LEAKED! The NWO Internet Takeover AND Kill Switch Agenda! If You Are Reading This - IT AFFECTS YOU!

page: 12
132
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   
Sorry everyone i wish I could enlighten the current situation but I know way too much info for my good soo...well each person decides the course of the future...hahaha




posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Jayesper
 


Do you really have anything constructive to add or do you just want to be more vague? The only thing to do is.... I don't want to say anymore....come on man you don't have nothing to say worth while. There is no way to combat these people and their goals, they will get passed wether we like it or not. If you sign a petition, sorry its not gonna stop these psychopaths.



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Awakened2012
 



ANOTHER ONE, spewing out nothing constructive about how they know something we don't. Please entertain us with the oh so wise information you have obtained. This bill really has some of you shook, talmbout you dont want to say such n such. COME ON MAN! STOP IT!!!(Ditka voice.)



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 06:41 PM
link   


"United Nations 'Should Not Control The Internet' Say EU MPs"


The United Nations should not be allowed to 'take over the Internet', European MPs have urged.

Currently the Internet is controlled by a range of groups, many based in the United States. They include Icann, which is a nonprofit group in California that maintains the web address system on behalf of the US government.

Nations will attend a conference in Dubai next month to review the current structure of online services, and to secure "the free flow of information around the world, promoting affordable and equitable access for all".

But according to recent reports, mostly in the Russian press, there is now a move by some countries to switch control to a UN agency.

In a document leaked online, Russian officials said:

"Member states shall have equal rights to manage the internet, including in regard to the allotment, assignment and reclamation of internet numbering, naming, addressing and identification resources and to support for the operation and development of basic internet infrastructure,"

Russia and other countries are reportedly worried that some element of control over a vital communications network is in the 'hands' of one nation.

Ahead of the meeting in Dubai, MPs in the European Parliament have insisted the UN's International Telecommunications Union is not the right body to take control of the net.

MPs voted in favour of a resolution which said the move would "negatively impact the internet, its architecture, operations, content and security, business relations, internet governance and the free flow of information online".

edit on 24-11-2012 by SOLIDSNAKE101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


Glad to see that you're apparently in a chipper Holiday spirit!

Allow me to be more clear. Up until now there were vague references to a secret document. NOW the document has leaked and can be reviewed and checked for veracity and intent.

But I guess details are irrelevant when we've got Ron and Rand telling us what to think?

~Heff


I'm indifferent on Ron, but Rand is a conniving little snot!

He's one I'll NEVER listen to! I'm with ya Heff



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 07:51 PM
link   
I do apologize for my absence from this thread today - but, it is the season, as they say and real life obligations kept me away.

I'll try to address pages of questions with a few generic answers:

1) The idea of a "kill switch" is not something I am concerned about in a universal manner. The potential for abusing it lay in local terms. Remember the Iranian woman who was shot a couple of years ago? Nadia I think her name was? Her entire story became public because of social media. If the power to simply "kill the waves" had existed, her story would never have gotten out and international reaction to her death would have never happened.

This type of localized loss of ability to connect is the real danger involved in this proposed resolution and in the secret EO signed by President Obama a few weeks ago that closely mirrors the same language.

2) Of course they aren't going to take away our distraction. The folks who are saying that the net needs censorship, IMO, are hyperbolic. The issue of child porn has been tabled several times.

The reality of the situation is that maybe ten years ago? Such things were accessible - even by accident - through web searches. But now? That evil is already mostly contained and, believe me when I say, if you are accessing such materials: A) You had to go out of your way to do so. B) You have been logged and can expect not just the FBI but probably Anon as well.

Blaming this subject as a need for censorship is a straw man of the highest order.

I truly wish more of the older members who can remember the days of Compuserve, AOL, and Prodigy would have chimed in and discussed the very real fact that the net used to exist in the form they wish to return it to now. A tightly controlled gateway system - based upon a new "pay for content" subscription system.

Those who use Steam will relate. When you log into Steam some games are free. Others are on sale. Still others are quite expensive. Hulu - the same. Some free content, other things require a paid subscription. And your cable "on demand" - another example.

THAT is the future model of the Internet if the bad men have their way. It's not that they want to take away our Internet. They do, however, very much want to take away our unlimited access both in terms of bandwidth and content.

As far as social media goes - and those who say "Dude they won't kill Facebook or Twitter". I agree. I predict that these apps, and the future versions of them will always be free and open. Because they are used for data mining. The members who have discussed sites demanding real names have it right. That is the direction we are heading. Currently it takes a bit of work to track down the troublemakers who go out of their way to be anonymous. Those who are tasked with patrolling the net don't like this - it makes them work harder.

Oh - and another thing. There are agent provocateurs here - and everywhere else online. Don't let anyone tell you different. It used to be easy to spot them - and sometimes it still is. New, generic accounts that post only on one topic. Using usernames that don't get any search engine hits for other sites and throwaway information.

But they've adapted. Research it. Now you might meet a person here with a fully fleshed out Facebook page - pictures and family information included, more than one field of posting interest, and a very real "feel" to their online personas.

And they know what they are doing. They know the buzzwords to use for acceptance in any subculture. So always - always post as if you KNOW that a Federal agent is looking over your shoulder. To do any less would be folly. Oh, and I am not suggesting that you be silent or compliant. I am simply saying know the risks.

There is a fine line between provocative discussion and finding oneself on a "no fly list". Honestly... I don't fly so I don't care.


~Heff



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 08:21 PM
link   
I feel as though a kill switch would be aimed at conservatives



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 08:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


Good latest post some very smart lessons can be learned from what you just said, i always knew there were agent provocateurs here i mean it doesn't take Albert Einstein or Nicolas tesla to figure this out, forms of cointelpro are all over the place and i'm sure it's been said by other mods here before but your the first one i saw say it so kudos.....


edit on 24-11-2012 by King Seesar because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


Why is the term kill switch used?
I find it hard to believe we can kill a man made communication system
with the,
flip of a switch,
and it would no longer exist as in the terms of dead, killed, etc.
We would have to kill the men,
that communicate in this matter also,
to be successful in the kill.



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 08:42 PM
link   
I can remember back in the 1960's my friend in third grade got 2 years probation for taking phone parts out of the dumpster and building his own phone company in or neighborhood.
He was shut down temporally, but in now way did it kill communication.

In those days, us kids we were all trying to reload our toy guns
in so many seconds trying to reenact a single bullet theory,
but communication was never killed.

edit on 24-11-2012 by Rudy2shoes because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 08:58 PM
link   
No offense to you OP but,
beating drums,
smoke signals,
and any copper wire that has not been scraped yet.
Communication will never be killed.



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


Whilst searching multiple websites, each spelling out a 'Threat to Life as we at present thinke we know such', many say the same as this guy

www.jeremiahproject.com...



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by violet
I wondered about the part of each person identifying themselves, but thinking it might only apply to if you post something incriminating, you would have to reveal yourself to authorities.


The entire point is for them to already know who you are by forcing you to use your legal name, or maybe even an Internet ID number which is connected to your driver's license or maybe Social Security Number. Whatever the case may be, it will be almost fool proof. Possibly even reading your thumb print in order for you to log on at all. Trust me, it's coming.


I'm not using my real name


That will soon change. It's also about preventing people from hiding behind fake names. Also, Some folks are less likely to speak so ill of the masters of puppets or Government when using their real identity. You will most likely not even have an option to not share your posts or whatever the case may be, with the general public and those who know you.

A simple search of your name or number and everything pops up. Facebook was the BETA test for the foolish Sheople, and they all herded to it. Now you got people posting politics to every single person that they are friends with where some of them never even knowing the posters politcal beliefs prior to Facebook, now do. This last election, I watched people un-friend eachother that have been friends for 20 years. Yep, even more division now, and The deciders love it!


I make my own rules.


No you don't. You may think that you do, but you don't. You see, even 10 or 15 years from the time that your real name will be required on the internet, they will be able to go back and find out your beliefs on politics, religion, New World Order ect. That way they can round up anyone they deem as a threat to their political ideology.

Maybe they will pardon everyone for anything said under a fake internet name, but make a law that says from here on out everyone is responsible for what they say online by having their real name stamped on it.


There must be anti stalking laws out there that would cover not having to do that.


I would not wager on it my friend


This needs to be clarified what it actually means.


What is there to clarify? I don't claim to have their manifesto or hand book but I assure you that I am damn close to what is going to be Law in the not so distant future. ~$heopleNation
edit on 24-11-2012 by SheopleNation because: TypO



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bildo
Here's a hint---It says your "legal name". That doesn't mean it has to be your lawful name. There is a difference.
The legal name is the name in all capital letters on the birth certificate. That's the "Legal Person". Corp US definition of "person" is: a trust; a corporation. Is that you?
Still haven't figured out how to get around this though. Maybe form a Trust and put your internet service in that name. But I suppose none of that matters. I'm sure they already know who each of us is and where we live....


No they don't, Not enough man power to do that. That's why they will just make it a law to reveal yourself online. However, I am sure they know everything about anyone who has ever made any threats against them on the internet. Anyone who belongs to a certain group, race, religion or organization of course.

Like I said before, a big part of this is making people accountable for what they say. Everything you do online will be connected to your legal name, Internet ID Number, drivers license, social security or whatever they come up with after your thumb print is read in order for you to log onto the internet. Bildo didn't say all that buddy, you did! This is more about keeping the Sheople herded and in line then spying on everyone.

However, Years down the road some Political ideology that gets into power anywhere in the world will be able to find out what anyone believes or believed. Then, it's off to the box cars for some of them. ~$heopleNation



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


Heff, Very good post brother, I agree 100% with what you layed out. I never could understand why some posters say such crazy things assuming that nobody is listening or watching in this case. I talk about our corrupt Government and the internationalists all the time here but I don't come unhinged while foaming out the mouth screaming start a revolution, start a revolution! The truth of the matter is, It takes a madman to suggest such things in the real world.

Plus, You could be just a normal guy with a family who has strong opinions and you book a trip to some place sunny and all of a sudden you can't take them because you mouthed off like a raving lunatic on some politcal or conspiracy website. Would that be worth it? I mean, I know you don't fly, but you're a pretty level headed dude anyway. I doubt you would have any problems.

Anyway yeah, People need to think about what they say online. You don't have to change your beliefs, but be wise about your statements, opinions and even rants. Some day my friends, your real name might be stamped on it all. ~$heopleNation



posted on Nov, 25 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Awakened2012
 


Wait... you know how to save everyone from mass destruction, but you won't tell anybody, and that's funny. Do you pull wings off fireflies for fun too?



posted on Nov, 25 2012 @ 05:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bildo

Originally posted by violet

Originally posted by SheopleNation
The days of hiding behind fake screen names will soon be gone, and you all better understand that because eventually every single person on this planet will only be allowed to post under their full legal names. ~$heopleNation


I wondered about the part of each person identifying themselves, but thinking it might only apply to if you post something incriminating, you would have to reveal yourself to authorities.
I'm not using my real name . I make my own rules. There must be anti stalking laws out there that would cover not having to do that.

This needs to be clarified what it actually means.

Here's a hint---It says your "legal name". That doesn't mean it has to be your lawful name. There is a difference.
The legal name is the name in all capital letters on the birth certificate. That's the "Legal Person". Corp US definition of "person" is: a trust; a corporation. Is that you?
Still haven't figured out how to get around this though. Maybe form a Trust and put your internet service in that name. But I suppose none of that matters. I'm sure they already know who each of us is and where we live....


There's something you've mentioned here about the all capital letters for our names. I've forgotten the term. Maybe its maximum capitis versus minimum capitis. It's something like that and it dictates who owns us. My original birth certificate is not in all caps but the new one I just had to get for acquiring a new passport is all capital letters.

This was changed a few years ago, that all documents would start capitalizing your name. I started noticing it on bills and anything mailed to me by the government, and any new ID I've acquired.

If you have any old ID or invoices or bank checks , check it out.

Sooner or later we all end up getting this new ID because of loss, theft or the new regulations for acquiring important documents, like me having to get a new passport with the new post 9/11 rules. I could not 'renew' my passport. My old birth certificate no good now. My new photo ID is the new chipped technology or whatever is in it.

I had been holding onto my old documents, not wanting to get the new ones but this passport I needed changed all that. I'm a legal Canadian resident trying to get my British passport and had to go through US homeland security, because I had " the old blue passport". It's a new rule We must go through the embassy in DC now.

Now I don't know this for sure and not able to locate a source at this time because I read about it some years ago now. Apparently if say you are summoned to court for example, you do not have to attend if they did not capitalize your name on the papers. It has some stupid meaning that you don't really own your own self, you are not you, but owned by your government, if its capitalized. I don't remember if that means they are your guardians. I've spelt the term wrong so not having any luck trying to post a source on this.

ETA
OK it's maxima capitis diminutio
edit on 25-11-2012 by violet because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2012 @ 06:19 AM
link   
reply to post by SheopleNation
 


I understand what you're saying.

I think it could be more what you suggested like for example I could still be violet on here or any other username on other sites, but it would have already been tagged as the real me in some other activity I engaged in online. So if I post something they can connect the dots to me right away. Even though I don't use Facebook or twitter, it could be when I banked online, or used my credit card or iTunes, I leave a fingerprint behind. Or perhaps it could even be like you suggest, I would have to use my actual fingerprint or iris scan. I'm looking at and touching my ipad to type all this. How do I know what's installed in this device? A lot of devices are touchscreen now. All my cameras have a front facing camera now. I have an app that can look through my PC webcam, I'm sure they can do the same without my knowledge if I've inadvertently activated the consent. And any pop up box alerting my computer is disabled. GPS is installed in these devices and smartphones.

There's something I read once about fibre optic cables being put under roads that can track your whereabouts, maybe even disable your cars engine. This brings me back to an earlier post in this thread where I mentioned bouygues guy who owns French telecom and is the biggest player in road building. He owns COLAS as well. He or his affiliates control most regions of who, who can build any new roads or bridges, etc. LaFarge is the other one, they control most of the worlds aggregates and concrete. Put it this way, they love disasters. As a side note Hilary Clinton was on board of directors along with Bush Sr during the Gulf. War. There was a story that can't be found now linking her to Katrina, lafarge had not effectively upgraded the levees. Whenever any city has to build up their dykes or levees, because a major flood could occur, its their gravel that is used. They pretty much own it all. Even if it has another company name assigned to it.

I read or hear these things and can't supply the sources. Apologies.
Anybody can look this up if they dig hard enough.
edit on 25-11-2012 by violet because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2012 @ 08:24 AM
link   
Hopefully this is a hoax.



posted on Nov, 25 2012 @ 09:41 AM
link   
i feel this is imminent, but i hope it doesnt happen, i need internet





new topics
top topics
 
132
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join