to be no legal basis for seizing domains that facilitate copyright
Off Our Net. The Internet is once again under attack, not from hackers intent on spilling secrets
or causing mischief, but by an administration intent on controlling the free flow of information that it views
as a threat to its expanding power. According to the Hill, which obtained a copy of the FCC's tentative
December agenda just after midnight Wednesday [12/1/2010], the government agency will seek to impose rules
concerning "net neutrality" at a Feb. 21 meeting.
Recognizing the Revolution. Having
successfully killed off patriotism in the school room, having completed the long march through all of our
institutions, the next move of the Marxists is to cut off communication lines. In other words, the Internet.
In order to proceed from here, those actively involved in the fundamental Transformation of America need the
Silence of the Lambs. Their telltale signs, which trump conspiracy, are everywhere for those who are
awake and watching.
FCC should bury net-neutrality proposal unless it is strengthened. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) is
urging the Federal Communications Commission to abandon its latest net-neutrality plan unless it is significantly
strengthened. In a letter to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski on Friday [12/10/2010], Franken became the
first Democrat to argue that having no rules would be preferable to the ones the agency proposed last week.
Treating the Internet Like a Utility. The FCC's proposed power grab could end up sticking you
with a usage-based internet bill, costing many of us high-volume users our employment. ... The problem
commences with who gets to regulate the Internet. The usual suspects in Washington, from Henry Waxman
(D-CA) to Federal Communications Commission Chair Julius Genachowski, are pushing for rules which would take
things in a radically different direction. Recall the "Fairness Doctrine" in radio was an FCC regulation —
not a law. What's currently being pushed as "net neutrality" is in many ways simply a fairness doctrine
for the Internet.
net-neutrality advocates oppose Genachowski's plan. A who's-who of the most influential
net-neutrality advocates has decided to oppose Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Julius
Genachowski's plan for regulating Internet lines, which he announced earlier this month.
voices of Internet dissent. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) apparently is headed
for a 3-2 party-line vote to regulate the Internet on Dec. 21, which Commissioner Robert M.
McDowell (a stalwart free-market champion who opposes the regulations) points out is the darkest day of the
year. In doing so, the FCC is putting the new Congress to a key first test of whether it can muster the
will to overturn the Obama administration's backdoor efforts to push a far-left agenda through regulation.
Malice Aforethought: [Scroll down] This is precisely the kind of speech that Obama and
his unelected czars and wannabe censors wish to monitor, judge, squelch, punish, crush, and eradicate.
Permanently. Napoleon shared the same touchiness: "I fear the newspapers more than a hundred
thousand bayonets." And those newspapers, together with the bayonet thrusts of bloggers, conservative
(and non-conservative) news and commentary websites, have needled Obama and his staff and advisors beyond
endurance. Any words critical of Obama or the government has been regarded as the equivalent of
blasphemy, slander, libel, and the subverting the "community harmony" of the nation.
Obama and security team to spy on Internet
users. For most of his time in the White House, Obama has been critical of information about
him and his administration posted on the Internet. He's frequently denigrated bloggers and Internet
conservative news and commentary web sites for their efforts to cover stories the so-called mainstream news
media refuse to cover, according to critics of his plans to control the "Information Highway."
In this case, the only possible reason for secrecy is deception. House leaders blast FCC for secrecy.
The trio of House Republicans who will hold top tech leadership positions next year excoriated the Federal
Communications Commission on Thursday [12/16/2010] for failing to make the text of its Net neutrality order
Don't Tangle The Web With
Rules. The U.N. is talking about regulating the Web. Meanwhile, Washington is moving
toward regulating online news and information content. Though not unexpected, these are deeply
The FCC's Threat to
Internet Freedom. 'Net neutrality' sounds nice, but the Web is working fine now. The new rules
will inhibit investment, deter innovation and create a billable-hours bonanza for lawyers.
Al Sharpton Helping FCC Design
Rush Limbaugh 'Free Speech' Show Trials. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski has in fact conducted the
entire process leading up to this unelected bureaucrat Web power grab shrouded in shadow. One of the many
authoritarian facets of this authoritarian procedure has been the lack of any public hearings on the new Internet
order on which the FCC is about to vote. This is a move to commandeer control of one-sixth of the nation's
economy — we should at least be given an opportunity to weigh in prior, right? Apparently not —
because apparently the FCC is looking into warping beyond all recognition its definition of "public hearing" —
with the Reverend Al Sharpton lending a hand.
poised to approve net neutrality rules. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will pass Internet
line regulations for the first time ever on Tuesday [12/21/2010], shoring them up with a shaky legal argument that
could get shot down in court. But the agency will not close the door on using a stricter legal framework that
might be more likely to survive a court challenge — even though the tougher regime is seen as anathema to
Michael Copps Demands His Critics Be Silenced. Most of the insidious bureauweenies eating
away America from within remain as faceless as they are unaccountable. But a few distinguish
themselves for their open belligerence toward our fundamental liberties.
This can happen here: Chavez defends plan
for Internet regulations. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez defended plans for a law that would impose
broadcast-type regulations on the Internet, saying Sunday [12/19/2010] that his government should protect citizens
against online crimes.
FCC Net Neutrality Rules Slammed From All Sides.
The federal government's new internet fairness policy — designed to prevent the nation's cable and DSL
internet service providers from meddling with the open, free-wheeling nature of the internet — was met with boisterous
criticism Monday night [12/20/2010] from all sides of the political spectrum.
FCC Gives Government Power to
Regulate Web Traffic. The Federal Communications Commission on Tuesday [12/21/2010] voted 3-2 to back Chairman Julius
Genachowski's plan for what is commonly known as "net neutrality," or rules prohibiting Internet providers from interfering
with legal web traffic. President Barack Obama said the FCC's action will "help preserve the free and open nature of
Ruling is Irrelevant. Despite a court ruling earlier this year which limited the FCC's jurisdiction over
the Internet, and Congressional pressure to leave well enough alone, [Robert] McDowell warned that the FCC's decision
yesterday is "likely to have the perverse effect of inhibiting capital investment, deterring innovation, raising operating
costs, and ultimately increasing consumer prices." He concluded that this decision "may end up marking the beginning
of a long winter's night for Internet freedom."
F.C.C. Is Set to Regulate Net Traffic.
The Federal Communications Commission appears poised to pass a controversial set of rules that broadly create two
classes of Internet access, one for fixed-line providers and the other for the wireless Net.
The Net Neutrality
Coup. President Obama, long an ardent backer of net neutrality, is ignoring both Congress and adverse
court rulings, especially by a federal appeals court in April that the agency doesn't have the power to enforce net
neutrality. He is seeking to impose his will on the Internet through the executive branch. FCC Chairman
Julius Genachowski, a former law school friend of Mr. Obama, has worked closely with the White House on the issue.
Official visitor logs show he's had at least 11 personal meetings with the president.
Approves Controversial 'Net Neutrality' Regulations. Supporters of "Net Neutrality" have been
disappointed by the proposed rules, saying they heavily favor the industry they are supposed to regulate.
Democratic Commissioners Mignon Clyburn and Michael Copps both voted with Chairman Julius Genachowski in favor
of the new rules, despite saying they believed the Open Internet Order to be too weak. Republican Commissioners
Robert McDowell and Meredith Attwell Baker voted against it.
Marsha Blackburn promises to undo FCC's Internet regulations. Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), a longtime
advocate of Internet freedom, said she's undaunted by the Federal Communications Commission's decision to adopt net
neutrality rules today. Instead, she thinks the FCC's action will be a catalyst for renewed commitment on the
issue in the 112th Congress.
vows to reverse FCC's 'Internet takeover'. Sen. Jim DeMint, R-SC, says Federal Communications Commission should
be renamed the "Fabricating a Crisis Commission," following a vote by the panel's three Democrats to approve proposed rules that
amount to a hostile takeover of the Internet by a government agency acting illegally.
The First Amendment Blues. What part of the
First Amendment does the Federal Communication Commission, led by Chairman Julius Genachowski, and three of its five appointed
commissioners, not understand? If the Internet is not about free speech, then nothing is.
Net Neutrality: For some,
'Big Brother' regulation is OK. It's been interesting watching the spin on net neutrality.
PC Magazine online offers one of those little-of-this, little-of-that "journalistic" pieces that put me
to sleep. Heck, I was even beginning to think, "Neutrality" has a nice ring, reminds of Switzerland during
the war, studiously impartial to all and sundry — well, except for safeguarding hoards of Nazi gold and other loot.
Not content with that, PC Magazine also offers an opinion piece, though it is becoming increasingly difficult to
distinguish news from opinion. The title was provocative: "Do We Need FCC's Net Neutrality Order?"
Save the 'Net; abolish the FCC. Congressional
Democrats could not find the votes to pass "net neutrality." No problem. Three un-elected officials will
impose rules on hundreds of millions of satisfied online consumers. A federal appeals court stops the FCC
from employing authority over the Internet. Again, not a problem. Three out of five FCC commissioners
can carve out some temporary wiggle room, because as any crusading technocrat knows, the most important thing is
getting in the door. It's not that we don't need the FCC's meddling, it's that we don't need the FCC
FCC set to OK
rules on Internet. With the Obama administration on the verge of embracing new "network neutrality"
rules increasing government oversight of the Internet, it's difficult to tell who objects more: Republicans
who denounce the move as a federal power grab or Democrats who dismiss the reforms as too weak to do the job.
Access Is Not a 'Civil Right'. When bureaucrats talk about increasing our "access" to x, y or z,
what they're really talking about is increasing exponentially their control over our lives. As it is
with the government health care takeover, so it is with the newly approved government plan to "increase"
Kill Off The FCC.
Two days after the FCC voted to take over the Internet, it stands in the way of an agreement between private companies.
This is an agency that should be targeted for elimination.
Somewhat related: UN,
Islamists & Communists Push Global Internet Regime. The United Nations and some of its most
oppressive member states are clamoring for global regulation of the Internet, including possible censorship.
Toward that end, the UN is working to set up an "intergovernmental task force" to figure out how to better control
the web at the international level and how to "harmonize" policing of Internet content. Led by the Brazilian
delegation, headed by "former" Marxist revolutionary Luiz Inacio "Lula" da Silva, advocates for the new
Internet regime include some of the most despotic governments on earth.
Envision a Takeover of the Internet. It was hardly noticed at the time, but its consequences
could be catastrophic. Late last September, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
(ICANN), which assigns internet domain names, approved a huge change in the way it operates. Europe and
North America will now have five seats on its Board of Directors, instead of ten, and a new "Arab States"
region will have five seats as well.
Was the Year of Government Without Bounds. [Scroll down] The year closed with a new dose
of government over-reach. Days before Christmas, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) claimed
authority over the Internet and moved to impose "net neutrality." Net neutrality is the term used for
the FCC's move to determine the rules for "reasonable" network management, and limit Internet providers from
charging content providers to deliver their services. The "net neutrality" concept has been voted down
in Congress, and a federal court has already ruled the FCC lacks authority to regulate the Internet.
Yet in spite of this, the FCC felt free to simply expand its authority and change the rules of our
On the eve of Christmas Eve, while you probably weren't paying attention, the Obama Administration released
the text of its new Internet regulations, which mark a significant pivot from the hands-off approach to the
Web observed by previous Republican and Democratic Administrations.
off the Internet! The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) wants to get its grasping hands
around the throat of the Internet, the international town hall where Americans have been free to express
their opinions without Big Brother's permission or interference. That makes the FCC unhappy. It
seems that this taxpayer-supported, intrusive federal agency simply can't bring itself to allow anything
having to do with Americans communicating with each other in public without their lordly oversight or
Goulash of Right, Left and Center. [Scroll down] How is "democracy" jeopardized by a popularly elected
despot? Is this not democracy at work? Is this not the essence of democracy? Is
this not how Hugo Chavez in Venezuela gamed the democratic system there? That "massive system of
surveillance and control" — think the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security
Administration — and how effective they are, not in "combating terrorism," but in watching everyone and
obstructing Americans in their business and pleasure. It also portends the FCC's initial steps to
regulate the Internet here with so-called "net neutrality," which, as I remarked in an earlier commentary,
is a euphemism for neutering speech and the power of ideas.
Neutrality: Obamacare for the Internet. Obama's FCC has passed new rules requiring private
companies who provide Internet services to submit to control under the government. What will
government's rules be? Those are yet to be determined. But the government alone will decide
what those rules are, how they are to be implemented, and to whom they will apply, and to whom they will
not. They call this: "Net Neutrality."
Finding Reverse Gear in the New Year.
Slipped into the chaos of the holiday season by three FCC commissioners, this appalling power grab will interfere
with free expression, gum up the works of the Internet, and stifle vitally needed capital investment.
It's deeply unpopular with voters, with 54% opposed in a recent Rasmussen poll, while only 21% approve.
Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) has already declared his intention to slip a choke chain on the FCC, by
promoting legislation to "ensure that the FCC can only use its rulemaking powers where there is clear evidence
of a harmful market failure," combined with "the accountability of a Congressional vote before any government
agency's proposed major regulations may be finalized."
An Internet Divided.
Americans paid little attention in September 2009 when the Obama administration relinquished the traditional
U.S. role in supervising policy for the global Internet. The eyes glaze over, after all, at the profusion
of acronyms and the allusions to obscure functions in uninteresting federal agencies. When the U.S.
Department of Commerce terminated its exclusive policy relationship with the Internet Corporation for Assigned
Names and Numbers (ICANN), the tech world was aflutter, but the event seemed to have no impact on the average
American's interactions with the Web.
nation choking on endless laws. [Scroll down] A second example is the Federal Communications
Commission's December party-line vote to enforce "net neutrality." It's a complex, debatable subject, but it's
not the wisdom of the decision that's at issue here. Rather it's the fact that the FCC under Julius Genachowski,
a classmate of President Obama's at Harvard, went ahead despite a) the clear wishes of Congress, which expressly
declined to give the commission authority over the Internet and b) a ruling by a DC federal court pointing out
Administration Reportedly Plans to Create Internet ID for All Americans. President Obama is putting
plans in motion to give the Commerce Department authority to create an Internet ID for all Americans, a White House
official told CNET.com. White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt told the website it is "the
absolute perfect spot in the U.S. government" to centralize efforts toward creating an "identity ecosystem" for
Obama to hand Commerce Dept. authority over
cybersecurity ID. President Obama is planning to hand the U.S. Commerce Department authority
over a forthcoming cybersecurity effort to create an Internet ID for Americans, a White House official said
here today [1/7/2011]. It's "the absolute perfect spot in the U.S. government" to centralize efforts
toward creating an "identity ecosystem" for the Internet, White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt
Obama Eyeing Internet ID for
Americans. President Obama is planning to hand the U.S. Commerce Department authority over a
forthcoming cybersecurity effort to create an Internet ID for Americans, a White House official said here
today. It's "the absolute perfect spot in the U.S. government" to centralize efforts toward creating
an "identity ecosystem" for the Internet, White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt said.
created the phony mass movement for net neutrality? Last month, when Federal Communications
Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski won approval of his "net neutrality" rules on a party-line 3-2
vote — supposedly to protect the freewheeling Internet from corporate predators intent on running it
their way — they got slammed from all sides. Republicans, including FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell,
blasted the rules as Democrat over-reach. Democrats, including Sen. Al Franken of Minnesota, called the
rules woefully inadequate to protect the public from Internet service providers giving stripped-down performance
to the masses and premium broadband to the wealthy. Franken's response is what the Pew Charitable Trusts
calls "raging incrementalism": get what you can now and scream loud enough to come back and get more later.
Internet passport. Federalized security screening at airports has been such a
success that President Obama wants to apply the same government "expertise" to the realm of
online commerce and commentary. The White House cybersecurity adviser joined Commerce
Secretary Gary Locke on Jan. 7 to announce what amounts to a national ID card for
the Internet. Their plan is straightforward. Instead of logging onto Facebook or
one's bank using separate passwords established with each individual company or website, the
White House will take the lead in developing what it calls an "identity ecosystem" that will
centralize personal information and credentials.
The dangerous internet
passport proposal. [Scroll down] If we allow these "internet passports" to become law, we
will surely end up with health care passports, carbon credit passports and, of course, food and nutrition
passports. We know with 100% certainty that the government cannot keep these programs secure. We
know with 100% certainty the government will gleefully track every web site you visit, every keystroke you
send, every purchase you make, every deposit and withdrawal, every blog comment, and every Facebook and
Twitter post. A simple algorithm will create lists of your acquaintances and friends and inform the
government of your political affiliations, political donations, clubs, interests and hobbies. This
would not only be the end of personal privacy; we would have good running start at an authoritarian American
"Net Neutrality" Merely Picks Winners and Losers. The internet has changed with the rapid rise of
online services like YouTube, Netflix and Skype which consume large amounts of bandwidth, slowing down internet
service for others. Proponents of Net neutrality insist that it merely keeps the status quo, prohibiting
"discrimination" by a few dominant internet providers, and "ensuring" free speech. In reality, it will
increase regulation and costs by restricting companies from making marketwise choices. Moreover, additional
government rules and regulations rarely increase freedom of speech.
passport. Federalized security screening at airports has been such a success that President
Obama wants to apply the same government "expertise" to the realm of online commerce and commentary.
The White House cybersecurity adviser joined Commerce Secretary Gary Locke on Jan. 7 to announce
what amounts to a national ID card for the Internet.
Internet 'kill switch' bill will
return. A controversial bill handing President Obama power over privately owned computer
systems during a "national cyberemergency," and prohibiting any review by the court system, will return
this year. Internet companies should not be alarmed by the legislation, first introduced last
summer by Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), a Senate aide said last week.
Lieberman, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, is chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs Committee.
Fight For Internet Freedom. Al Gore didn't invent the Internet, but if Thomas Jefferson could
have he would have. The Internet, with its Facebooks and Twitters, is the perfect venue for and example
of the free speech the Founding Fathers enshrined in the Constitution's First Amendment. Perhaps even
as much as the first printing press, it has freed the minds of men from the tyranny of those gatekeepers who
know that if you can control what people say and know, you can control the people themselves.
Obama the Internet
pharaoh. Big-government types can't resist the urge to control things they feel are currently
beyond their grasp. The Internet remains perhaps the only venue with the freewheeling flavor of the
Old West. This irritates those who would become Net Nannies just as much as it does those who want to
maintain power by any means necessary. The temptation to squelch inconvenient speech is too great;
no politician should ever be given a button to silence the Internet. That rule applies to Washington
as much as Cairo.
FCC Lacks Authority to Regulate the Internet. Two of the five commissioners on the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) said that the Commission lacks the legal authority to regulate the Internet,
predicting that the recent regulations issued by the commission in December will be struck down in federal
Internet Cop. From his first
major speech to a hurried and secretive rulemaking procedure in the final weeks of 2010, [Julius]
Genachowski has made it his mission to plant the seeds of government control within the core of the
Internet — all under the guise of "preserving Internet freedom."
Somewhat related: Obama Launches Total Takeover of
Media System. Even the Washington Post describes it like something out of Orwell's 1984.
The FCC has approved a presidential alert system. Obama may soon appear on your television or call your
cell phone to warn you about the next specious al-Qaeda underwear bombing event. Commissioners voted
last week to require television and radio stations, cable systems and satellite TV providers to participate
in a test that would have them receive and transmit a live code that includes an alert message issued by the
president. No date has been set for the test, according to the Post.
'Kill Switch' Cedes Battle over Government Accountability. The Internet works as a
means of keeping government accountable, however, only if the "on" button is in individuals' hands.
Employ an Internet "kill switch," as some pundits observing recent events have recommended — and
which Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) has proposed as part of his Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act
of 2010 legislation — and all bets are off. That is a tool of dictatorial regimes, not
Internet bill alarms privacy experts. Just as the Egyptian government recently forced the
Internet to go dark, U.S. officials could flip the switch if the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset
legislation becomes law, say its critics. Proponents of the bill, which is expected to be reintroduced in
the current session of Congress, dismiss the detractors as ill-informed — even naive.
Killing the 'kill switch'.
Sens. Joe Lieberman, Tom Carper and Susan Collins introduced a cybersecurity reform bill that explicitly
prohibits the president from shutting down the Internet. The Cybersecurity Freedom Act of 2011, introduced
late Thursday, is nearly identical to the legislation introduced last year by the trio, except for two changes.
First, it adds language explicitly stating the president can't shut down the Internet. ...
Obama to the
Internet: No ICANN. Freedom of information and communication on the Internet is playing a
key role in supporting pro-democracy demonstrators in the Middle East and developing norms for civil society
elsewhere around the world. But just when freedom is beginning to flicker, the Obama administration is
seeking to give authoritarian regimes more power to impose censorship on the Web.
The Powers of This
President. Not all the powers President Obama has wielded or claimed seem clearly identifiable
in the U.S. Constitution. ... [For example, the] Federal Communications Commission (FCC) assumed regulatory
authority over the internet and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) assumed regulatory authority over
greenhouse gases though Congress had not empowered either to do so.
kill switch rebooted. Dumb ideas never die in Washington; they're just re-invented. One
chestnut that simply refuses to expire would grant the president Mubarak-like power over the handful of
private companies whose services provide the backbone of the Internet. Last month, Sen. Joseph I.
Lieberman, Connecticut Independent, reintroduced legislation that had been widely panned last session as the
"Internet kill switch." Now the scheme has been re-imagined with a warm-and-fuzzy title meant to allay
for the U.S. House For Standing Up to Regulatory Tyranny. [Scroll down] On
the FCC side, President Obama's close friend Julius Genachowski has been running the supposedly
independent agency as an extension of the White House, pursuing so-called "net neutrality"
regulations to give the FCC a toehold over regulating broadband Internet access despite the fact
those regulations were rejected by Congress (where they had almost no support), the American
people, and the courts.
As Putin Crushes
Russia's Internet, Obama Stands By. In America, the opposition party candidates began jockeying
for position and the incumbent declared his intentions. In Russia, where there is no opposition party
and the incumbent is a mere figurehead, the corrupt dictatorial regime began systematically eradicating
political dissent on the Internet. ... In fact ... Obama may actually support the Kremlin's efforts to wipe
out privacy on the Internet. His administration is actively seeking to crack open Skype and Gmail, just
like the Putin Gestapo.
How Will States Tax
Internet Downloads? Congress May Decide. Here's an interesting conundrum, posed by Representative
Dennis Ross (R-Florida), at a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing held on Monday: "Imagine you are
sitting in Dulles airport in Virginia, waiting for a flight back to Florida," Ross began in his opening
remarks. "You download a music file from Apple, which is headquartered in California. The music is
sent to you via a server in Oklahoma." Which of these states should be allowed to tax the sale?
The Editor says...
I think I see where this is headed: A federal sales tax for the internet.
Hands off the
Internet. The international bureaucrats and influence-seekers who want
to hand the Internet over to the United Nations just got a major boost from the European
Union. In an apparent about-face from its previous positions, the EU announced last
month that it supports transferring the assigning of Internet domain names — currently
handled by a California nonprofit — to an international body.
Who Should Control the
Internet? The United Nations next week will hold the World Summit on the
Information Society (WSIS) in Tunisia, at which national representatives will discuss
strategies to bridge the "digital divide" and harness information and communication
Will the Internet become the
UNTERNET? The United Nations wants control of the internet. [...] At the
WSIS Preparatory Commission meeting held this past September in Geneva, the European Union
joined with countries like China and Iran in rejecting the concept of not fixing what is
not broken and decided that increased international supervision — maybe even
international control — of the internet has become necessary.
Why Trump Is Right About 'Shutting Down' Parts Of The Internet. If you are a moron, you could interpret Donald
Trump's statements in the GOP debate tonight to mean he wants to start shutting down specific websites or services on the
internet. He clarified later that he was talking about geography: limiting access to, say, Syria or wherever Islamic State is
operating from. Trump is right not only that limiting or knocking out the internet is the best way of hampering Islamic
State, but also because there is at least one solution that is eminently feasible. It's just that sneering commentators
aren't educated enough to know about it.
Civil unrest in Egypt led to the cutoff of internet and cell phone service, to protect the
government from its unhappy citizens. Will President Obama use the same tactic in
this country when dissent gets more widespread than he would like?
Dictators Shutting Down the Internet. Cory
Doctorow asks: "Why would a basket-case dictator even allow his citizenry to access the Internet in the first place?" and "Why not shut down
the Internet the instant trouble breaks out?" The reason is that the Internet is a valuable tool for social control. Dictators can
use the Internet for surveillance and propaganda as well as censorship, and they only resort to extreme censorship when the value of that
outweighs the value of doing all three in some sort of totalitarian balance.
How to Shut Down Internets. Egypt turned off the
internet by using the Border Gateway Protocol trick, and also by switching off DNS. This has a similar effect to throwing bleach over a map.
The location of every street and house in the country is blotted out. All the Egyptian ISPs were, and probably still are, government licensees.
It took nothing but a short series of phone calls to effect the shutdown.
the Feds Can Learn From Egyptian Internet Control. Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Google services
all have been disrupted by Egyptian governing authorities in pursuit of clamping down on protests. And
we don't think the U.S. government would do the same? Tell me, what's the difference between the
Egyptian government's shutting down social networks to "bring order" to protests and the U.S. government's
shutting down the Internet if there is an "imminent cyber threat"? Answer: nothing.
Egypt's Internet still offline.
Egypt has gone offline. In a stunning development unprecedented in the modern history of the Internet,
a country of more than 80 million people has found itself almost entirely disconnected from the rest of
Did Egypt Kill the Internet? No Google. No Facebook. No Twitter. No
Skype. Since about 5:20 a.m. ET Thursday, virtually all of Egypt has been living in a Web-less
demonstrates the Internet 'kill switch'. President Hosni Mubarak hasn't been able to stop
the protesters who took to Egypt's streets on Tuesday, so in the ensuing days, he's attempted to stop
them from communicating with each other and the outside world. Several American sites — Twitter,
YouTube, Hotmail and Google — as well as the Chinese search engine Baidu were blocked by Mubarak
and the Egyptian government on Wednesday, Jan. 26.
Web blockade raises concerns about 'kill switch' for Internet. The news of Egypt's crackdown on
Web access is raising new concerns over a comprehensive cybersecurity bill that critics claim gives the
president a "kill switch" for the Internet. ... Civil rights advocates such as the ACLU also raised concerns
about the bill, which they claim gives the president the ability to shut down the Web in the event of a
catastrophic cyber-attack. Specifically, observers are concerned the new version of the bill will
reportedly not allow for judicial review when the administration shuts down a network under attack.
Chinese Government Blocks
Internet Searches for 'Egypt'. The Chinese government is taking precautions to make sure the
people of China don't get any ideas from the Egyptian protests. News of the revolt is being tightly
controlled, and Internet searches for "Egypt" have been blocked on China's state-run Internet search
engines and microblogging sites.
Egypt goes offline US gets internet 'kill switch' bill ready. As Egypt's government attempts to
crackdown on street protests by shutting down internet and mobile phone services, the US is preparing to
reintroduce a bill that could be used to shut down the internet. The legislation, which would grant US
President Barack Obama powers to seize control of and even shut down the internet, would soon be reintroduced
to a senate committee, Wired.com reported. It was initially introduced last year but expired with a new
Shutting Down American
Cyberspace. While the revolts which have occurred in Tunisia and Egypt against historically
oppressive regimes involve different issues, there is no question that the impetus for both was technologically
driven. Facebook and Twitter have been integral components in not only organizing and coordinating
large-scale demonstrations, but also in providing critical, real-time updates to anti-government forces.
The Egyptian government has responded to this reality: as of 5:20 AM Thursday morning [1/27/2011],
Egypt shut down nearly all Internet and mobile phone access. ... Question: could a similar blackout be
imposed in the U.S. as the result of a "national emergency"?
The Internet 'Kill Switch'. Virtually the first thing an authoritative Egyptian government did to
quell dissent was to shut down its Internet. So why are we debating a bill to give our government the
Update: Hosni Mubarak fined for cutting internet.
Former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has been fined $34m (£20m) for cutting off communications services
during the uprising that ousted him. The fine of 200m Egyptian pounds is the first clear ruling against
Mr Mubarak since he left office in February. Two other senior officials were also fined.
Cuba hits the internet kill switch
Cuban Govt. Blocks
Internet and Ham Radio Signals. Could It Happen Here? On July 11, Cuban citizens rallied in the streets
to protest food and medicine shortages and electricity outages. The demonstration was one of the biggest since the days
of Castro. Cuba is going through its worst economic crisis in decades, along with a resurgence of coronavirus
cases. Cuban officials blame the decades-long embargo with the United States for the collapsing economy. The
internet, basically unavailable until 2008, has only been widely available in Cuba Since July 2019, when the Cuban government
began lifting restrictions on internet access. Since that time, Cuba has slowly entered the digital world, with mobile
access to the internet becoming available in December 2018. As Cuba's citizens protested, many of them pulled out their
cellphones to post videos and images across social media platforms. The Cuban government began immediately blocking
access to those platforms. This is reminiscent of Arab Spring, when the governments of Egypt, Libya, and Syria
completely shut down the internet to quell the protests. Other governments in the Arab world were rumored to have
arrested and even executed people for things they posted on the internet.
Libya hits the internet kill switch
traffic in Libya goes dark. Internet services in Libya, already spotty throughout the country's
violent upheaval, appeared completely halted in what analysts consider an attempt to stifle information about
Syria hits the internet kill switch
In 2011: U.N. Report Declares Internet
Access a Human Right. A United Nations report said Friday [6/3/2011] that disconnecting people
from the internet is a human rights violation and against international law. ... The report, by the United
Nations Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression,
comes the same day an internet-monitoring firm detected that two thirds of Syria's internet access has abruptly
gone dark, in what is likely a government response to unrest in that country.
Kill Internet To Quell Riots. The "Democratic" Republic of Congo (DRC) recently ordered national telecom
companies to turn off internet and text messaging (SMS) services in order to suppress political insurrection. Telecom
minister Emery Okundji explained that the action was to prevent "violence that is being prepared." All tyrants make broad,
general statements like this that are essentially meaningless, to justify their outrageous behavior. The effect of
online bans and restrictions work for a while, but eventually, regular folks become really annoyed at not being able to
conduct daily business and personal affairs. At this point, there is more to protest, not less. The African
country has a history of political struggle and human rights abuses under DNC leaders Laurent Kabila and, now, his
son Joseph Kabila.
Algeria hits the internet kill switch
completely turns off Internet to buckle down on exam cheating. Two years ago, Algeria made an unusual move to
end cheating on standardized tests by temporarily blocking student access to Facebook and other social media websites.
But now Algerian schools have decided that this method is simply not enough — and the country is going further by
effectively cutting off access to the Internet nationwide. The country has announced that its Internet
service — through June 25 — will go down an hour after the start of each of the high school diploma
exams, which are expected to be taken by more than 700,000 students, according to the BBC.
disconnects from global internet in tests: Move sparks fears Putin will strengthen his grip on free
speech. Russia disconnected itself from the global internet during tests in June and July amid fears Vladimir
Putin will crackdown further on free speech, it has been revealed. The country adopted legislation, known as the
'sovereign internet' law, in late 2019 that seeks to shield the country from being cut off from foreign infrastructure.
It was implemented to stop what Russia branded the 'aggressive nature' of the US's national cyber security strategy.
Will Test Its Ability to Disconnect from the Internet. Russia will test its internal RuNet network to see whether
the country can function without the global internet, the Russian government announced Monday [10/21/2019]. The tests will
begin after Nov. 1, recur at least annually, and possibly more frequently. It's the latest move in a series of technical
and policy steps intended to allow the Russian government to cut its citizens off from the rest of the world.
Begins Installing Equipment To Cut Russia's Access To World Wide Web. Earlier this year, Russian President
Vladimir Putin signed the Russian Internet (RuNet) into law to protect the country's communications infrastructure in case it
was disconnected from the world wide web — or so he said. Critics argued it was opening a door to a
Chinese-style firewall disconnecting Russia from the outside world. Now, Alexander Zharov, the head of the federal
communications regulator Roskomnadzor has confirmed to reporters that "equipment is being installed on the networks of major
telecom operators," and RuNet will begin testing by early October. Such testing, reporters were told, is known as
wants to unplug its internet from the rest of the world. Is that even possible? Russian lawmakers want to
tighten the screws on Russia's internet access by creating an "sovereign" network that the Kremlin could shut off from the
greater World Wide Web. Proponents of a bill now working its way through the Russian parliament say passing the measure
will protect the country's internet from foreign cyberattacks or other threats. But international human rights groups
and opponents say the law is an attempt to create a firewall around Russia's internet and restrict information flow.
The law's introduction has drawn comparisons to China's restrictive Great Firewall.
Myanmar hits the internet kill switch
in midst of 'national-scale internet blackout' — monitor. Myanmar is in the midst of a "national-scale internet
blackout", a monitoring group said on Saturday, as thousands of people take to the streets to protest a coup that unseated
the government on Monday [2/1/2021]. The NetBlocks Internet Observatory said in a post on Twitter that real-time network
data showed connectivity had fallen to 54% of ordinary levels and witnesses reported a shutdown of both mobile data services
and wifi connections.
Sudan hits the internet kill switch
PM, Cabinet Arrested, Internet Curtailed In Apparent Military Coup. Following weeks of rising tensions between
civilian and military members of a state council attempting to guide Sudan to Democracy two years after the fall of longtime
dictator Omar al-Bashir, the Sudanese military has decided to end Sudan's Democratic experiment — arresting the
prime minister and a large number of senior cabinet members and pro-government party leaders, and shutting off the
Internet — with a coup, per reports from Reuters and the AP.
Facebook cuts off Australia
Censors Australia from Posting News, Censors Australian Publishers Globally. A proposed law from the Land Down
Under did not go over well with Facebook. Facebook has decided to block all news in and from Australian users in
response to a proposed law that would require the platform to pay news publishers for stories that appear on Facebook.
"In response to Australia's proposed new Media Bargaining law, Facebook will restrict publishers and people in Australia from
sharing or viewing Australian and international news content," said William Easton, Facebook's Managing Director, Facebook
Australia & New Zealand in a blog post. "The proposed law fundamentally misunderstands the relationship between our
platform and publishers who use it to share news content. It has left us facing a stark choice: attempt to comply with
a law that ignores the realities of this relationship, or stop allowing news content on our services in Australia. With
a heavy heart, we are choosing the latter," Easton continued.
minister Scott Morrison attacks Facebook for 'arrogant' move to 'unfriend Australia'. The Australian government
has been blindsided by Facebook suddenly blocking all news on the platform in Australia but says the "heavy-handed" move will
not stop parliament from passing landmark laws to force tech giants to pay for journalism. Australians woke up on
Thursday [2/18/2021] to discover they couldn't view or share news on the social network after Facebook blocked the content in
an escalation of a row over whether it should have to pay media companies for displaying their content. Facebook is
opposed to the federal government's news media code which has already passed the lower house of parliament and is expected to
soon pass the upper house.
Blocks News From Australia — Yes, The Entire Country. Australian officials are pushing back against
the totalitarian grip of Big Tech. As a result of investigations into Google and Facebook the Australian government
is set to establish fines against tech companies for anti-trust violations. However, some officials are now discussing
taking actions that are beyond civil lawsuits, and are now advocating for arrest of company officers for unlawful
conduct. The battle lines are being drawn, and in response to the Australian government position on anti-trust Facebook
(feeling they are elite and above the law) has now decided to block all news articles from the entire country from their
social media platform.
Australia's Lead Russia Has Passed A Law On Fines For Censorship Against Russian Citizens The Law Will Apply To Twitter,
Facebook, and YouTube. Big Tech's efforts to restrict user access to various Internet platforms are a serious
challenge, President Vladimir Putin said at a meeting with leaders of parliamentary factions on Wednesday [2/17/2021].
He responded to the recent statements made by Vyacheslav Volodin, speaker of the State Duma (lower house), who put the
spotlight on Big Tech's violation of freedom of speech. "What you said about these so-called platforms, IT companies,
is a serious challenge not only for us — we see what has happened in the [United] States," Putin noted.
According to him, it is quite obvious that such an "ideological divide" runs throughout the world.
An ISP cuts off Russia
backbone provider shuts off service in Russia. Cogent Communications, an internet backbone provider that routes
data across intercontinental connections, has cut ties with Russian customers over its invasion of Ukraine, as first reported
by The Washington Post. The US-based company is one of the world's largest internet backbone providers and serves
customers in 50 countries, including a number of high-profile Russian companies. In a letter to Russian customers
obtained by The Post, Cogent cited "economic sanctions" and "the increasingly uncertain security situation" as the motives
behind its total shutdown in the country. Cogent similarly told The Verge that it "terminated its contracts" with
Russian customers in compliance with the European Union's move to ban Russian state-backed media outlets.
Any dictator with an internet kill switch is going to use that switch
when his own political future is in jeopardy.
"You do not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it
will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs
it would do and the harms it would cause if improperly administered."