Home » Why the Government Must Control the Internet

Why the Government Must Control the Internet

January 22, 2012 byThe Godfather

It wasn’t too long ago that that we had three sources of national news: ABC, CBS, and NBC. Print media were limited to the daily newspaper and national news magazines like Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News & World Report. No more.

The media gatekeepers are few and far between today. The last gate – the biggest gate – is the internet. If it can’t be controlled, the people can’t be controlled. That’s why governments around the world are working to implement ways to control it. A nation like China just does it, but here in the United States the pretense of a legitimate legal remedy must be found.

Congress got slapped down with an all-out internet frontal attack that shut down their phone lines. Republican Senator Everett Dirksen (1896–1969) explains what happens when sustained pressure is put on Congress: “When we feel the heat, we see the light.” Gary North comments:

The Good Old Boys learned that they cannot conduct business as usual any longer — not when Internet autonomy is concerned. The Internet can mobilize millions of voters in hours. The Good Old Boys had not yet figured this out on Tuesday. They are slow learners.

Al Gore didn’t realize what he had invented.

Even the leftist New York Times understood what happened. Of course, they’ve seen the effect of the internet on their industry through a drop in subscription rates and ad revenue:

And for all the campaign contributions, Washington parties and high-priced lobbyists the old economy could muster, nothing could compare to the tentacles the new economy can reach into Americans’ everyday lives through sites like Wikipedia.

The most encouraging aspect of the protest was the action people took. What politicians count on is a short memory and activist exhaustion. These guys won’t stop. Harry Reid has postponed a vote on the controversial laws. He’s waiting for the outcome of the 2012 election. This is from the “Techdirt” site:

Think the blackouts were just a “publicity stunt” that didn’t wake up the American people to a serious problem with the legislative process? Wikipedia has now revealed that an astounding eight million people used its tool to look up their elected officials’ contact info. It’s not yet clear how many actually called, but some information on calls is starting to come out, and it sure sounds like a lot of people called.

We heard from multiple Senate staffers that the phones — both in DC and back home in the district offices — were ringing non-stop with complaints about the bill. Our own calling widget, care of Engine Advocacy, got a tremendous amount of usage — including over 2,000 phone calls per minute at peak calling times. Meanwhile, Google’s online petition scored 4.5 million signatures… and that’s the number that was reported earlier in the day. I’m sure it was higher by the end of the day. Anyone think this isn’t a mainstream issue yet? More importantly, can anyone explain why various Senators still want to move forward with this bill?

The battle’s not over. Keep a sharp eye and keep the heat on. Your congressman is counting on you to fatigue of “eternal vigilance.”

Tagged with

censorship, Harry Reid, internet, SOPA, Techdirt

screeminmeeme

When the people fear the government, it's tyranny.
When the gov fears the people, it's liberty. …T. Jefferson
WiTy42

While individual rights and free speech are very important, the internet has opened up a Pandora's box that, ultimately, will cause one problem or the other. On the one hand, with government control, the user is constrained by what Big Brother decides can be watched, read and listened to. Government-driven censorship moulds the user into the individual (or, rather, non-individual) that the man in power wants him to be. In the 1984-like scenario, the same people that would constrict and totally control the flow of information are the same people that would have no qualms about stopping free elections and declaring themselves dictator with an end to lifetime rulership. Not a nice scenario.

But the flipside isn't much nicer. A totally free and open internet – to which everyone has access – is just as dangerous. Forgetting, for the moment, about all the filth that practically validates the (economic) existence of the 'web, the cacaphony of voices, views and lies passed off as truth leaves the reader at the mercy of his own lusts – or at least limited knowledge. What voice do you listen to? What is true? What is a lie? And the constant barrage of degrading news (e.g. the general public reading the details of the Penn State scandal) has its effect as well. We are told that the love of many will wax cold BECAUSE INIQUITY WILL INCREASE. Whose iniquity? Just your own? Or do the actions of others (and being privy to the sordid details) have an effect on a bystander? Over time, it serves to numb the conscience – especially as these "news" stories come out on a more regular basis. By slowly wading into the cesspool, our definition and sense of sin becomes more and more dilute – until at last we are approving what we once abhorred. So the moral compass AND clarity of truth will both suffer in an unrestrained internet. In that scheme, moral and political anarchy will be the rule of the day. And anyone in power will have (more or less) free reign to do whatever they want – and even release news reports about it – since the moral outrage of the public will be obliterated (and the truth of any statement will be countered by SOMEONE on the internet). Pilate's question is being begged on a large scale.

We are told that there is to be (or is?) a day in which anyone who wants to buy or sell must have the mark of the beast or be killed. That understanding of "buying and selling" goes well beyond the business transactions. Even Jesus told us to "buy the truth and sell it not". The buyer and seller in Ezekiel 7-9 has a broad application to any transaction of any sort (intellectual, economic, political etc…). So could it not be that the mark of the beast involves control over every aspect of the lives of men? Doesn't that fit the "beast" known as the internet? The identity of the beast may not be technology, but the mark of it may well be technological control (at least in this age). And unless you are willing to buy only with plastic/numbers and get your views from the internet, you are not really involved in today's society? Are you? How many people AREN'T on Facebook? How many DON'T have debit cards?

I'm not saying that this is the interpretation of Revelation, but it deserves some thought. Babylon is described as being the hold of every foul spirit and the cage for every unclean bird. If that isn't true of the internet (though certainly it doesn't have exclusive claim on that), then it isn't true anywhere on God's green earth.

So when God says "Come out of her my people…that ye be not partakers of her SINS…" (not just judgment, but the sins themselves!) ….. well, I'll let the reader draw his own conclusions.
http://www.liberty-in-our-time.com Rocky Frisco

Al Gore pulled that lie out of his rear. The real father of the internet was my cousin, J. C. R. Licklider, as detailed in "The Dream machine."
Eddie

I have one good reason. The Progressives, [ commies in sheeps clothing, ] aloud to tell lie after lie distortion after distortion all to undermind our form of government. As an example; Everyone on t.v. etc. calls our Constitutional Republic a democracy. This is a lie and should be censored. If we still had our Constitutional Republic we wouldn't have all of these problems we face today. We would have sound money [ gold standered ] no income tax, [ copied from the communist manifesto ] and a government confined to the Constitution. It is this magic democracy conjered out of thin air that has brought us all this trouble. Think about it.

Read more: Why the Government Must Control the Internet http://godfatherpolitics.com/3293/why-the-governm…
upaces88

@ Eliwhit:
Sorry I couldn't find you! I am having to respond here instead of your original responding to me as I mentioned that there are so many internet providers who I believed will fight back for us.

Thank you for responding; and sadly, I think you have an excellent point that they
toosmarttovoteGOP

The title should be, "Why I Think the Government Must Control the Internet".
poacher

this fight is just beginning. sopa and pipa are stalled so there is an international treaty in the works to do the same freaking thing. the statists never rest. i believe this one is another u.n. stinker but am not positive on that yet.
nanny

GO BACK AND READ WINSTONS COMENT— HE IS SO RIGHT —– I JUST FINISHED WATCHING THE MOVIE 1984– BIG BROTHER IS DEFINATELY WATCHING US AND THE INTERNET IS THE WAY THEY HAVE TO KEEP UP WITH WHAT WE ARE SAYING ABOUT THEM—READ YOUR HISTORY AND SEE HOW HITLER ROSE TO POWER—- LITTLE CHILDREN WERE TAUGHT TO SING HIS PRAISES— AND MUCH MORE TO LET US KNOW THIS REALLY ISNT ABOUT COPYING MOVIES OR CDS— ITS ABOUT KEEPING UP WITH WHAT WE HAVE TO SAY TO ONE ANOTHER—— GOD HELP US !!!!!!
A. Terranova

In light of this article and those responding to it, is it not ironic that of all the Republican candidates running for president in 2012 Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who will fight FOR the people's rights under the U.S. Constitution, the law of our land? Neither Romney, Gingrich or Santorum, all big government politicians, will do that. They will maintain the status quo, which is why Ron Paul is being shunned by both the media and the Republican establishment. The majority of politicians in both parties want power and control for the sake of self-preservation and not for smaller, less invasive government. Only WE THE PEOPLE will determine who wins and who loses. If things don't change very soon, the big losers are going to be us, the people.
Elaine

@ Tripped01…Do you realize what would happen if we allowed Obama to have control of the internet?
We would NEVER hear the truth about anything unless “it pleased him.”
He had a Priest arrested today for praying on the streets outside of the WH. A PRIEST!!!

He just SOLD 7 islands to Russia off the coast of Alaska.

He GAVE eminent domain to the Chinese of a stand-alone city to be built in Idaho and Texas.

He just allowed 80,000 Muslims to find refuge here while Christians are being slaughtered daily and he turns his back on them.

We WOULD NEVER be able to know about any of this on the TV News.

Yet, you think it is best to GIVE control of the internet to the Government.

http://profile.yahoo.com/5T56CKN2PIVV7SAX7TDAKY577Y William

Did you hear about the National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order Obama signed on Friday, March 19, 2012? This enables the president to declare martal law, providing him with dictatorial powers over the United States and the American people whenever he chooses to implement it. This virtually provides Obama with his very own ace-in-the-hole, guaranteeing him a pass should he lose the 2012 electrion. Something else that is disturbing . . . no radio commentator will openly discuss this issue with me. Does this take the heat off of government control of the internet?