Translate

Friday, May 29, 2015

FCC CHAIRMAN WHEELER ARGUES TO SHACKLE INTERNET~TOUTS SOCIALIST GLORIES OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION

SOCIALIST POWER GRAB OF THE INTERNET ISN'T SO 

"NEUTRAL" AFTER ALL

             

FCC Argues to Shackle Internet

BY C. MITCHELL SHAW
SEE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/computers/item/20949-fcc-argues-to-shackle-internetrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

When FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler (shown) began pushing the most recent attempt at Net Neutrality, his first public salvo was an op-ed piece written for Wired. The February 4 article was his attempt to make the case for the necessity of government regulation of the Internet. Throughout the article, his disdain for the free market is evident. The only way for the Internet to survive, he would have us believe, is to allow the FCC to regulate it as a public utility and make rules for acceptable practices that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have to follow. Wheeler wrote,
After more than a decade of debate and a record-setting proceeding that attracted nearly 4 million public comments, the time to settle the Net Neutrality question has arrived. This week, I will circulate to the members of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) proposed new rules to preserve the internet as an open platform for innovation and free expression. This proposal is rooted in long-standing regulatory principles, marketplace experience, and public input received over the last several months.
One is left to wonder how the Internet ever survived all these years without government regulation. Wheeler seems to believe — or at least expect the American public to believe — that government regulation can do what the free market cannot: “preserve the internet as an open platform for innovation and free expression.”
Going even further, Chairman Wheeler claimed that it was regulation of the telephone industry that made the Internet possible in the first place:
The internet wouldn’t have emerged as it did, for instance, if the FCC hadn’t mandated open access for network equipment in the late 1960s. Before then, AT&T prohibited anyone from attaching non-AT&T equipment to the network. The modems that enabled the internet were usable only because the FCC required the network to be open.
Companies such as AOL were able to grow in the early days of home computing because these modems gave them access to the open telephone network.
Wheeler’s claim is based in a lack of faith in the free market. He assumes that the modems that were developedafter telecom regulation were necessary for the Internet to emerge, and he speculates that some other form of communication device would not, could not, have been developed in the absence of that regulation. The free market answer to that is that the Internet would have simply evolved differently. Other technology would have been invented to make the connections needed for people to access the Internet. The modems that he claims required government intrusion into private-sector business simply would not have been needed because there would have been something else that did not require government intrusion. The best evidence of that is that the Internet has continued to evolve by using newer technology. Not many people are using dial-up modems anymore.
The truth is, even without telecom regulation requiring telephone companies to allow open access for Internet modems, “companies such as AOL” would likely have found another way to get the job done. That’s just how free market innovation works.
As Wheeler continued his effort to make his case, his anti-free market bias became even more obvious. He related a story of his own failed business model, which he seemingly believes proves the case for the glories of government ­regulation:
I personally learned the importance of open networks the hard way. In the mid-1980s I was president of a startup, NABU: The Home Computer Network. My company was using new technology to deliver high-speed data to home computers over cable television lines. Across town Steve Case was starting what became AOL. NABU was delivering service at the then-blazing speed of 1.5 megabits per second — hundreds of times faster than Case’s company. “We used to worry about you a lot,” Case told me years later.
But NABU went broke while AOL became very successful. Why that is highlights the fundamental problem with allowing networks to act as gatekeepers.
While delivering better service, NABU had to depend on cable television operators granting access to their systems. Steve Case was not only a brilliant entrepreneur, but he also had access to an unlimited number of customers nationwide who only had to attach a modem to their phone line to receive his service. The phone network was open whereas the cable networks were closed. End of story.
End of story, indeed. Setting aside the assertion that failing at something makes one an expert at it, his point is irrelevant. And misleading. His business did not fail because of a lack of government regulation; and AOL did not succeed because of government regulation. There are some important facts missing from Wheeler’s narrative of why his company failed and AOL succeeded:
• NABU’s network operated primarily in Ottawa, Canada, whereas AOL (which was known as Quantum Computer Services until 1991) was based in New York and covered the United States. Consequently, Quantum/AOL had a larger base from which to attract subscribers.
• NABU’s Internet service required the purchase of a very expensive specialized computer (made by NABU) to connect to its network. Quantum/AOL was designed (at first) to work on the very popular Commodore 64. Quantum/AOL later expanded its software and network to support other popular computers as the market changed.
• NABU relied on cable systems that did not support bi-directional connections that were essential to the network NABU was developing (NABU stands for Natural Access to Bi-directional Utilities). Quantum/AOL used telephone lines, which are bi-directional.
• NABU was heavily subsidized by the Canadian government. Quantum/AOL was a privately owned company that went public in 1992. If government involvement equaled success, NABU should have succeeded and Quantum/AOL should have failed.
That Wheeler overlooks all of that and sees the sole reason for his company’s failure and AOL’s success as the presence or absence of government regulation says more about his worldview than it does of the proper province of government. Rather than take responsibility for the failure of his company and learn a lesson that could be applied to future endeavors, he chooses to blame the free market for his failure. Now he is simply attempting to apply that broken worldview and failed logic to the greatest innovation man has ever known. It’s as if he wants to destroy the Internet for everyone because he couldn’t succeed in business with it. If you can’t join them, beat them.
That worldview is really at the heart of the whole Net Neutrality debate. Do we as a people believe in a free market, or do we believe that only government can do what none of us can do? How we answer that question will decide the fate of liberty for generations to come. In the digital age, there is no distinction between digital liberty and any other liberty. If we allow government to take over the Internet, we will lose the greatest tool for liberty we have ever known. End of story.

REPUBLICANS GANG UP ON RAND PAUL BECAUSE HE DARES TO EXPOSE THEIR GLOBALIST AGENDAS & AID TO ISIS

RAND PAUL MALIGNED BY FELLOW REPUBLICANS FOR EXPOSING TRUTH
SANTORUM, RUBIO & CHRISTIE ACTUALLY BELIEVE THE NSA IS NOT COLLECTING PHONE RECORDS BY THE MILLIONS & THAT THE REPUBLICANS HAVE NOT AIDED ISIS WITH WEAPONS DROPS
Republican rivals gang up on Rand Paul


Rick Santorum Slams Rand Paul on ISIS: 'I'd Expect to Hear That From Maybe Bernie Sanders'; Paul Detained by TSA at Airport


Santorum: Rand Paul Has A 'Fundamental Misunderstanding' Of ISIS


DICTATOR OBAMA ASSUMES "EMERGENCY POWERS AUTHORITY" OVER EVERYTHING EVEN WATER





"EMERGENCY POWERS" GIVE BARACK OBAMA AUTHORITY OVER JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING DURING A MAJOR NATIONAL CRISIS

Barack Obama is the most powerful president in all of U.S. history
LEGISLATIVE & JUDICIAL BRANCHES FAILING 
AT CHECKS AND BALANCES
SEE: http://www.infowars.com/emergency-powers-give-barack-obama-authority-over-just-about-everything-during-a-major-national-crisis/republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Presidents have always exercised emergency powers, but now thanks to dozens of new laws, regulations, court decisions and executive orders, Barack Obama is the most powerful president in all of U.S. history.  Of course the U.S. Constitution does not actually give the president any special powers during a time of national emergency, but over time presidents have decided that they should be able to exercise such powers and the courts have generally agreed with them. 
During World War II and prior to that, these emergency powers were largely uncodified and were primarily used during times of war.  But since World War II things have completely changed, and this has particularly been true since 9/11.  Over the past decade or so, a whole host of extraordinary powers have specifically been given to the office of the president, and all that it takes to exercise them is a major “national emergency”.  So if we do have a full-blown economic collapse, a historic natural disaster, a significant war or a massive pandemic, Barack Obama could use the emergency powers that he has been given to essentially take authority over everything.
There is not a single document or series of documents that contain all of the emergency powers that Barack Obama could potentially wield during a major national emergency.  As I mentioned above, these powers come from literally dozens of laws, regulations, court decisions and executive orders.  But in this article I will discuss a few important documents.  One of these is a presidential directive that was issued during the second term of George W. Bush.  It is entitled NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD – 51/HOMELAND SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/HSPD – 20, and you can take a look at it on the FEMA website right here.  This document is primarily concerned with the continuity of our federal government in the event of a catastrophic emergency.  So precisely what would constitute a “catastrophic emergency”?  The following is how the document defines that term…
“Catastrophic Emergency” means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions;
That sounds quite broad to me.  It could apply to all sorts of scenarios.
If we do have such a “catastrophic emergency”, the president essentially becomes a dictator at that point.  The document certainly talks about the need to ensure that “constitutional government” continues, but during the course of the emergency there really is not much of a role for the other two branches of government to play.  Instead, the “shadow government” takes over under the overall command of the president.  The following is a short excerpt from the document…
The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government. In order to advise and assist the President in that function, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism (APHS/CT) is hereby designated as the National Continuity Coordinator. The National Continuity Coordinator, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (APNSA), without exercising directive authority, shall coordinate the development and implementation of continuity policy for executive departments and agencies. The Continuity Policy Coordination Committee (CPCC), chaired by a Senior Director from the Homeland Security Council staff, designated by the National Continuity Coordinator, shall be the main day-to-day forum for such policy coordination.
Of course the 11 page document that we have on the FEMA website is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to continuity of government planning.  Unfortunately, most of the plans are top secret and are not allowed to be seen by the public.  Astonishingly, this even applies to members of Congress.  The following comes from Wikipedia
On July 18, 2007, Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR), a member of the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security, requested the classified and more detailed version of the government’s continuity of government plan in a letter signed by him and the chairperson of the House Homeland Committee, which is supposed to have access to confidential government information. The president refused to provide the information, to the surprise of the congressional committee.
Another document that raises a lot of red flags is an executive order entitled “National Defense Resources Preparedness” that was issued by Barack Obama on March 16th, 2012.  This particular executive order updates previous executive orders, and it gives the president extraordinary authority during a time of national emergency.  Below, I have posted most of section 201 of that executive order.  As you can see, it potentially gives Barack Obama authority over just about everything during a time of national emergency if he feels it is needed for “national defense”…
Sec201.  Priorities and Allocations Authorities.  (a)  The authority of the President conferred by section 101 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071, to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or orders (other than contracts of employment) to promote the national defense over performance of any other contracts or orders, and to allocate materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense, is delegated to the following agency heads:
(1)  the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;
(2)  the Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;
(3)  the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;
(4)  the Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;
(5)  the Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and
(6)  the Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.
(b)  The Secretary of each agency delegated authority under subsection (a) of this section (resource departments) shall plan for and issue regulations to prioritize and allocate resources and establish standards and procedures by which the authority shall be used to promote the national defense, under both emergency and non-emergency conditions.  Each Secretary shall authorize the heads of other agencies, as appropriate, to place priority ratings on contracts and orders for materials, services, and facilities needed in support of programs approved under section 202 of this order.
A similar executive order regarding national communications was issued on July 6th, 2012.
But the powers that Barack Obama could potentially wield during a time of national emergency are not just limited to what is written down.  This may shock many Americans, but it is true.  In the past, presidents have used their “emergency powers” to suspend habeas corpus, to place American citizens in internment camps and to seize private property.  The following comes from Wikipedia
A claim of emergency powers was at the center of President Abraham Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus without Congressional approval in 1861. Lincoln claimed that the rebellion created an emergency that permitted him the extraordinary power of unilaterally suspending the writ. With Chief Justice Roger Taney sitting as judge, the Federal District Court of Maryland struck down the suspension in Ex Parte Merryman, although Lincoln ignored the order. 17 F. Cas. 144 (1861).
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt similarly invoked emergency powers when he issued an order directing that all Japanese Americans residing on the West Coast be placed into internment camps during World War II. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld this order in Korematsu v. United States. 323 U.S. 214 (1944).
Harry Truman declared the use of emergency powers when he seized private steel mills that failed to produce steel because of a labor strike in 1952. With the Korean War ongoing, Truman asserted that he could not wage war successfully if the economy failed to provide him with the material resources necessary to keep the troops well-equipped. The U.S. Supreme Court, however, refused to accept that argument in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, voting 6-3 that neither Commander in Chief powers nor any claimed emergency powers gave the President the authority to unilaterally seize private property without Congressional legislation. 343 U.S. 579.
And it is important to keep in mind that Barack Obama now possesses far more power than any of those presidents ever did.  All it is going to take for him to exercise those powers is a major national emergency.  This is something that Jim Powell discussed in an article for Forbes
Not long after that, we found ourselves in an open-ended national emergency declared on September 14, 2001 and extended since by both George W. Bush and Barack Obama.  This means the president has standby powers from hundreds of statutes that would enable him to re-introduce military conscription, seize private property and in myriad ways establish a government-run economy.
Thankfully, things are still somewhat stable for the moment so Obama does not have a reasonable excuse to use all of the powers that he has been given.  But that could change at any time.  If we do see a “catastrophic emergency” in the next year or so, there are very few limits on what Barack Obama would be able to do.  That includes potentially postponing or suspending the 2016 election so that he can remain in office throughout the course of the national emergency.
We have never seen such a thing happen before, and hopefully we never will.  And of course it isn’t just Barack Obama that we need to be concerned about.  A future leader of this nation could potentially be even worse than him.  It has been exceedingly foolish for us to give a single person so much power in the event of a “catastrophic emergency”, and in the end we may regret this bitterly.
_____________________________________________________________

Obama Is Taking Over All Water
Published on May 29, 2015
Presidents have always exercised emergency powers, but now thanks to dozens of new laws, regulations, court decisions and executive orders, Barack Obama is the most powerful president in all of U.S. history. Of course the U.S. Constitution does not actually give the president any special powers during a time of national emergency, but over time presidents have decided that they should be able to exercise such powers and the courts have generally agreed with them.
http://www.infowars.com/emergency-pow...


Obama Administration's New EPA Rules 

Expand Control Over All Waterways

EXCERPT:
In a White House statement released on May 26, President Obama stated: “I called on the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to clear up the confusion and uphold our basic duty to protect these vital [water] resources.”
Obama went on the explain that the two federal bodies will provide businesses and industry with the “clarity and certainty” they need to determine which waters are protected by the Clean Water Act, and ensure that polluters “can be held accountable.”


BONO OF U2 "CHRISTIAN" GROUP PRAISES CATHOLIC IRELAND'S VOTE FOR GAY MARRIAGE~PUSHING EUGENICS BY REDEFINING MARRIAGE~THINKING OF MOVING OR STORING GOLD THERE?~THINK AGAIN

FALLOUT FROM POPE FRANCIS: 
"WHO AM I TO JUDGE?"
THIS, EVEN IN HYPER CATHOLIC IRELAND?
DON'T STORE YOUR PRECIOUS METALS HERE
U2-HATERS OF CHRISTIAN FUNDAMENTALISTS
1 John 4:5-"They are from the world; therefore they speak as from the world, and the world listens to them."
John 15:18-19-"If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you."



IRISH VOTERS APPROVE GAY “MARRIAGE” 
(Friday Church News Notes, May 29, 2015,www.wayoflife.orgfbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) - 
In a major sign of the times, by a margin of 60%, voters in the Republic of Ireland (not to be confused with Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom) backed a measure to amend its constitution to allow gay “marriage.” Ireland is a Roman Catholic country. Leo Varadkar, a Cabinet minister, said, “We’re the first country in the world to enshrine marriage equality in our constitution and do so by popular mandate. That makes us a beacon, a light to the rest of the world, of liberty and equality. So it’s a very proud day to be Irish” (“Ireland Has Voted,” CNSNews.com, May 23, 2015). Mr. Varadkar doesn’t believe the Bible. The move to legalize gay “marriage” is not light, but darkness. Marriage was created by a holy God as the first human institution, and it cannot be shaped by human whim like a nose of wax. The God who created marriage is not dead, and every man will give account to Him. The supporters of gay “marriage” frame the issue in terms of human rights and equality, but the issue is actually about the nature of marriage. This proud generation thinks it is wise enough to change 6,000 years of human tradition based on God’s Word, but the result will be confusion and the destruction of all standards of morality.“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!” (Isaiah 5:20).
____________________________________________________
AGENDA 21 ENABLERS
BONO: PAL OF GLOBALISTS & ENVIRONMENTALISTS
VERY CLOSE FRIENDS OF 
LIBERAL RICH, POWERFUL, 
AND "CHRISTIAN" LEADERS LIKE THE POPE (DEFENDER OF THE POOR) WHO WANT SOCIALIST REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH, CARBON TAXES;
TIES TO EUGENICS PROPONENTS;
NEO-COLONIALIST "SAVING THE EARTH" 
BY KILLING UGANDANS
THE WORLD LOVES ITS OWN:

FRIEND OF THE GATES & THEIR "EUGENIC" VACCINATIONS
EUGENICISTS WITH THE MONEY FRONTING BONO:
Hand and mouth:
FUSION OF ONE WORLD "RELIGION" & GOVERNMENT TO ENSLAVE & MURDER MILLIONS; THE FUNDAMENTALISTS ARE THE FIRST TO DIE:
FRIEND OF SINNERS DOESN'T MAKE HIM JESUS: 
HOMOSEXUAL ELTON JOHN & BONO; NEITHER ARE REPENTANT:
Posted by mysteriousways 0comments

U2 PROMOTES HOMOSEXUAL “MARRIAGE” 
(Friday Church News Notes, May 29, 2015, www.wayoflife.org fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) - The rock band U2 posted an Instagram note in support of same-sex “marriage” in Ireland’s recent referendum. The note said, “In the name of love vote yes.” The phrase is a reference to their song “Pride (in the Name of Love)” which is supposed to be about the life and death of Jesus Christ. Three members of the band (Bono, The Edge, and Larry Mullen, Jr.) profess to be Christians and have a great influence in evangelicalism, the emerging church, and the contemporary worship movement. Phil Johnson calls Bono “the chief theologian of the Emerging Church Movement” (Absolutely Not! Exposing the Post-modern Errors of the Emerging Church, p. 9). Eugene Peterson, author of The Message, says that Bono is a prophet like John the Baptist (foreword to Get Up Off Your Knees: Preaching the U2 Catalog). Brian McLaren and Tony Campolo say that Bono is moving the world toward the kingdom of God (Adventures in Missing the Point, 2003, pp. 50, 51). Bill Hybels interviewed Bono at Willowcreek Community Church’s Leadership Summit in 2006, and Rick Warren invited Bono to Saddleback Church to help launch his P.E.A.C.E. program. But when judged biblically, U2 is destitute of spiritual truth, and the fact that the band is wildly popular with contemporary Christians is a fulfillment of the apostasy described in 2 Timothy 4:3-4. Joseph Schimmel observes that “Bono has led people into a version of Christianity that is slippery, undefinable, and liberal (The Submerging Church, DVD, 2012). The members of U2 rarely attend church, and “Sundays find them in a pub rather than in a pew” (U2: The Rolling Stone Files, p. 14). In a wide-ranging interview with music reporter Michka Assayas, Bono never gives a scriptural testimony of having been born again (Bono on Bono). Bono says that he believes Jesus is the Messiah and that He died on the cross for his sins and that “he is holding out for grace,” but Bono’s “grace” is a grace that does not result in radical conversion and a new way of life. It is a grace without repentance, a grace that does not produce holiness. Nowhere does he warn his myriads of listeners to turn to Christ before it is too late and before they pass from this life into eternal hell. In fact, the only thing he says about heaven or hell is that both are on earth (Bono on Bono, p. 254). The members of U2 do not believe Christianity should have rules and regulations. “I’m really interested in and influenced by the spiritual side of Christianity, rather than the legislative side, the rules and regulations” (The Edge,U2: The Rolling Stone Files, p. 21). Yet there are more than 80 specific commandments in the book of Ephesians alone, the same book that says we are saved by grace without works. Though salvation is by grace, it always produces a zeal for holiness and obedience to God’s commands, for we are “saved unto good works” (Ephesians 2:8-10). According to Titus 2, the grace of God teaches the believer to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts and to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world. Bono says that the older he gets the more comfort he finds in Roman Catholicism (Bono on Bono, p. 201). Though he speaks positively of Romanism, Bono has nothing good to say about “fundamentalism,” falsely claiming that it is a denial that God is love (Bono on Bono, p. 167) and calling it vile names (p. 147). Bono defines love by the rock & roll dictionary rather than by the Bible, which says, “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous” (1 John 5:3).
____________________________________________________

The Emerging Church and the Bono-Screwtape Connection (Official DVD Trailer)


Published on Sep 5, 2014

Many Emergents view Bono, frontman of the popular rock band U2, as their "prophet" and main icon in the Emergent Church movement. Bono has stated that his stage persona's during U2's Zoo TV tour were inspired by C.S. Lewis' "Screwtape Letters," but in what way and for what purpose? Is this how the bible teaches us to conduct ourselves as Christians? How is Bono continuing to influence the church today? Learn why truth is sometimes stranger than fiction as we reveal the shocking truth behind what inspires this Emergent rocker.

To learn more about our ministry, please visit:
http://www.goodfight.org


Bono's Hidden Eugenics Agenda


Published on May 30, 2012

The scale of fraud perpetrated by U2′s Bono and the globalist cabal he fronts for is staggering. The likes of Bono, Queen Elizabeth, Al Gore and other top globalist fronts revel in guilting the public all while advancing their semi-covert eugenics and global control operation.


Bono's Secret: Frontman for Genocide
Published on May 28, 2012
The scale of fraud perpetrated by U2's Bono and the globalist cabal he fronts for is staggering.
THE BONO ONE FOUNDATION:
SEE: http://www.one.org/us/person/bono/
Bono's ONE foundation under fire for giving little over 1% of funds to charity
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/artic...
Costly Red Campaign Reaps Meager $18 Million
http://adage.com/article/news/costly-...
Bono, Facebook and the Challenge of Following the Jesus of the Poor
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kristi-...
FACEBOOK BILLIONAIRE: Bono's investment firm rocks Facebook IPO to the tune of $1.5 billion
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/music...
20 Steps Ahead, 3 Steps Back: U2's Bono could lose $342 million after Facebook shares plummet
http://www.nme.com/news/u2/63985
Elevation's Investment Partners
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_L...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blacksto...
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jam...
http://www.nationalreview.com/planet-...
Queen to make William Knight of the Thistle to mark his 30th birthday
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/art...
http://www.elevation.com/EP_IT_FLASH.asp


Bono's One Foundation Keeps 98% of Charity Funds