Obama Can Shut Down Internet For 4 Months Under New Emergency Powers

Obama Can Shut Down Internet For 4 Months Under New Emergency Powers

June 28th, 2010

Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet.com-

Obama Internet

President Obama will be handed the power to shut down the Internet for at least four months without Congressional oversight if the Senate votes for the infamous Internet ‘kill switch’ bill, which was approved by a key Senate committee yesterday and now moves to the floor.

The Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act, which is being pushed hard by Senator Joe Lieberman, would hand absolute power to the federal government to close down networks, and block incoming Internet traffic from certain countries under a declared national emergency.

Despite the Center for Democracy and Technology and 23 other privacy and technology organizations sending letters to Lieberman and other backers of the bill expressing concerns that the legislation could be used to stifle free speech, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee passed in the bill in advance of a vote on the Senate floor.

In response to widespread criticism of the bill, language was added that would force the government to seek congressional approval to extend emergency measures beyond 120 days. Still, this would hand Obama the authority to shut down the Internet on a whim without Congressional oversight or approval for a period of no less than four months.

The Senators pushing the bill rejected the claim that the bill was a ‘kill switch’ for the Internet, not by denying that Obama would be given the authority to shut down the Internet as part of this legislation, but by arguing that he already had the power to do so.

Read More

“Drudge Tax”: Government Agency Declares War On Conservative Online Journalism

“Drudge Tax”: Government Agency Declares War On Conservative Online Journalism

June 4th, 2010 Posted By Erik Wong.

mattdrudge

The internet is the new Talk Radio, in that it is completely run by Conservatives. This truth is proven in the very name attached to this act of suppression, the “Drudge Tax.” They might as well call it the “Right-Wing Tax,” they are not hiding what this attempt at Totalitarianism is directed towards. The left owns 90% of the MSM, yet they know that much of America is using the internet to see through their bullshit. Their poll numbers are tanking, and this scares them. That is how this “Tax” came into being. That’s what this “Tax” seeks to control.

The Washington Times:

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is seeking ways to “reinvent” journalism, and that’s a cause for concern. According to a May 28 draft proposal, the agency thinks government should be at the center of a media overhaul. The bureaucracy sees it as a problem that the Internet has introduced a wealth of information options to consumers, forcing media companies to adapt and experiment to meet changing market needs. FTC’s policy staff fears this new reality.

“There are reasons for concern that experimentation may not produce a robust and sustainable business model for commercial journalism,” the report states. With no faith that the market will work things out for the better, government thinks it must come to the rescue.

The ideas being batted around to save the industry share a common theme: They are designed to empower bureaucrats, not consumers. For instance, one proposal would, “Allow news organizations to agree jointly on a mechanism to require news aggregators and others to pay for the use of online content, perhaps through the use of copyright licenses.”

In other words, government policy would encourage a tax on websites like the Drudge Report, a must-read source for the news links of the day, so that the agency can redistribute the funds collected to various newspapers. Such a tax would hit other news aggregators, such as Digg, Fark and Reddit, which not only gather links, but provide a forum for a lively and entertaining discussion of the issues raised by the stories. Fostering a robust public-policy debate, not saving a particular business model, should be the goal of journalism in the first place.

The report also discusses the possibility of offering tax exemptions to news organizations, establishing an AmeriCorps for reporters and creating a national fund for local news organizations. The money for those benefits would come from a suite of new taxes. A 5 percent tax on consumer electronic devices such as iPads, Kindles and laptops that let consumers read the news could be used to encourage people to keep reading the dead-tree version of the news. Other taxes might be levied on the radio and television spectrum, advertising and cell phones.

The conflict of interest in having the government pay or contribute to a newsman’s salary could not be more obvious. Reporters and columnists would have little incentive to offer critical analyses of tax increases that might mean a boost in the pocketbook. Once Congress has the power to fund the news, it can at any time attach “strings” designed to promote certain viewpoints – in the name of fairness, of course. Each year at budget time, the Fourth Estate would scramble to be worthy in the eyes of Capitol Hill for increased support. It is hardly a surprise that the heavily subsidized National Public Radio frequently presents issues in a way favorable to Washington’s tax-and-spend agenda.

Self-respecting journalists must reject this tempting government bribe as the FTC brings its proposals to a round-table discussion scheduled for June 15. When it comes to the media, consumers lose most when government suppresses innovation in the name of “saving” old business models.

FCC Chair Pitches Restraint In Net Neutrality Obama invades the Internet

FCC Chair Pitches Restraint In Net Neutrality

Julius Genachowski’s “Third Way” aims for moderate regulation of broadband to protect consumers while encouraging investment and innovation by Internet providers.

By W. David Gardner,  InformationWeek
<!– –>May 6, 2010
URL: http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=224700985

Federal Communications Commission chairman Julius Genachowski revealed his “Third Way” to attempt to solve the Net neutrality issue that has been dogging Internet regulation negotiations for weeks. Genachowski’s plan generally calls for regulation of Web transmission by Internet service providers, but would renounce some requirements on carriers, such as rules that they would have to share lines with competitors.

In a statement Thursday, the FCC chairman said he supported a “restrained approach” to broadband Net neutrality regulations, “one carefully balanced to unleash investment and innovation while also protecting and empowering consumers.”

Genachowski’s approach is likely to be criticized by major carriers like AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon Communications, which want as little regulation as possible. However, firms like Google and Skype that rely on unfettered access to broadband are likely to support Genachowski.

The FCC chairman was clearly trying to pick his way through a complex minefield of regulations and arguments, but his “Third Way” is likely to be praised, challenged, and discussed from a variety of quarters. To start, however, Genachowski is certain to see his approach approved by his two Democratic colleagues on the FCC, commissioners Michael Copps and Mignon Clyburn, giving him a three-to-two endorsement over the two Republican commissioners.

While much of the issue is mired in arcane regulatory jargon, the results of the latest chapter in Net neutrality are likely to influence a wide sweep of Americans and measures ranging from delivery of broadband in rural areas to encouraging new investment and competition in broadband services.

Genachowski had been examining the issue since April, when a U.S. federal appeals court ruled that the FCC couldn’t sanction Comcast for blocking Bit Torrent from transmitting traffic over the Internet. Genachowski asked FCC general counsel Austin Schlick for legal guidance and Schlick suggested the “Third Way” approach.

Genachowski also appears to have received important backing from Senator John D. Rockefeller and Congressman Henry Waxman, both Democrats, before he announced his Third Way statement Thursday

Schlick reviewed proposals, including one to keep Title I authority to oversee broadband as it generally now is or to reclassify broadband as a telecommunications service. As currently defined, broadband is viewed as an information service and the FCC has little oversight over it. The carriers generally support keeping the Title I classification, while Google, Skype, and public interest groups wanted broadband to come under Title II.

“I have serious reservations about both of these approaches,” said Genachowski, adding that Schlick found the third way: “a legal anchor that gives the Commission only the modest authority it needs to foster a world-leading broadband infrastructure for all Americans while definitely avoiding the negative consequences of a full reclassification and broad application of Title II.”

Genachowski’s Third Way approach will be open for public comment, which is expected to be vigorous on both sides of the issue.