Profile image
By Dr. Bob Uda, Ph.D., CM, CHSP, ILO (Reporter)
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views
Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:

Barack Obama Takes Over the Internet

% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

This just came across the transom.  Now it is hitting very close to home.  I’m on the Internet 16 hours a day, 7 days a week.  Gary G. Kreep, executive director of the United States Justice Foundation (USJF), reports that there is very important, one-of-a-kind, information stated below about Mr. Obama and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) wanting to control YOUR Internet freedoms.  Please read every word to understand the totality of this threat to your freedoms.

The USJF reported today (12/18/10) that Barack Obama has a “Christmas surprise” for the American people.  It’s based upon the FCC’s self-imposed December 21 deadline to implement new Internet rules.  Via the FCC, Mr. Obama wants to take control of the Internet—YOUR Internet—your ability to contact your friends, your relatives, and your elected representatives in government.  This “stealth” use of new rules and regulations will sneak up on us just before Christmas.  Quite frankly, not too many people know about this; or really take the notion seriously, because, after all, we have the 1st Amendment to the U. S. Constitution to protect us.  Right?  Wrong!

The FCC is ready to add the Internet to its “portfolio” of regulated industries. The Obama Administration wants to take control of the Internet BEFORE CHRISTMAS! (even though the regulations won’t “officially” go into effect until after the holidays.  The FCC Chairman, Julius Genachowski, announced that he has circulated “draft rules” that he says will “preserve the freedom and openness of the Internet.” No statement—I call it a bald face lie—reflects the vast gulf between the rhetoric and the reality of Obama Administration policy.  Obama’s FCC is ready to steal our Internet freedom by simply declaring it has the “right” to regulate it. Here’s the underlying problem for Barack Obama. Internet journalists tend to report the news without coloring it with the brush of “political correctness.” They challenge the lies that the Obama Administration puts out that the so-called “mainstream media” simply accept and repeat as the truth.

We must be prepared to do battle with the intrusive FCC federal regulations that will clamp down on our 1st Amendment rights via the Internet. To protect our free speech rights on the Internet, we must fax every single Member of Congress and let them know they must NOT agree to the upcoming December 21st regulations!  Will you do that for yourself and for the rest of us… today—please?  This is so important; let me repeat my request so you understand the extreme urgency. Because, historically, when government seizes liberty, it’s gone forever.

According to the Washington Times: “With a straight face, Mr. Genachowski suggested that government red tape will increase the ‘freedom’ of online services that have flourished because bureaucratic busybodies have been blocked from tinkering with the Web. Ordinarily, it would be appropriate at this point to supply an example from the proposed regulations illustrating the problem. Mr. Genachowski’s draft document has over 550 footnotes and is stamped ‘non-public, for internal use only’ to ensure nobody outside the agency sees it until the rules are approved in a scheduled December 21 vote. So much for ‘openness.’

Make no mistake; Barack Hussein Obama is very determined to undermine free speech by seizing cyber-control Internet free speech; under the disguise of making sure our safety and security are of prime importance. The recent WikiLeaks fiasco has helped him to rationalize this tremendous increase of government control to the American public.  Freedom and openness should continue to be the governing principles of the Internet. That’s why Mr. Genachowski’s December 21 proposals should be STOPPED by Members of Congress. In fact, both the U. S. Senate and the House of Representatives should make it even clearer that the FCC should STOP trying to expand its REGULATORY EMPIRE and should STOP trying to control our freedom of speech over the internet!

In the administration’s zeal to “protect the people,” the social progressive zealots in the Obama federal bureaucracy are not averse to writing the rules and regulations like this. It makes a clear statement. It takes away our freedoms on the Internet; but it is all under the claim of “protection.”  That’s why the proposed FCC Internet rules and regulations—THAT ARE ABOUT TO BE IMPLEMENTED without Congressional legislation being enacted—must be stopped by that Body whose legislative authority has been abridged.  That is why YOU must get involved this very moment!

Support BeforeitsNews by trying our natural health products! Join our affiliate program

APeX - Far superior to colloidal silver in destroying viruses, bacteria and other pathogens.
Ultimate Curcumin - Natural pain relief, reduce inflammation and so much more.
Supreme Fulvic - Nature's most important supplement! Vivid Dreams again!  See Testimonials
MitoCopper - First bioavailable copper destroys pathogens and gives you more energy.
Prodovite - The Secret To Healing is in the Blood! Complete absorption in 5 minutes.

Report abuse


    Your Comments
    Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

    Total 2 comments
    • Anonymous

      This article is full of lies. First off for anyone who cares about real Network Neutrality this is fake Net Neutrality the FCC is peddling. The proposed regulations aren’t strong enough and the proposal does not include Title II reclassification of broadband to restore the agency’s oversight authority on broadband providers to implement and enforce regulations on Internet Service Providers.

      Real Network Neutrality rules mandate ISPs to practice reasonable network management. They are nondiscrimination rules to protect individual users online and innovators — without an Open Internet the future Googles and Yahoos of the world would need permission from the duopoly big cable and phone company ISPs to innovate and even compete in the Internet economy.

      Big telecom and cable companies hate the idea of having to provide equal access to the same Internet — and want to be able to throttle data of users connected to the Internet via the networks they run. Some of these companies took Universal Service Funds to build their networks therefore the networks should actually belong to the government in these instances and to the people. Also, some took Recovery Act funds from the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009 to expand broadband deployment (as part of the infrastructure programs in the bill) and were required if they use such money to not mess with users Internet connections.

      Some think public interest groups like media reform organization Free Press are socialist for supporting any regulation of ISPs. Words like socialist are being used to scare people into thinking government action to protect consumers from predatory businesses in the form of regulations is tantamount to socialism. I support a free and open Internet and ideally yes less government regulation would sound nice — if government was trying to take away individual freedoms I would be up in arms but this is a matter of government protecting our freedoms from big corporations. Corporations who hate the idea of having common carrier rules apply to them in the Internet access market and don’t want to remain dumb pipes to the same Internet.

      If this was government regulating Internet content as FOX New’s Glenn Beck has falsely claimed — I would not be supportive of content being regulated but the service providers yes. Keeping the Internet open and free of corporate gatekeepers is crucial. Stop the lies of government taking over the Internet it is not. Even the right wing Christian Coalition recognizes the importance of Network Neutrality.

      By the way to those saying Net Neutrality is Fairness Doctrine for the Internet it is not. Fairness Doctrine mandated news outlets comply with the public interest and air differing points of view — it did not ban them from showing certain content the regulation was to ensure the news media had enough diverse voices.

      Glenn Beck by the way has lied about the Fairness Doctrine being a censorship tool of the left to silence the right. That is untrue. The Fairness Doctrine would enable conservatives on talk radio and on TV to still have their say but you couldn’t have Rush Limbaugh on the air 24/7 only for 4 hours a day and the other 4 bring in someone with a differing perspective likely a liberal to talk the other 4 hours. You couldn’t have the same voices on all the time you had to have diversity.

      President Obama is not trying to take over the Internet this is just a lie. Net Neutrality is what prevents Comcast from blocking Bit Torrent etc (they deceptively tried to do so in 2008 got caught, reported to FCC and sanctioned but sued on a technicality — whether its illegal and should be illegal — and regardless of Comcast’s immorality they sued on a technicality that the FCC cannot enforce such rules if it defines broadband under Title I as a weakly regulated information service.

      Historically. it was regulated under Title II as a telecommunications service until 2002 — since then the FCC allowed mergers of big telecom companies and the duopoly big cable and phone market of collusion and limited competition to develop.

      As Free Press states the current state of our media did not occur naturally or overnight — policy choices by Congress and the FCC contributed to the media system we have today. It is by no accident that today corporate media control many of the airwaves on the radio dial and most of the television stations as the government allowed them to consolidate — to merge with others in this area and cause a reduction in competition. Reduced competition results in reduced consumer choices. Often these public policy decisions affecting our media were made behind closed doors without the public’s knowledge or informed consent resulting in policies while benefiting big corporations did not serve the public interest well. Free Press was formed to fight for the public and give us a seat at the table so we can have our say in policy decisions.

      When you don’t engage the public and seek their involvement bad policy decisions are made. That’s what happened through most of this decade. Why was AT&T allowed to re-merge with SBC Communications and Bell South after Ma Bell was broken up years earlier to create competition in the wire-line phone market. That breakup benefited consumers greatly but we have not been served well by the re-mergers that took place. Now AT&T is once again exercising monopoly power in an abusive way but not on wire-line phones this time instead its trying to mess with the Internet.

      The Internet has been successful because of its openness we can’t let corporations take that openness away. We can’t let Comcast merge with NBC Universal and discriminate against Netflix.

    • Dr. Bob Uda, Ph.D., CM, CHSP, ILO


      Thanks for your comment. I noticed that whenever you comment, the hit count on readers goes up. Keep your comments coming. It gets people thinking, which is exactly what I desire in my articles and postings.

      Bob Uda




    Email this story
    Email this story

    If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

    If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.