Congress Can Save the Internet

President Obama wants this to be the last month of an open, uncensored internet guaranteed by the U.S. government. His plan to end American stewardship would hand new power to authoritarian governments offended by the internet as we know it.

The good news is it appears congressional leaders have agreed to rescue the internet in time to prevent the Sept. 30 expiration of U.S. oversight. Sen. Ted Cruz, who has pushed hard against the plan since it was announced two years ago, told me last week he’s “cautiously optimistic” legislators will block it through a rider to the federal budget: “The basic proposition of keeping the internet free has united Republicans across the spectrum and should also unite Democrats with Republicans.”

The US Governments Relinquishes Its Internet Authority To Foreign Governments This Month!

This is a preemptive strike to prevent the flow of good valid information, please people become aware of any live video streaming software such as Ustream install it on your phone, it can atleast be used to show injustice where it may occur. Anything that gets the feed out there.

The beginning of the end is in ~ 1 day, 6 hrs

I know this may seem like yet another doom porn post, but it doesn't hurt to atleast question your own theological standing with a "higher power." Its a matter of faith not which theology, and please remember, indifference is just as insidious as injustice, and evil.

God Bless.
(Ezekiel 33:3)

a reply to: digidamage
What does this mean for us? if other countries have more "control" over the internet, what are you expecting out of it?

a reply to: digidamage


Already a long thread on this ATS and that is not what is happening.

originally posted by: ware2010
a reply to: digidamage
What does this mean for us? if other countries have more "control" over the internet, what are you expecting out of it?

I think if Obama wants it done Its probably bad for Americans.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: digidamage


Already a long thread on this ATS and that is not what is happening.

Ty I missed that one.

a reply to: digidamage

Not sure if this piece is just side bar notes to what is coming but it would seem that there is a plan in the works.

Facebook Collaborating With Israeli Government To Determine What Should Be Censored
By Glenn Greenwald

Last week, a major censorship controversy erupted when Facebook began deleting all posts containing the iconic photograph of the Vietnamese “Napalm Girl” on the ground that it violated the company’s ban on “child nudity.” Facebook even deleted a post from the prime minister of Norway, who posted the photograph in protest of the censorship. As outrage spread, Facebook ultimately reversed itself — acknowledging “the history and global importance of this image in documenting a particular moment in time” — but this episode illustrated many of the dangers I’ve previously highlighted in having private tech companies like Facebook, Twitter, and Google become the arbiters of what we can and cannot see.

www.informationclearinghouse.info...

Yah well, its only a matter of time. Truth is not welcome at the top. Its hidden.

So expect it one day and also that the blame will fall elsewhere.

Ask old people, they remember what it was like in the Dark Age before internet. Top down, one way dissemination from TV, newspapers and magazines, the pulpit, classroom and peer pressure.

Going dark in three, two one...

'click'

Total crap opinion piece.

originally posted by: imsoconfused

originally posted by: ware2010
a reply to: digidamage
What does this mean for us? if other countries have more "control" over the internet, what are you expecting out of it?

I think if Obama wants it done Its probably bad for Americans.

It won't help his golf handicap so you must be right.

a reply to: digidamage

Congress doesn't care.

Yay censorship!

a reply to: imsoconfused
I can agree with you on that one

SPAM removed by admin

1) Yes, it is more doom porn. Atypically bad doom porn, at that. Do you understand that they're handing over the NAMING SYSTEM? If you do then please explain why this is a cause for concern?

2) How would one go about "handing over" control the entirety of the internet? Do you possess any comprehension of how this internet thing functions and exists as we know it?

2.5) Do you REALLY think there wouldnt be IMMEDIATE rebellion if part of, let alone ALL OF the internet was suddenly censored? That's the state of this world. No one gives a damn about anything that doesn't directly involve them but if the internet were to drastically change (at ANY pace) there WOULD be rebellion. Hell, people are ready to riot next month if a friggin TV character is killed off.

3) What the hell does this have to do with the seemingly random insertion of theological crap?

a reply to: digidamage

from your source
www.wsj.com...

The basic proposition of keeping the internet free has united Republicans across the spectrum and should also unite Democrats with Republicans.”

Is this the USA? the same nation that "freed the Middle East of their resources," all in the name of freeing their citizens?

Maybe we define what "free" means before we proceed further, ya think?

Its a matter of faith not which theology, and please remember, indifference is just as insidious as injustice, and evil. God Bless. (Ezekiel 33:3)

Is this the same demiurge desert god that the jews adopted and the gnostics despised? What makes you think "it"
does Americas bidding?

Oh no, oversight of the interwebs is going overseas...the sky is going to fall in....

a reply to: Magnivea

3) What the hell does this have to do with the seemingly random insertion of theological crap?

I am glad others call this for the crap it is

a reply to: digidamage

I've always wondered why people like Ted Cruz champion this concept of keeping the internet under US control, when the rest of his ideology is that we need to remove the internet from government control. Assuming he's not being a hypocrite and just doesn't want to agree with Obama on anything, then shouldn't he be all for moving it to international control, beyond the reach of any specific petty government?

And for that matter, the control we're talking about isn't control over how it functions. It's control over naming rights when you register a website. Maybe some people are just really attached to .com rather than the .us or .usa we should have?

Congress Can Save the Internet

We all know how well government does with "saving" anything in the private sector...

Take it from her gipper:


-Christosterone

SPAM removed by admin

SPAM removed by admin