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.

 

Franken: Under FCC's 'neutrality' rules, 'the Internet as we know it would cease'

page: 1
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Franken: Under FCC's 'neutrality' rules, 'the Internet as we know it would cease'


www.rawstory.com

If they pass and telecoms are allowed to move forward with their plans, "the Internet as we know it would cease to exist," Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) concluded in an editorial published by Huffington Post.

"That's why Tuesday is such an important day," he continued. "The FCC will be meeting to discuss those regulations, and we must make sure that its members understand that allowing corporations to control the Internet is simply unacceptable."
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.huffingtonpost.com




posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 11:25 AM
link   
Franken: Under FCC’s ‘neutrality’ rules, ‘the Internet as we know it would cease to exist’

So more gouging likely to pass on Tuesday...
If this passes, everyone should dump their ISP and go with WiFi.

From the Huffington Article-

For many Americans -- particularly those who live in rural areas -- the future of the Internet lies in mobile services. But the draft Order would effectively permit Internet providers to block lawful content, applications, and devices on mobile Internet connections.

Here's what's most troubling of all. Chairman Genachowski and President Obama -- who nominated him -- have argued convincingly that they support net neutrality.

But grassroots supporters of net neutrality are beginning to wonder if we've been had. Instead of proposing regulations that would truly protect net neutrality, reports indicate that Chairman Genachowski has been calling the CEOs of major Internet corporations seeking their public endorsement of this draft proposal, which would destroy it.


Has anyone heard of this measure? It isn't really being reported on...

So, does this mean that the ISP's will dictate what gets put up for general consumtion? That the big corporations will be in charge of Internet and its content?

www.rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 11:28 AM
link   
Didn't he sign that other internet bill that was supposed to censor the internet a few weeks ago? My mind is drawing a blank. Do you remember this?

Ah yes the Copyright infringement act. That was it.
edit on 20-12-2010 by mayabong because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   
Perhaps he did, it wasn't mentioned... I will look.

Here is a snippet from an article yesterday about the Comcast Merger.


Regarding the pending $30 billion combination of Comcast and NBC Universal, now in its final stages of review by the FCC and Justice Department, Franken expressed concern that the commission might issue its decision during the holidays. "It needs to do this in the light of day, not hidden in the middle of Christmas and New Year's. The American people have a right to know about this merger," Franken said.

I will be supremely disappointed if approval of the merger is slipped through when most of America is unwrapping presents and spending time with their families, not worrying about their cable or Internet bills," he added.

The lawmaker, who reiterated his view that the deal would harm consumers and competition, said some critics have visited his office discreetly to say they're opposed but fear retaliation if they speak out. "That is the definition of a company with too much market share."




techdailydose.nationaljournal.com...



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by thegoodearth

So more gouging likely to pass on Tuesday...
If this passes, everyone should dump their ISP and go with WiFi.



Wifi is a good idea in principal but far from a solution given the range and the fact that you'd have little more than a local area network without access to the wider internet. In otherwords an intranet in which the only content is provided by those within it.

Sad fact is that the vast majority are unwilling to give up their facebook/msn/vod/skype ect ect ect, and as such the major ISPs will continue on.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 11:49 AM
link   
That stuff was on Drudge this morning.

I think it's interesting that everybody whined about how much the Bush administration tried to "censor" and "erode civil rights."

Now, we have a "progressive/liberal community organizer" in office and more is happening with fascist civil rights erosions in a few months than happened in the previous eight years of the Bush administration.

Barack obama and his hand-picked minions, along with the policies they wish to enact, are contrary to basic American tenets - freedom, liberty, the rule of law, justice.

Let me restate it again for those of you who either do not understand or who do not want to accept the facts:

liberalism = fascism
socialism = NAZI
progressive = fascist
obama = statist/fascist





posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 11:55 AM
link   
I can only laugh at the such pathetic attempts to 'control' the internet.

Whatever 'controls' they will attempt are only man made.

What one man can make, another can do better, and it may not be the from the ranks of the controllers, but from the population.

Whatever that had been taught and the foundations of such knowledge, MUST be passed on to others, or in the event of mishaps, such as the one possessing such knowledge passes on, then no one else will know how to eradicate problems that will surely arise, flawed as we humans only are.

When such knowledge are passed and HAVE TO BE passed, it is only natural another or others will access to such knowledge, or even more certain stilll, the ingenuity of mankind's curiosity will attempt to back engineer such systems to learn from it, find its loopholes and exploit it to the full.

The only way to 'control' the net is to destroy and banned it. But no inept Corporation master will willingly do so, unless one amongst them have nothing to lose for he will probably be bankrupted or placed in Levenworth for his crimes against humanity. But he is only one. There will be billion others whom depend on the net for wealth and greed is their addiction that will never allow the net to be ceased, which is their archilles heel.

So, go ahead, by all means. Sitting back to watch how the animals are gonna fail yet again. There is not stopping mankind's eventual progress and evolution. Killing us all and themselves is the only way. Free will is a power unto itself. The darkside of it had never won a war before, only temporary battles perhaps.

Get the popcorn ready, sit back and watch clowns at work ! :-)



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 11:56 AM
link   
The internet does not need regulation.

This is just further proof that government feels the need to control everything.

The problem is government, not the internet.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by MMPI2
 


nnnnnooooooo, more has not happened under obama

I mean

Patriot Act.

Seriously, just the Patriot Act.

And even if this goes through as is, it's not a HUGE EROSION OF OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES. It really sucks, it's a pretty sizable erosion of net neutrality. But it only would be limiting the liberties of Wireless users, not the entire network. And details on what exactly it would do are still scarce. We're being fearmongered for no good reason -- it is clear that this isn't optimal, but I think we should really reserve our "HEAD FOR THE HILLS!" reactions until we see what's actually in this regulation.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:04 PM
link   

TextFor many Americans -- particularly those who live in rural areas -- the future of the Internet lies in mobile services. But the draft Order would effectively permit Internet providers to block lawful content, applications, and devices on mobile Internet connections.


The mobile internet is how many access the internet, as well as a clear way for them to "filter" content with their eyes toward the future. The amount of people using mobile internet is increasing exponentially. How this affects us all is big, especially with added costs.



This Mobile networks like AT&T and Verizon Wireless would be able to shut off your access to content or applications for any reason. For instance, Verizon could prevent you from accessing Google Maps on your phone, forcing you to use their own mapping program, Verizon Navigator, even if it costs money to use and isn't nearly as good. Or a mobile provider with a political agenda could prevent you from downloading an app that connects you with the Obama campaign (or, for that matter, a Tea Party group in your area).

It gets worse. The FCC has never before explicitly allowed discrimination on the Internet -- but the draft Order takes a step backwards, merely stating that so-called "paid prioritization" (the creation of a "fast lane" for big corporations who can afford to pay for it) is cause for concern.


www.huffingtonpost.com...
edit on 20-12-2010 by thegoodearth because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Never thought I would EVER agree with Al Franken.

But in this, he has the right of it. I guess like a stopped clock, he's right twice a day.

Tomorrow they vote on this Trojan horse. I say the internet is fine as is.

FCC leave it the hell alone!

This reminds me of the days when "liberal" and "progressive" Bill Clinton was in office and his lackeys tried to ban high-level encryption for personal use for US citizens, and they couched the measure under a seemingly positive name as this.
edit on 20-12-2010 by mydarkpassenger because: Spelling



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Starred and flagged OP, thanks.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Solasis
 



Yes. More has happened under barack obama to erode civil liberties in two years than under the past four previous presidential administrations.

The obama administration has reinforced the basic tenets of the "patriot act" that took the bush administration eight years to implement. Obama did it in 20 months. Barack obama, dangling on the strings of his puppetmaster george soros, strengthened the ability to suspend habeas rights, warrantless wiretapping, rendition practices...and now they want to start the incrementalist process of controlling what people say, do, read and learn on the internet.

We're seeing the incrementalism associated with fascism unfold before our eyes.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Solasis
reply to post by MMPI2
 


nnnnnooooooo, more has not happened under obama

I mean

Patriot Act.

Seriously, just the Patriot Act.








Are you serious? Your going to identify one thing that suits your argument and not touch base with the many things in the first 2 years of the Obama admins., that has been an infringement on the US rights?

How bout an unconstitutional health care? Care to justify that topic?
Or how bout:

The Obama Administration IP Czar Victoria Espinel has been holding meetings with ISPs, registrars, payment processors and others in a bid to get them to block access to websites “dedicated to infringing activities”. However, as we have documented, the government deems such infringement to include political opinions which are antagonistic toward the state, leaving the door open for state censorship of free speech on the world wide web.


source: theswash.com...

and...

He believes that the Second Amendment conveys an individual right to bear arms. But, he supports reasonable regulations on those rights.



He declined, to take a position on whether the DC gun ban violates the 2nd Amendment.


source: www.talkleft.com...

Where in the 2nd Amendment does it say there should be regulation? Hint: It doesn't.


Care to continue with your disinformation?

edit on 20-12-2010 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:28 PM
link   
DUH..

THAT'S why we have the new v6IP network. It's already been implemented just not "activated"...

They already had a solution for this problem many years ago.. Just like TSA scanners. They were built years ago, and the Christmas Bomber was whom activated this situation :S



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by MMPI2
That stuff was on Drudge this morning.

I think it's interesting that everybody whined about how much the Bush administration tried to "censor" and "erode civil rights."

Now, we have a "progressive/liberal community organizer" in office and more is happening with fascist civil rights erosions in a few months than happened in the previous eight years of the Bush administration.


I wish they would ban you already - you are obviously a troll or a paid shill.

No one else could believe the garbage you spout.

So Obama had "Free Speech Zones"? Obama made the DHS, ANOTHER government agency that spends billions spying on us? net neutrality had its birthplace in the Bush Administration. Ever heard of the aptriot act? But im sure you will find some BS lie to say about that too.

So stop with the outhright lies and attempts to change history. Im not an Obamabot by far, but every thread I see you on, you are posting inflammatory lies and blatant mistruths and representing them as fact, forcing people to argue with you and derail the subject...just like right now.
edit on 20-12-2010 by aching_knuckles because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by MMPI2

We're seeing the incrementalism associated with fascism unfold before our eyes.



I'll say, and you are certainly doing your part to help it.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by MMPI2
That stuff was on Drudge this morning.

I think it's interesting that everybody whined about how much the Bush administration tried to "censor" and "erode civil rights."

Now, we have a "progressive/liberal community organizer" in office and more is happening with fascist civil rights erosions in a few months than happened in the previous eight years of the Bush administration.

Barack obama and his hand-picked minions, along with the policies they wish to enact, are contrary to basic American tenets - freedom, liberty, the rule of law, justice.

Let me restate it again for those of you who either do not understand or who do not want to accept the facts:

liberalism = fascism
socialism = NAZI
progressive = fascist
obama = statist/fascist




Congress = Bankster/Corporate Law making Dept.
CIA = Cocaine Indoctrination and Assasinations
Democrats = Liberal Corporate Fascists
Republicans = Conservative Corporate Fascists
Obama = Rockefeller employee
Bushes = Rockefeller employees
Clintons = Rockefeller employees
USA = Corporate Fascist States of King Rockefeller



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


Disagreeing with you =/= Disinformation

And seriously, bringing up George Soros, you threw all of your credibility out the window. You're the one who's spreading disinformation, and you probably don't even know it.

Boy, requiring everyone in the nation to have health insurance. That sure is an erosion of civil liberties. Yeah, there are flaws in it -- the parts where some incapable individuals will have to pay for it, that sucks a lot. But that ain't exactly the fault of the people who, you know, actually wanted the bill to pass.

But, yeah. trying to establish ways for everyone to be able to pay for health care. What a fascist monster.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by aching_knuckles
 


your reply belies the anger and hatred common to the progressive/statist mindset.

i truly feel sorry for people who interact with the world in this way.





top topics



 
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join