Seems like it's impossible to get attention for the new Internet Censorship Bill due to be passed i

page: 4
133
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by DoNotForgetMe
 


Hilary is not a Marxist, she's nothing but a sell-out, like the rest of them, ists and isms seem to stop where money starts lining pockets. I think it's well beyond time to stop participating in the ideological war when it's clear our politicians and officials have no ideology what so ever. All of them are a complete farce acting a part so that you and I never see the truth.




posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ex_CT2
Yeah, they're determined--and I mean determined--to bring the Internet securely under their Fascist umbrella


For those of us in the U.S., if the government wants to slowly take away our privacy and alter the Constitution, the only way to fight this is to force additions to our Bill of Rights. It would take a massive amount of votes (which would prove we aren't sheep) to force the government into accepting our conditions of:
1. The government can never shut down the internet.
2. The government can never shut down any information website that actually reports on government
activities to the public.
3. The governemnt can never set up its own set of web servers to force all of those in the private sector
to access the internet through them.
4. The government can only invade the privacy of those that may be deemed a physical terrorist threat
to U.S. property and its citizens. The government shall never assume the role of an internet law inforcement
agency.

So, can we do this, or are we sheep? Quite frankly, I'm afraid of the answer.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by LordGoofus
If CISPA and other similar SOPBA-like laws do actually get through there will be a point where the geeks will say enough's enough and start building their own "new" internet. It's not as far fetched of an idea as it sounds..


Well, I haven't heard anything about 'Anonymous' in a while, but if the government goes too far I have no doubt that a handful of people like Anonymous could simply bog down the internet so that it becomes, basically, shutdown.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 





1. The government can never shut down the internet. 2. The government can never shut down any information website that actually reports on government activities to the public. 3. The governemnt can never set up its own set of web servers to force all of those in the private sector to access the internet through them. 4. The government can only invade the privacy of those that may be deemed a physical terrorist threat to U.S. property and its citizens. The government shall never assume the role of an internet law inforcement agency.


If they are already trampling on the constitution I doubt any new additions would be respected either, but how do you propose this could be done?



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Check out this website, help this thing build some momentum!

www.defendtheinternet.com...

There's still time to bring more public awareness to CISPA. Thanks for helping to keep the conversation alive.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 02:49 PM
link   
Keep pointing you to Edward Bernays, Hegel, and Memetics.

Once you fully understand it you will be permanently unplugged from the delusion and cannot be plugged back in again.

starvision- starcloak-starpower

Where synchronicity, symbolism, and secrets collide...literally.. Expect the unexpected.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by AliceBlackman
 


It's sad but even thought people will and are trying to bring awareness of this subject to others, it's just not going to work how we would like.

The Mainstream Public only cares once it affects/effects ( ? ) them. Once they they have to deal with the problem , then it will become a priority for them.

The thing though, is that people rely on the internet to spread information. So basically they can do anything they want and any time it becomes topic on face book or wherever, just take it down.


Extreme Example ( hopefully will never happen ) : President issues orders to kill "terrorists " , but turns out they weren't terrorists at all, they got bad info and they end up killing 20 civilians for no reason.

The backlash would be HUGE.....unless they stop that info from spreading, which this bill would allow them to do.

And anybody who figures out a way around it has just made themselves a target to be apprehended for no reason and help for the rest of their lives for absolutely no reason.


Obviously extreme....but it would be legal.....Does any person want it legal ? nope.....just those who we let have power.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by AliceBlackman
 
There already doing this they just need a law in place before they get caught. Just the first thing that comes to mind. Plus a second line.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iamschist
reply to post by jiggerj
 





1. The government can never shut down the internet. 2. The government can never shut down any information website that actually reports on government activities to the public. 3. The governemnt can never set up its own set of web servers to force all of those in the private sector to access the internet through them. 4. The government can only invade the privacy of those that may be deemed a physical terrorist threat to U.S. property and its citizens. The government shall never assume the role of an internet law inforcement agency.


If they are already trampling on the constitution I doubt any new additions would be respected either, but how do you propose this could be done?


Not a clue.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 04:12 PM
link   
CISPA has nothing to do with internet censorship, if you believe that then you haven't bothered reading the bill.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nite_wing
reply to post by AliceBlackman
 


Don't bother me. American Idol is on. (Or is it Dancing with the Stars?) Guess I will just have to check the TV Guide. Too busy right now.
edit on 6-4-2012 by Nite_wing because: (no reason given)


You cant really say that. #1 Sopa didn't get passed which means a lot of people helped out with that one and knew it was wrong.Same thing with the labeling of GMO foods except the fda found a way around the petitions. I have to say recently the public is starting to wake up which is making it more obvious what the government and some evil corporations are up too. i do agree with you that a large portion of the population doesn't care about anything even things that effect them. These people tend to look the other way,ignore politics in general which I can say makes some sense because its fixed and focus on things that they like. Amazingly they vote for American idol but that's because its easy and doesn't require research it's just who do you like best as a singer. To have an understanding of politics you need to read all most daily, have a basic understanding of the constitution and bill of rights, know the candidates and their policies, and judge from the list of candidates who you know are lying to you, to get your vote.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Holodomor
 


Little off topic, but dude there are so many Bronies on your page LOL. On topic, yeah i also have a facebook page trying to spread awareness but unless some big names like google and reddit boycott this one it may be hard to stop.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 07:38 PM
link   
There was once the Boston Tea Party. There should now be a light bulb party for the new kinds of bulbs.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 08:31 PM
link   
sopa was designed to fail. This is an often used tactic, given folks attention span is limited and the will to fight, and fight and fight and fight has waned. The floated the sopa bill knowing full well it would fail, in fact I would not be surprised if those who created it did not put out much of the effort to defeat it. PR, mind control, is science, and thousands of years of use have perfected it.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 08:31 PM
link   
The reason no one really cares about sopa, pippa or piggy wig. Is that they are meaningless. A total joke. Who cares? We can steal all the apps , films, tunes, all your medical docs and any info on you and anyone else, just like that. And there is nothing you or anyone else can do. For example i am online right now downloading tons of films on torrent, i don’t care i don’t encrypt anything either, how do i do it- i will tell you, i went into wall mart i got a pay as you go sim card with cash, i put it into a mobile phone i topped up with cash, i tethered my laptop to it and i can download and surf all i want, yea sure 18+ sites are banned and porn too, but torrent no, a ha ha ha ha. That’s just one of a million ways, you will never stop us arrrrrr arr, and to add insult to injury i faked some one else’s IP so by the time i am done i am long gone.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 08:40 PM
link   
next step is ad-hock wifi. no need for pay internet. you will see at the end of this year when the gov kills the net. we have a wifinet redy to run that use only a wifi capable pc, thats all that is needed. its sort of like p2p gnutella but without a isp just wifi connect to a friend and that friend connects to the next etc



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 10:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by DoNotForgetMe
 


Hilary is not a Marxist, she's nothing but a sell-out, like the rest of them, ists and isms seem to stop where money starts lining pockets. I think it's well beyond time to stop participating in the ideological war when it's clear our politicians and officials have no ideology what so ever. All of them are a complete farce acting a part so that you and I never see the truth.


Yes, she is. If you actually would bother to do even minimal research you will find loads of information that gives her away. Ifi you were to be truly honest about it you will have to take the blinders off. Want the truth or your version of what you think is going on?

And also, you say politicians have no ideology. I think you have mistaken this idea with the fact that globalists have no sense of national sovereignty, but who's checking....
www.usasurvival.org...

wizbangblog.com...

And she is certainly a student of Alinsky, met with him, and wrote here thesis about him.

www.msnbc.msn.com...

and how about this from an article by Devvy Kidd


Both Hillary and Bill Clinton are devout Marxists and propagators of world communism. They disguise it very well. No self-respecting woman, regardless of her commitment to a marriage, would put up with a husband who publicly rubs her nose in his infidelity -
The face these two put on for the gullible in no way is representative of their past and what they believe. Hillary is probably the most dangerous woman in this country for freedom and liberty. Below is a reprint of an article from my old newsletter,




From SECRET by David Price:


Price dedicates this research to Richard S. Welch, American CIA Chief-Agent who was assassinated in front of his family, Christmas 1975, due to collaborations between Soviet KGB operatives and the Marxist-terrorist IPS group. The same group Bill Clinton's close friend and advisor, Derek Shearcr, then held membership in, which Hillary Clinton later funded and praised, and from which Bill Clinton chose several appointees.


www.newswithviews.com...


But maybe you got your personal opinion from the Democratic Underground forum
www.democraticunderground.com...


Then there is this


One of Hillary's closest faculty mentors was Thomas I. Emerson, a constitutional scholar affectionately known as "Tommie the Commie." It was in his class that Hillary first laid eyes on a bearded William Jefferson Clinton. She sported Gloria Steinem glasses and board-straight long hair — the former Goldwater Girl had turned iconic hippie.


Barbara Olson, writing in The Final Days, reveals how Hillary studied the Critical Legal Studies school. Unabashedly Marxist, Critical Legal Studies uses a "deconstructionist" model to subvert the law and engineer social transformation.
During this time Rodham met Marian Wright Edelman of the Children's Defense Fund who soon became Hillary's confidante. Hillary spent the summer of 1970 in Washington DC working at her side. Edelman would later admit to the truth of her duplicitous agenda: "I got the idea that children might be a very effective way to broaden the base for change."




smoking gun of Marxism

Those experiences led Rodham to publish "Children under the Law" in the Harvard Educational Review. That article ridiculed the antiquated notion that families should be seen as "private, nonpolitical units." Making the over-the-top comparison that, "Along with the family, past and present examples of such [dependency] arrangements include marriage, slavery, and the Indian reservation system," Rodham argued for the need to "remodel" the family and grant children a legal right to sue their parents.


The summer of 1971 Hillary traveled to California to work at the Oakland law office of Robert Treuhaft, described by the New York Times as a "radical law firm that specialized in fighting every kind of discrimination and social injustice."
Treuhaft was a former member of the Communist Party USA, leaving the party only after Khrushchev's revelations about Stalin's massacres. Treuhaft later confided that Hillary "certainly ... was in sympathy with all the left causes."
/ex]

By the end of her stint at Yale, friend Sara Ehrman described Hillary's politics as "liberal, ideological." Representative Dick Armey was more candid: "Her thoughts sound a lot like Karl Marx. She hangs around with a lot of Marxists. All her friends are Marxists." Author Barbara Olson put it this way: "Hillary was a budding Leninist, Menshevik, Bolshevik, Trotskyite ... What really mattered to Lenin — and what Saul Alinsky taught Hillary to value — was power."

www.renewamerica.com...



So, truly, you should either devote yourself to understanding what Marxism is and who espouses it in comtemporary politics, or don't speak about what you don't understand.
edit on 7-4-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)
edit on 7-4-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)
edit on 7-4-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 11:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Iamschist
 

We are legion. they are few. I'm a pragmatist myself, but there's no dealing with these people.

lamp post+ rope + official.=answer.
(some self-assembly may be required)



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 12:16 AM
link   
The people of America do not have a voice friend! If you have the influence or cash you can hire some actors to pretend that there is some kind of consensus, but a true consensus is a fallacy in this country! SOPA just greased us up my man! Most will feel like they wouldn't dare because the people have spoken, but actually it was a media and big business sponsored affair that tanked SOPA. The lack of action now just shows what is really in the works.

Find a way to give the masses a voice, a real voice! Brainstorm anyone?
edit on 8-4-2012 by moonleaf because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 12:45 AM
link   
I'm afraid it's simply too late for anyone to stop this, these wheels were set in motion a while ago. The army has a cyber security division and they cover this in West Point these days. In addition outside contractors are using symantics and web bots to to track trends on the internet and actually PREDICT future events before they happen, almost like that crappy Tom Cruise movie.
I sometimes wonder if wikileaks and anonymous were a false flag op set up just to make this happen.





new topics
top topics
 
133
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join