The biggest red flag yet

By 20 Comments 2,913 views

obamanet

The FCC voted today to regulate the internet . It’s absolutely frightening. It will be the end of the internet as we know it. Never mind that Obama will demand that all illegal aliens are guaranteed access to the internet and you’ll pay for it. Never mind that for now. It’s the real goal that’s scary. It’s who’s behind this that’s chilling. As one would expect, the left supports the action and you can just hear the implications in their words:

“We’re on the eve of a historic event at the FCC,” Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.) said during a Wednesday morning hearing on the rules. “Tomorrow, the commission is set to put into place what will be the strongest Internet protections consumers have ever had.”

Indeed.

The Chairman of the FCC, Tom Wheeler, has refused to testify before Congress.

Excuse me? Who the hell is he to refuse to talk to Congress? Who the hell does he think he works for?

From Wikipedia:

In late April 2014, the contours of a document leaked that indicated that Wheeler’s FCC would consider promulgating rules allowing Internet service providers (ISPs) to violate net neutrality principles by making it easier for Internet users to access certain content — whose owners paid fees to the ISPs (including cable companies and wireless ISPs) — and harder to access other content.

Harder to access “other content.” Conservative websites, for instance.

Wheeler is an Obama loyalist and fundraiser.

It has been suggested that the FCC itself has become “lawless.”

While unable to disclose the proposed regulations on his own, FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai has been sounding the klaxons.

He is also sharply critical of President Barack Obama’s very public push to influence policy at the FCC, which is technically an independent agency. Last year, it was widely believed that Wheeler, a former head of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, would not push for Title II. Pai calls the president’s actions—which included “creating a YouTube video of with very specific prescriptions as to what this agency should do”—unprecedented in his experience. Coupled with the fact that “the agency suddenly chang[ed]course from where it was to mimic the president’s plan,” says Pai, “suggests that the independence of the agency has been compromised to some extent.”

Google gets to dictate to the FCC what should happen, but for some reason the American voter has no say, and much worse, we have to pass it to find out what’s in it.

And that’s still not the worst of it. The biggest red flag?

Soros.

George Soros is the author of this statement:

“The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.”

Soros is the destroyer of economies. He gleefully speaks of the collapse of the West:

Billionaire investor George Soros, infamous for his lavish funding of big-government and globalist causes, dropped several bombshells during a recent interview with Newsweek including a bold forecast of potential Western economic collapse, massive civil unrest, and the end of what he likes to paint as the “free market.” He also sees the emergence of one of the most dangerous periods in modern history, describing it as a time of “evil.”

Riots on the streets of America are inevitable, the financier explained, expressing his thoughts on the subject in a manner Newsweek described as “almost gleefully.” And it will likely be used by authorities as an excuse to crack down on dissent. The “strong-arm tactics” Soros predicts will be employed could even bring about a “repressive political system” in the U.S. where individual liberty is curtailed, he said.

“The collapse of the Soviet system was a pretty extraordinary event, and we are currently experiencing something similar in the developed world, without fully realizing what’s happening,” he told the magazine before heading off to the World Economic Forum in Davos, a yearly gathering of top central bankers, executives, and political figures set to begin on Wednesday.

In the article, essentially a profile on the infamous billionaire entitled “George Soros on the Coming U.S. Class War,” the Hungarian-born hedge-fund manager claimed he did not really know what to invest in at the moment. Sources close to Soros told the magazine that he was sitting on a lot of cash.

It’s alleged that Soros has “Seven Steps” for bringing down a country:

Step One: Form a shadow government using humanitarian aid as cover.
Step Two: Control the airwaves. Fund existing radio and TV outlets and take control over them or start your own outlets.
Step Three: Destabilize the state, weaken the government and build an anti-government kind of feeling in the country. You exploit an economic crisis or take advantage of an existing crisis — pressure from the top and the bottom. This will allow you to weaken the government and build anti-government public sentiment.
Step Four: Sow unrest.
Step Five: Provoke an election crisis. You wait for an election and during the election, you cry voter fraud.
Step Six: Take power. You stage massive demonstrations, civil disobedience, sit-ins, general strikes and you encourage activism. You promote voter fraud and tell followers what to do through your radio and television stations. Incitement and violence are conducted at this stage.
Step Seven: Outlast your opponent.

I believe this originates with Glenn Beck and many are quick to dismiss it, but let’s at least consider a couple of things. If some of these allegations sound really familiar, they ought to- especially that not letting a serious crisis go to waste thing. Humanitarian aid? As in illegal aliens? Control the airwaves? Like the internet? Civil disobedience? Occupy? Soros did fund groups participating in the Ferguson protests.

It’s something to at least think about.

Soros says that the happiest days of his life were accompanying his father ratting out Jews to the Nazis.

Now Soros is pouring money into “net neutrality.”

Liberal philanthropist George Soros and the Ford Foundation have lavished groups supporting the administration’s “net neutrality” agenda, donating $196 million and landing proponents on the White House staff, according to a new report.

And now, as the Federal Communications Commission nears approving a type of government control over the Internet, the groups are poised to declare victory in the years-long fight, according to the report from MRC Business, an arm of the conservative media watchdog, the Media Research Center.

“The Ford Foundation, which claims to be the second-largest private foundation in the U.S., and Open Society Foundations, founded by far-left billionaire George Soros, have given more than $196 million to pro-net neutrality groups between 2000 and 2013,” said the report, authored by Media Research Center’s Joseph Rossell, and provided to Secrets.

“These left-wing groups not only impacted the public debate and funded top liberal think tanks from the Center for American Progress to Free Press. They also have direct ties to the White House and regulatory agencies. At least five individuals from these groups have ascended to key positions at the White House and FCC,” said the report which included funding details to pro-net neutrality advocates.

Soros is drive by two motivators- money and power. He needs money like a fish needs a bicycle.

This is about power and control. If Soros is in favor of something, it’s most definitely not in the best interest of this country.

We are so screwed.

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.

20 Responses to “The biggest red flag yet”

  1. 1

    Greg

    Actually, if you favor a level playing field that encourages competition, innovation, and the widest range of products and services at the lowest prices, this is the best thing that could have happened.

    If you wanted to see a situation where Internet Service Providers could arbitrarily charge differing rates to different businesses for transmitting identical volumes of data, I guess you’ll be disappointed.

    I have no problems whatsoever with the federal government playing the part of a fair minded referee in the world of commerce. A referee is needed. Otherwise giant corporations dominating any given industry will shake the public down for every nickel they can extract. If anyone doubts that, they’re totally out of touch with reality.

  2. 2

    Skookum

    Yes, if you like your health plan you can keep it.

    If you like your doctor you can keep him.

    American families will save $2,500/year on health insurance costs.

    Yes, and unions and companies that are big Democrat donors will receive subsidies to offset the increased costs of health care.

    Is it unreasonable for Americans to be skeptical of a president who lies and uses health care to work for political advantage and leverage? ..

    No one trusts this liar in the White House. Why should we believe him now? (This is a rhetorical question.)

  3. 3

    DrJohn

    author

    @Greg:

    Greg

    The mistake you make is to take Obama at his word. He is a goddam liar. NOTHING he says – other than wanting to fundamentally transform the nation and wanting your electricity rates to skyrocket- has any veracity. I might even share some of your thoughts if the actions came from someone else.

  4. 6

    Greg

    I doubt if any person who was totally honest with the American people could ever be elected by them as president. If such a person were elected, total truthfulness would likely make it politically impossible to accomplish anything. Thinking otherwise is probably a manifestation of either starry-eyed idealism or naiveté.

  5. 7

    yard dog

    Wouldn’t it be refreshing if we had elected officials that had the back bone to defund all of these oppressive government agencies. Get back to a constitutional form of government.

  6. 9

    Aqua

    @Greg:

    If you wanted to see a situation where Internet Service Providers could arbitrarily charge differing rates to different businesses for transmitting identical volumes of data, I guess you’ll be disappointed.

    This is just not true, at least in the way you are laying it out.
    A point of presence in a switch is something that has been around for a very long time. The top tier cell phone providers do it all the time. The lower tier providers probably don’t so they can save money and offer lower prices.
    For example, top tier cell company Alpha has an area of cell sites and the biggest fiber provider in the area is Gamma Fiber. Gamma provides fiber to as many cell sites as they can for Alpha. Alpha, as part of their deal, gets a point of presence in the Gamma switch.
    Lower tier cell provider Beta collocates at the Alpha cell sites. They have Gamma fiber, because Gamma already has a presence at the Alpha sites. But Beta doesn’t pay to have a presence at the Gamma switch, they just route their service from their switch through the normal nodes. A little more latency, a lot of savings.
    That is all Google, Netflix, Amazon, and the rest of the big boys do. They establish a point of presence at an ISP switch.
    Now, the ISPs are not going to just give out space in their switch to everyone. So what will happen is everyone will have to route traffic normally and latency will increase. Because that is what liberals want. Not every company wants to pay to have higher speeds, so that’s unfair. So now everyone will just get crappy speeds.

  7. 10

    Aqua

    @Greg:

    If anyone doubts that, they’re totally out of touch with reality.

    And this little diddy. You are the one out of touch with reality. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. I explained the “Fast Lanes” above.

    One things I will agree with the commission on is the anti-competition clauses states and municipalities had. The commission overturned those, which I agree with. But this could have been accomplished without a Title II act. The anti-competition clauses are a result of local governments and publicly owned right-of-ways. That is exactly why Google Fiber is so popular. Google lets the people of an area know that if they want Google Fiber they just need to help out by getting the local government to help process right-of-way issues.

  8. 11

    Nanny G

    People do not know what’s in the FCC’s ”Net Neutrality” regulations.
    There are 332 pages of it and it is NOT public.
    So, to come out ”for” it or even ”against” it is silly.
    You don’t know what ”it” is!
    What we do know is that there was supposed to be 30 days of public comment BEFORE it was voted on by the FCC.
    Has there been?
    No!
    In fact, only the 5 members of the FCC even have a copy of it and that copy came with a gag order so NO public comments can be made based on knowledge of what is in it!
    Ajit Pai, one of two Republican Commissioners on the FCC, tweeted,

    “I wish the public could see what’s inside.”

    He added:

    “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. The plan explicitly opens the door to billions of dollars in new taxes on broadband… These new taxes will mean higher prices for consumers and more hidden fees that they have to pay.”

    One of the leaks indicates that internet USERS will have to pay an additional $16 billion a year in FCC user taxes and fees.

    And who said,

    “[W]hile a certain proposal ‘may pass the muster of a federal court, Congress and the public have the right to review any specific proposal and decide whether or not it constitutes sound policy. And the commission has the responsibility to defend any new proposal in public discourse and debate.”

    ????
    None other than Sen. Obama!

    Right now the two Republican members of the 5 member FCC board are asking their chairman to postpone the vote (scheduled for Thursday) and let the public see ”what is in it,” for 30 days first.

    I agree with them.
    I’d like to take a stand based on knowledge of what it is not based on who to believe.

  9. 13

    Nanny G

    @Aqua:
    The commission voted and passed it yesterday. You can find the new rules online.

    Where (link) can you find the entire thing?
    I’ve looked on the FCC site as well as the web.
    Thanks.

  10. 14

    Mully

    How many legislative bodies do we now have a the federal level? I thought it was the job of congress to write rules and regulations, not a 5 member appointed panel.
    So now we have an additional 332 pages of internet freedom? I don’t think so. Once again the gullible left buys blindly into something because the herd is moving one direction. So here they are defending what they have not seen. The lemming march continues.
    The internet was not broken but politicians couldn’t keep their hands off trying to fix it.

  11. 15

    Aqua

    @Nanny G:

    Where (link) can you find the entire thing?

    My apologies, they haven’t released the full plan, just the outline. The outline includes:
    No Blocking: broadband providers may not block access to legal content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices.
    No Throttling: broadband providers may not impair or degrade lawful Internet traffic on the basis of content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices.
    No Paid Prioritization: broadband providers may not favor some lawful Internet traffic over other lawful traffic in exchange for consideration of any kind — in other words, no “fast lanes.”
    This rule also bans ISPs from prioritizing content and services of their affiliates.
    http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015/db0226/DOC-332260A1.pdf

  12. 16

    Nanny G

    @Aqua:
    Thanks for trying as well.
    So, Congress is correct.
    The law requires a 30-day public comment period as well as Congress being allowed to weigh in.
    Not only has that not happened, but it was voted in and still Congress doesn’t know what’s in it.

  13. 17

    Ditto

    Posted elsewhere, bears repeating:

    The FCC released a new PSA on Net Neutrality.

    “There is nothing wrong with your internet connection. Do not attempt to delete your cookies or clear your cache. We are controlling the bandwidth. If we wish to make it faster, we will raise your taxes. If we wish to make it slower, we will throttle your downloading to dial-up speeds. We will control the content. We will control what you post. We can block your images, make them placemarks. We can change the political questioning to softballs or censor all content we find objectionable. For the duration, sit back and STFU as we will control all that you see and hear. We repeat: there is nothing wrong with your internet. You are about to participate in a great transformation. You are about to experience the lies and propaganda which reaches from the uniformed mind to – The Progressive Limits.”

    Big Brother Obama is watching, and he’s a vindictive S-O-B.

  14. 18

    Ditto

    Facebook suspends black middle schooler’s account after slamming Obama

    CJ Pearson’s viral video last weekend in which he criticized President Obama provoked a real reaction from viewers – all 1.4 million of them.

    But the 12-year-old middle schooler apparently provoked a reaction from Facebook, too. They suspended his account.

    Pearson has this posted on his Facebook page:

    I am having my Editor, Alan Davidson post on my behalf on this page while Facebook continues to lock me out. The 1st amendment is obviously not a big concern to the powers at be at Facebook, but we will continue to fight back!

    He went to check the page after school on Friday and that’s when he learned his account and page had been locked for “suspicious activity.”

    He tried in vain to have his page reactivated, but to no avail, according to the Examiner.

    “Time and time again, Facebook has shut down many conservative accounts after they decide to speak up,” Pearson said on Fox & Friends Sunday.

    Master Zuckerberg don’t like it when an uppity black strays off the plantation and speaks like those “damn” Republicans.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *