New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Another FREEDOM Fight
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

Another FREEDOM Fight

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/21/2009 at 13:30
cyborg View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar
God of Wind

Joined: August/24/2007
Location: North Georgia
Status: Offline
Points: 12082
By: John O. Edwards Article Font Size  


Since the Internet took root as a mass communications phenomenon in the mid 1990s, a quiet war has raged in Washington over the extent to which the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) would regulate the new medium.

Until, now the Internet has been largely self-regulated, and the FCC has taken a hands-off approach.

But that could change dramatically soon if the Obama administration has its way.

During the weekend, press reports revealed a stunning development: The Obama administration will announce Monday that the FCC would propose new rules to embrace what it calls "Net Neutrality."

Obama's new Federal Communications Commission chairman, Julius Genachowski, will use a speech to the Brookings Institution, a liberal think tank, to announce the FCC proposals, according to those reports.

On the face of it, Net Neutrality appears to be a popular and fair proposal.

Genachowski will "propose new rules that would prohibit Internet service providers from interfering with the free flow of information and certain applications over their networks," according to the Associated Press.

The FCC rules "would bar Internet service providers such as Verizon Communications Inc., Comcast Corp. or AT&T Inc., from slowing or blocking certain services or content flowing through their vast networks," according to the AP.

But critics contend that the proposals are nothing more than a backdoor way for the FCC to tighten federal control over the Internet by beginning with the regulation of Internet service providers.

The battle lines over Net Neutrality have formed along partisan and ideological lines, with some exceptions.

During the presidential campaign, Obama said he would embrace Net Neutrality — a cause championed by Google and other Silicon Valley companies that don't want large Internet service providers denying or controlling their access to Internet users.

But Republicans have largely opposed Net Neutrality, suggesting self regulation has worked well.

The previous FCC chairman, Bush appointee Kevin Martin opposed Net Neutrality. He suggested it was not needed.

Conservatives see Net Neutrality as a power grab that will benefit big Internet players such as Amazon and Google while stifling smaller competitors.

The libertarian CATO Institute, in a 2004 policy analysis concluded: "The regulatory regime envisioned by Net Neutrality mandates would also open the door to a great deal of potential 'gaming' of the regulatory system and allow firms to use the regulatory system to hobble competitors. Worse yet, it would encourage more FCC regulation of the Internet and broadband markets in general."

Democrats in Congress have pushed for such controls in the past without success. In 2006 House Democrats offered an amendment to make Net Neutrality law, but the motion failed.

At the time Republicans warned of efforts to control the Internet.

"I want a vibrant Internet just like they do," Rep. Lamar Smith, a Texas Republican, said during the 2006 House debate over the issue. "Our disagreement is about how to achieve that. They say let the government dictate it . . . I urge my colleagues to reject government regulation of the Internet."

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/22/2009 at 09:01
Sgt. D View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: February/20/2008
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 3642
And the plot thickens. More foreign interest comming to light. By the fed gaining a foot hold into net regulation it makes it much easier to take control later on. When the nation falls in finacial ruin the world administration will readly have the snake by the head. At some point you won't be able to access the net unless you first let your system scan your hand or forehead.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/22/2009 at 10:59
cyborg View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar
God of Wind

Joined: August/24/2007
Location: North Georgia
Status: Offline
Points: 12082
My thoughts are these.
1) The current administration is concerned about social and private networking sites. Mainly because these are two key areas where the exchange of ideas is known to show that those using them are of a higher intellect. These people are more likely to take offense to such programs as government health care. They are rich in anti socialist philosophy, and the ideals set forth lend strong credence to opposing the socialist agenda. The lame stream media is outed for their bias. People such as Glenn Beck, and the NRA, local gun rights activists etc, all use the internet.
 
2) It is a tool for people to communicate and organize, without the fear that the FCC will shut them down (for now) Remember, a very large number of those that attended the freedom march, and the tea parties were organized via the internet. This is known to be a fact based on the lack of acknowledgement by the lame stream media.
 
3) Information is a huge boon to independence. Look at all of the facts that are readily available with just a keyword. This doesn't sit well with socialists. They want control of everything. It is that control that keeps them in power.
 
4) The speed at which you can get intel via the freedom of information act. That speed allows those inclined to do so to look deeply into legislation before it can be voted on, and make an educated decision about the support or opposition of it, without the media spin.
 
The list goes on and on.  
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/22/2009 at 12:04
Kickboxer View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Moderator

Joined: February/13/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 18344
Originally posted by Sgt. D Sgt. D wrote:

And the plot thickens. More foreign interest comming to light. By the fed gaining a foot hold into net regulation it makes it much easier to take control later on. When the nation falls in finacial ruin the world administration will readly have the snake by the head. At some point you won't be able to access the net unless you first let your system scan your hand or forehead.
let he who hath wisdom count the number of the Beast...
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/22/2009 at 12:09
cyborg View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar
God of Wind

Joined: August/24/2007
Location: North Georgia
Status: Offline
Points: 12082
Absolutely right there Dan..... The push for government controlled Health Care is a huge step into the direction of requiring the implanting of the "already in use" RFID chip.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/22/2009 at 18:22
Ed Connelly View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
God of no Chihuahua

Joined: December/16/2007
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 24220
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/22/2009 at 18:46
RONK View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: April/05/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3199
Originally posted by cyborg cyborg wrote:

My thoughts are these.
1) The current administration is concerned about social and private networking sites. Mainly because these are two key areas where the exchange of ideas is known to show that those using them are of a higher intellect. These people are more likely to take offense to such programs as government health care. They are rich in anti socialist philosophy, and the ideals set forth lend strong credence to opposing the socialist agenda. The lame stream media is outed for their bias. People such as Glenn Beck, and the NRA, local gun rights activists etc, all use the internet.
 
2) It is a tool for people to communicate and organize, without the fear that the FCC will shut them down (for now) Remember, a very large number of those that attended the freedom march, and the tea parties were organized via the internet. This is known to be a fact based on the lack of acknowledgement by the lame stream media.
 
3) Information is a huge boon to independence. Look at all of the facts that are readily available with just a keyword. This doesn't sit well with socialists. They want control of everything. It is that control that keeps them in power.
 
4) The speed at which you can get intel via the freedom of information act. That speed allows those inclined to do so to look deeply into legislation before it can be voted on, and make an educated decision about the support or opposition of it, without the media spin.
 
The list goes on and on.  
 
 This is all absolutely 100 percent dead-on accurate.
Well-stated, Billy.
 
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Another FREEDOM Fight"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
FS: DNZ Freedom Reaper Picatinny 30MM 311PT Black Seamaster Hunting and Shooting Gear For Sale 3
Freedom Arms Mini revolver on gunbroker Brady Firearms For Sale 1
Does higher quality glass help fight mirage? maj paine Tactical Scopes 10


This page was generated in 0.277 seconds.