Hi Benjamin. You say: “The ability of our government to interrupt all Radio and Television transmissions (via the Emergency Broadcasting Service)”

This is NOTHING new. It goes back to the old Conelrad days along with “clear channel” stations.

If there is a national emergency I want to know about it. If I don’t have time to take shelter from a tornado or nuke I’m gonna blame you.

Rob

The ability of our government to interrupt all Radio and Television transmissions (via the Emergency Broadcasting Service),added with the FCC’s Unconstitutional Net Neutrality,Trusted User Internet ID Rules and PARASITE regulations, gives this Administration UNFETTERED control of all means of Electronic Communications. This is a primary military tactic of every invader going into a country. It prevents the civilian population from reacting or uniting to counter the threat until it’s much too late. Afterwards all communications (including hardcopy Newspapers) are used for the invading forces propaganda and indoctrination agendas (by censoring all opinions and news reports detrimental to the invader’s agenda). All the Classic Signs of a Police State, Violating America’s First Amendment Freedoms. NO ADMINISTRATION NEEDS THIS KIND OF POWER! THE POSSIBILITY OF “MISUSE” VS. “SAFETY” IS NOT SOMETHING TO BE GIVING THE BENEFIT OF A DOUBT ABOUT!!!

Obama would have “vetoed the bill any way” it scars me to think that he has the ability to now cut off the radios and TVs using the emergency broadcast and now the internet as well. Talk about an ability to black out all news and information. I am worried that he is getting ready to declare martial law at the onset of more violence from the “Occupiers” that he had his adviser tell them to get more “Militant” and with in days violence broke out in Oakland he is backing them and their demands to spread the wealth, to make the USA into a Socialist nation and has the backing of all the Communist-Marxist in congress to do so. He scares me because he will not follow the Constitution and does not think the American public knows what is best for itself as well as he does.

First, before the inevitable purveyors of red-herrings descend, I have worked in the IT industry for decades, and, I am a strong supporter of “Net Neutrality” (having fought for it for years). In fact, I fully support Federal legislation which would directly enact the principles of un-monitored, un-censored, and un-manipulated, citizen-Internet-access. The Federal Legislature (the Congress, and the Senate) does have the authority (and responsibility) to insure this freedom, since, Internet-providers, effectively, operate as Government-sponsored general communications-monopolies. The Internet (and Internet Service Providers) should function like a phone-company [a "Common Carrier"] (simply providing access and services). They [ISPs] should not operate like a cable-company (moderating, monitoring, blocking, “throttling”, and controlling, customer data-flow, and use).

However, the FCC’s actions in this matter are a complete charade. First, the FCC’s “neutrality guidelines” actually, specifically, allow all of the worst elements of consumer-abuse which prompted the public outcry for “Net Neutrality” in the first place. Under the FCCs “regulatory guidelines” ISPs will actually, very specifically, be allowed to monitor, intercept, slow-down, or flatly block any, and all, data traveling across their networks… as long as they [the ISP] make the unverifiable claim that they were merely “managing data traffic”, or were trying to prevent some vaguely-described illicit activity, such as… say… alleged, “copyright infringement”.

However, the FCC does not, and must not, have the authority to regulate (via bureaucratic fiat) the private communications traveling through “common carriers” (the way the FCC arbitrarily regulates the “content” of broadcast media, such as commercial TV and radio). And, this entirely-false claim that the FCC is actually attempting to insure “Net Neutrality”, is nothing more than a smokescreen (red-herring) to cover-up the expansion of an, unchecked, “regulatory” body [the FCC] over the Internet, itself.

“Net-Neutrality” must be established and protected, but, by law (which functions under the checks-and-balances of Constitutionally-instituted government, and public-control)… -not- by capricious, arbitrary, politically-appointed, bureaucratic-regulation (operating outside of any true public oversight, or control).

Put bluntly, the FCC is -not- trying to protect citizens/consumers (read the actual FCC “Net-neutrality regulations”). The FCC is merely -using- “net-neutrality” as a thinly-veiled excuse to, un-Constitutionally, create a precedent which justifies their “regulatory” power over the Internet (…as though, the Internet were a nationalized, state-resource… instead of the direct, citizen-to-citizen, communications medium that it actually is).

Control…control….control….of every aspect of our lives. What ever happened to the over-the-air shut down that was suppose to happen on 11/9? Does anyone really believe it was going to get by the Senate and go to Obama. Obama would have been made to a choice. Just like the oil pipeline he squashed today. A complete jobs killer. He had to make a choice. Progressive enviromentalists or the people. He knows he has the unions in his pocket so jobs for them go on the back burner. Need to please the enviromentalists for the votes. Nothing gets by this as..ole, nothing.

I beleive that Harry Reid in not presenting the proposed bills to the senate has done more to purposely destroy the “American” way than even Obama! If he was taking orders from the “guilty” one, he should be very ashamed of himself! That he is not ashamed shows the quality of his character!

Thats is because the senate is controlled by the demon rats and Harry ” the simpleminded ” Reid . They all need replaced desparately , then we can go about fixing things .

GOD BLESS OUR BRAVE VETRANS!

It is a shame that a chosen few can control the life and death of our military men and women with nothing more than the lust for power under the guise of politically motivated rhetoric about democracy and freedom, greed and the simple stroke of a pen to keep us in a perpetual state of war.

Veterans Day Montage – American Anthem
Norah Jones – Tribute to my late father who served in Vietnam and to all who’ve served in the U.S. Military… Past and Present

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1B81kW814qA&feature=related

Reply

This kind of rule is what put the private railroads out of business. A law was passed that did not allow railroads to charge different prices to different customers. That’s free enterprise for you isn’t it? The government has no business getting involved in businesses. If a service or product is lucrative other people will develope businesses in it and inovate driving the price down. Once the government steps in either making barriers to entry prohibitive to protect the existing businesses (crony capitalism) or save the public from their service providers (regulations) the smart money will hesitate to inovate in that field.

The government needs to learn its place and that is not in our pockets or micromanaging the people. They are supposed to be serving us not ruling us.

we need more regulations from the fcc, epa, dept of energy, fema, fda, and most of the other useless government agencies. they make great decisions. anytime our govt comes up with some new regulations, we loose a freedom.

When ever govt is involved in anything it gets partisan and really screwed up. I don’t think its very wise to keep allowing the govt to do everything for us or we reach a point of becoming slaves.

For DanB:

So if you can’t afford ten gigabites of bandwidth to get your message heard, you should just keep your mouth shut? Or is this more a deal of IF you can buy your way into office, via highspeed internet, then fine and dandy. If you have the money, no one should be allowed to compete with you if they can’t match your expenses? Now YOU sound like a good Rockefeller, if you don’t own it already, buy it or destroy it. That way everybody has to come to you for the product you have to sell.

I know of some in IT that think is great. But how many real people truly need to force an ISP to offer maximum bandwidth without paying for it? To regulate other peoples traffic to optimize their own?

By the way, I am a hobbyist turned IT pro. Have been in IT for about 3 to 6 years depending on how you reckon it. And I oppose net neutrality. The pessimist in me knew it was going to happen because it favors the politicians and big government…. And the IT pros were for it will eventually get a rude awakening that this was a rotten bill of goods. But they don’t see it know, so I doubt they’ll see it until it far far too late and they find that they have no liberty left. Personally, I think if they really want that great ISP bandwidth then they should PAY FOR IT. That is the advantage of the free market. If you are willing to pay enough, there may be someone willing to offer it.

I want to hear from big government-loving utopians who monitor this website. If it’s safe to assume that they’re at least “thinking” about this topic, I want to know what’s going on between their ears.