FCC Rules Designed to Stifle Internet Political Speech

Net neutrality is a classic Trojan horse

by Kurt Nimmo | Infowars.com | March 13, 2015

On Thursday the Federal Communications Commission made public a document detailing its so-called net neutrality rules that were approved two weeks ago on a 3-2 vote.

A PDF version of the document can be downloaded here.

The rules impose heavy regulations on what is currently a free and open internet and will ultimately result in federal government micromanagement.

The rules will also accelerate and finalize a long term government objective of censoring political enemies and limiting their use of the internet. Serious political opposition to the establishment has flourished on the internet and the federal government has stumbled in previous efforts to regulate speech its considers politically threatening.

Control of the internet is the primary motivation behind the FCC rule-making agenda, not net neutrality and the fallacious call to regulate corporations and enforce the principle that all data is equal.

This was made clear by opponents to the FCC report and order on remand.

“Americans love the free and open Internet. We relish our freedom to speak, to post, to rally, to learn, to listen, to watch, and to connect online. The Internet has become a powerful force for freedom, both at home and abroad. So it is sad to witness the FCC’s unprecedented attempt to replace that freedom with government control,” writes FCC commissioner Ajit Pai.

The desire to assert that control became obvious in February, 2014, when the FCC terminated a study that threatened the First Amendment right to freedom of the press. The study on “critical information needs” would have asked journalists about their “news philosophy” and raised the specter of an underhanded attempt to revive the Fairness Doctrine.

“The Commission’s decision to adopt President Obama’s plan marks a monumental shift toward government control of the Internet. It gives the FCC the power to micromanage virtually every aspect of how the Internet works. It’s an overreach that will let a Washington bureaucracy, and not the American people, decide the future of the online world,” Pai continues.

“Let’s leave the power where it belongs — with the American people. When it comes to Americans’ ability to access online content or offer political speech online, there isn’t anything broken for the government to ‘fix,’” Pai wrote in a Politico op-ed in February.

“It is difficult to imagine where we would be today had the government micromanaged the Internet for the past two decades as it does Amtrak and the U.S. Postal Service. Neither of us wants to find out where the Internet will be two decades from now if the federal government tightens its regulatory grip. We don’t need to shift control of the Internet to bureaucracies in Washington.”

Concerted Effort to Neutralize Political Speech on the Internet

The entire rubric of cyberespionage and cybersecurity is designed for state control over the individual, not for protection from Anonymous and hackers in China or Russia.

“Some argue that heightened surveillance, restrictions on Internet freedom and even censorship are necessary to protect intellectual property rights, prevent cyberespionage, fight child pornography, and protect national interests such as nuclear power plants from hackers,” Fox News noted last February.

“Consequently, lawmakers — even President Obama in his State of the Union address — have been motivated to take steps to stem the hacking tide. However, the road to better security could also stifle free speech.”

In fact, the drastically overblown and often fictional threat of cyber security is engineered specifically to curtail speech, not harm from child pornographers but from political opposition to the state.

Recently refurbished cyber security legislation, having failed to become law in the recent past, is now being dusted off in congressional committees. Once enacted, cybersecurity measures will run concurrent to FCC rules and will impose a matrix of control over the internet.

The FCC and the corporate media continue to prortray the latest effort to regulate the internet as a win for the little guy, when in fact regulation will not diminish corporate control of the internet.

As Infowars.com noted in February:

Obama and the federal government have bent over backwards to portray net neutrality as a win for the little guy. In fact, despite all the siren warnings about socialism and the FCC by Obama’s opponents, the agency is in the pocket of the telecommunications industry and always has been.

Its current appointed boss, Tom Wheeler, is a former lobbyist for the cable and wireless industry, with positions including President of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association and CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association.

“Net neutrality is a classic Trojan horse,” I argued. “It will be used not only to censor speech and marginalize opposition to the political class, but will also deliver the internet to large and forever consolidating media corporations.”

As the NSA and the behavior of corporations in league with the intelligence community reveals, the internet will, after the FCC rules take hold and cybersecurity laws are implemented, finally be sanitized of meaningful political opposition and, as well, serve as a surveillance platform and a tool for corporate advertisers to categorize and target individuals.

The Secrets Of The Lost Persian Empire | Lost Worlds | Timeline

Lost Worlds investigates the very latest archaeological finds at three remote and hugely significant sites - Angkor Wat, Troy and Persepolis. Lost Worlds travels to each site and through high-end computer graphics, lavish re-enactment and the latest archaeological evidence brings them to stunning televisual life. From the 900-year-old remains of Angkor Wat in the Cambodian jungle the staggering City of the God Kings is recreated. From Project Troia, in North West Turkey, the location of the biggest archaeological expedition ever mounted the lost city is stunningly visualised and finally from Persepolis the city and the great Persian Empire are brought to life.

Bill H.R.2466 - Iran Freedom and Democracy Support Act

Introduced in House - 108th Congress (2003-2004)

Introduced in House (06/12/2003)

Iran Freedom and Democracy Support Act - Declares it to be U.S. policy to: (1) support democracy and freedom in Iran; (2) support an internationally-monitored referendum by which the Iranian people can peacefully change the system of government in Iran; and (3) help the Iranian people achieve a free press and a free, democratic society.

Directs the Broadcasting Board of Governors to: (1) require the head of Radio Farda to develop programming in consultation with Iranian exiles who support such a referendum and with the Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI) and the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) at the Department of State; and (2) ensure that a significant percentage of Radio Farda programming discusses democratic change in Iran.

Requires the MEPI and ECA to provide grants for the translation and distribution of materials on democracy for the Iranian people.

Authorizes the MEPI and ECA to award grants to fund programs and activities to promote a democratic referendum in Iran.

Prohibits the importation of any textile or food article from Iran until the President certifies that Iran has shown substantial progress in respecting human rights, ceased its support for international terrorism, and terminated its nuclear weapons program.

Authorizes the reduction in amounts available for U.S. contributions to international financial institutions that provide assistance to Iran in an amount equal to such assistance, and the reallocation of such contributions to the U.S. Agency for International Development for child survival and HIV/AIDS programs, until the President provides the certification referenced above.

Requires the President to report to Congress on the presence of Al-Qaeda elements in Iran.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-bill/2466/all-info

The News: mind control through “cognitive dissonance”

- By Jon Rappoport - February 24, 2015 - NoMoreFakeNews.com

“When professionals broadcast one absurdity after another, they begin to see the effects are actually strengthening their own position of authority. It’s a revelation. It’s also a continuation of the tradition of the Trickster archetype. For example, with just a few minor adjustments, Brian Williams can be seen as the sly Reynard the Fox…” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

From the viewpoint of elite television news, controlling the minds of its audience depends on what’s politely called “cognitive dissonance”:

As the anchor recites a news story, the viewer sees an obvious hole through which he could drive a truck.

The story makes no sense, yet it’s being presented as bland fact. The trusted anchor clearly has no problem with it.

What’s the viewer to do? He experiences a contradiction, a “dissonance.”

For example, this year’s flu vaccine. The US government has admitted the vaccine is geared to a flu virus that isn’t circulating in the population. Therefore, even by conventional standards, the vaccine is useless. But the kicker is, the CDC says people should take the vaccine anyway.

The anchor relays all this information—and never seriously questions the situation, never torpedoes the government for recommending the vaccine.

The average viewer feels a tug, a pulse of discomfort, a push-pull. The vaccine story is idiocy (side one), but the trusted anchor accepts it (side two).

Dissonance.

The top chiefs of news—and top propaganda operatives—anticipate cognitive dissonance. In a real sense, they want it to happen. They make it happen. Over and over.

Why?

Because it throws the viewer into a tailspin. And in that mental state, in his effort to resolve the contradiction, he will normally choose to…give in. Surrender. Believe in the anchor. It’s the easier path.

The viewer will even doubt his own perception. “I see no good reason for Building 7 to collapse, but the news doesn’t bring that up, so…it must be me.”

This is the power of the news. It presents absurdities and then moves right along, as if nothing has happened.

For the viewer, it’s the equivalent of: “Don’t you see that pile-up of smashed cars on the freeway, and the smoke? No? Oh well, it must be me. I guess I was wrong. There isn’t any pile-up.”

The introduction of contradiction, dissonance, and absurdity parading as ordinary reality is an intentional feature of brainwashing.

On the nightly news, the anchor reports that US government debt has risen by another three trillion dollars. He then cuts to a statement from a Federal Reserve spokesman: the new debt level isn’t a problem; in fact, it’s sound monetary policy; it strengthens the economy.

The viewer, caught up in this absurdity, tries to make sense of it, then gives up and passively accepts it. Brainwashing.

Smoothly transitioning from this story, the anchor relays information from the CDC: vaccination rates must achieve 90% in the population, in order to protect people from dangerous viruses. The viewer thinks, “Well, my daughter is already vaccinated, so if she comes into contact with a child who isn’t vaccinated, why would that be a problem for her? Why does 90% of the population have to be vaccinated to keep her safe? She’s already vaccinated.”

The viewer wrestles with this absurdity for a moment, then gives in and accepts what the CDC and the anchor are saying. More passivity. More brainwashing.

The anchor moves right along to the next story: “The US is experiencing one of the coldest winters in history, further evidence of the effects of global warming, according to scientists at the United Nations.”

The viewer shakes his head, tries to deal with this dissonance, surrenders, and accepts what he is hearing. Deeper passivity is the result. Deeper brainwashing.

On and on it goes, day after day, month after month, year after year, on the news.

Contradiction, absurdity, dissonance; acceptance, surrender, passivity.

The same general formula is used in interrogations and formal mind control. It adds up to disorientation of the target.

Most disoriented people opt for the lowest- common-denominator solution: give in; accept the power of the person of authority.

When it comes to the news, that person is the anchor, the narrator, the presenter of reality.

He sows the ground with seeds of dissonance. That is how he gains compliance from the viewer.

If the news anchor experiences moments of conscience and self-doubt, he can tell himself he is doing the work of a journalist: he’s presenting information obtained from reliable sources. If these sources are spouting contradictions and absurdities, so be it. “Nothing better is available.”

Among the many supporters of conventional news is the education system. Most teachers never learn logic, and they don’t teach it. The result? Their students never gain the ability or the courage to reject the news and its dissonances.

What little these students gain from 12 or 16 years of schooling they eventually sacrifice on the altar of consensus reality—as broadcast every night on the screen before them.

In the face of absurdities that never add up or make sense, they surrender their minds.

If you gain enough distance from the news and watch it every night and pick it apart and see every dissonance, you realize the news is utterly Surreal. However, it is sold as utterly Normal. That is its trump card—the ability to sell itself as the ultimate in Normalcy.

That is its greatest achievement: overcoming its deepest contradiction.