It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Wikileaks is merely leading up to this...FCC will vote on regulating Internet lines in December

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 09:21 AM
link   
The WL debacle will simply give the FCC all it needs for the next "Nudge"/power grab. Just wait and see.


In an effort to meet an Obama campaign promise, Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Julius Genachowski indicated Wednesday that he will propose new regulations for Internet lines.

He is expected to give a speech at 10:30 a.m. on Wednesday laying out his proposal.

Genachowski's attempt to revive the long-delayed net-neutrality proceeding is a delicate balancing act designed to garner some industry and public interest support without completely satisfying anyone...

Public Knowledge, a group that promotes net-neutrality, urged Genachowski to continue with reclassification at a future meeting.

The group nevertheless praised Genachowski for his decision to move forward with "urgently needed" rules, even without the reclassification effort.

Genachowski also got a supportive letter on Tuesday from Senate Democrats.

Sens. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), and John Kerry (D-Mass.) urged him to move forward before the end of the year.

"We are also well aware that it is always easier to criticize the policy-making process than it is to make good policy--and as a result you have taken incoming fire from all sides," the letter said.

Genachowski will hold a vote on his plan at a Dec. 21 commission meeting after tweaking the proposal in the next few weeks. He needs to woo two of his fellow commissioners, the minimum needed to pass the rules.


More new rules eh?? Assange has certainly given them more motive to move forward. It's COMING!!

thehill.com...




posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 09:26 AM
link   
Net neutrality. Means FCC won't get involved.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 09:29 AM
link   
Yet another thing we can thank Assange for.... played right into that one didnt he?


Call me paranoid but it sure looks like a controlled release with nothing earthshattering.. and a good example of engineering a need for net rules/laws. I didnt think so at first, but I swear Im leaning over with the conspiracy crowd on this one recently. We and the rest of the world DO have the capability of stopping whatever is needed to be stopped as far as things on the internet being accessed. No one did anything and it just seems strange to me. The whole situation is quite strange.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Advantage
 


Many are asking the same questions. We have the supposedly the best intel in the world and we can't even find Assange and yet Time magazine apparently knows where he is. Really??



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
reply to post by Advantage
 


Many are asking the same questions. We have the supposedly the best intel in the world and we can't even find Assange and yet Time magazine apparently knows where he is. Really??



Yep, gets more and more curious, doesnt it?



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 09:48 AM
link   
FanS
good post Jibe
this really seems to all play into the PTBs hands just right doesn't it?



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 09:50 AM
link   
more anti-wiki threads anything to discredit wiki leaks huh haters?


problem with ats is to manyy paranoid people who think everyone has an agenda .



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by seedofchucky
more anti-wiki threads anything to discredit wiki leaks huh haters?


problem with ats is to manyy paranoid people who think everyone has an agenda .


New to ATS? Paranoia comes with the territory, this is primarily a conspiracy site after all.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


9/11 gave our government 'permission' to invade our right to privacy...
And now Wikileaks gives our government 'permission' to invade our right to free speech.
I say 'permission' because these actions are only possible with the consent of the governed.


Makes me wonder if the whole wikileaks thing is another attempt by our government to control us more.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


What's really confusing is the fact that our government has known about this for how long? Uhh since wikileaks first released the iraq war diaries...that was like 10 months ago.
They knew this was going to happen, yet they waited until now to do something about it?
Either our government is TRULY incompetent, or something else is going on...



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 11:37 AM
link   
It's coming for sure, but I don't think it really is because of wikileaks or that wikileaks is any sort of set up prelude to it. I think that's just timing, and that the wikileaks thing is some 'problem' that they are using to justify their 'reaction, solution' to.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 12:17 PM
link   
The FCC has no authority to regulate internet traffic.

The FCC was created to deal with the enforcement of radio wave usage in respect to ownership of the airwaves.

The FCC has become a criminal organization of thieving autocrats that are determined to force their ideal society down the publics throat at the expense of private property rights and free speech.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 12:18 PM
link   
Wikileaks is most obviously a CIA/FBI creation, as discussed it is likely designed to help fan the flames for increased government power, remember they had been talking about "cyber attacks" as if some remote computer could actually create catastrophic or even miniscule damage to one's infrastructure. When this ruse was revealed for what it was, they needed something else. Enter in Wikileaks, it's the most obvious COINTELPRO operation since the program was put into place some 30 years ago. In addition, Wikileaks fuels war propaganda for Iran(Somehow the Arab countries also want Iran's head to be cut off? ). Iran has sent neither army, nor sea forces towards Israel or any other country and in fact it couldn't afford to.

Well known to the world was the Green Revolution having taken place this last year, what was also well known but overlooked is that Iran is a poor 2nd/3rd world country, having dealt with severe issues far before the global recession to begin with. The Iranian people are as fed up and angry with their government as the majority of the world is with their's. And of course, due to their lifestyle as opposed to Western lifestyle, they will easily take the streets and riot.

So imagine, if Iran suffers a major attack. Replay the Shah event of 1954 because that's what will take place. The Iranian people will be angry, the western forces will say "If your leaders only listened to us" resulting in a bloody coup of the Iranian government. And a Karazi-esque puppet to be added in that sect of the region.

This scenario is all too clear to the Iranian Government and to the Iranian people. In the interest of both, neither want war with the West. The Iranian Government needs Iran to be stable, in order to keep a much deadlier version of the Green Revolution from happening. And in order to eventually become a prosperous nation.

You would think, that given Obama's glorious support for globalism( for which is another topic) he would support Iran and it's desires and it's needs to become a developed member of the International Community. Instead, he like the incumbent Bush before him likes to rattle the war saber whenever it's beneficial.

Since both the incumbent and the current pursue the same agenda, it's clear this isn't a left or right issue. But rather the Globalist State has determined, as it has in the past before and in the future that Iran and other such countries that don't comply, are a threat. Not because they are so to our great United States of America. But rather, they are a threat to globalism.(Bush gave North Korea nukes, yet you don't see the U.S. Government promoting propaganda against NK. Sure, there's the occasional cry but really does our mainstream media say anything about the country that actually has nukes? Nope, why? I don't know.)



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


The same authority has been granted to the EPA as well. These two entities will be their own legislative body that can operate without approval from congress thereby bypassing our what little is left of our checks and balances. Just like the appointments of all of the czars that were almost all done under the radar.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by seedofchucky
problem with ats is to manyy paranoid people who think everyone has an agenda .


Everyone does have an agenda, to survive first and foremost.

The police and agencies need crime to survive, so is it in there interest to get rid of crime, no.



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


Yes I think so.

See the video in this thread. www.abovetopsecret.com...


And then take into account it seems Assange has a plan...


Conspiracies are cognitive devices. They are able to out
think the same group of individuals acting alone


Conspiracies take information about the world in which they operate (the conspiratorial
environment), pass it around the conspirators and then act on the
result. We can see conspiracies as a type of device that has inputs (information
about the environment) and outputs (actions intending to change or maintain
the environment).

What does a conspiracy compute?
It computes the next action of the conspiracy
Now I we ask the question: how effective is this device? Can we compare it to
itself at different times? Is the conspiracy growing stronger or weakening? This
is a question that asks us to compare two values.

Can we find a value that describes the power of a conspiracy?
We could count the number of conspirators, but that would not capture the
difference between a conspiracy and the individuals which comprise it. How do
they differ? Individuals in a conspiracy conspire. Isolated individuals do not.
We can capture that difference by adding up all the important communication

cryptome.org...
Conspiracy as Governance
me @ iq.org (Julian Assange)
December 3, 2006

The best party is but a kind of conspiracy against the rest
of the nation. (Lord Halifax) )As Quoted By Assange)

edit on 8-12-2010 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 10:54 PM
link   
I'm too tired of all this crap to have much more to say about anything. We all saw this coming,and it's getting closer and closer,and no one is in a position to do anything except complain about it.

What's the use?

Anyhow,just passing this on...



“Obama’s henchman goes rogue to ‘guard’ Internet”

Chairman Julius Genachowski is moving forward as rapidly as he dares to add the Federal Communications Commission to the growing list of federal agencies used by President Obama to enforce a radical agenda opposed by the Democratic Congress and an overwhelming majority of voters. Genachowski recently unveiled a revised draft of his 2009 “net neutrality” proposal that would put the Internet under a New Deal-era communications bureaucracy. Under the guise of protecting consumers from being forced to pay for varying levels of delivery access and speed, Genachowski proposes to drag the Internet under the same regulatory authority that puts the FCC in charge of radio, telephone and television broadcasting.


Cpmplete article here...
washingtonexaminer.com...



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join