[Lazlo in PA]

I don’t see the votes for this. The progressives would love to jam all types of things down our throat, but being able to do it is another thing. This is not Egypt. This will not stand.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

I think the debate is rather farcical, because does anyone believe for a moment that the US government *wouldn’t* shut down the Internet if it wanted to? All it has to do is contact AT&T, Verizon and Qwest, and 90% of the US Internet is down. The rest would be limited to local traffic.

And once things were up and functioning, it would be months or years before the federal courts would say, “Oh, you shouldn’t have done that!”, which would be met with a shrug.

[lapsus calami]

 

 

Only despots are concerned with having such capabilities. Speaks volumes about the regime we have in D.C.

 

 

[Countyline]

Considering all the technology available today, how is it we actually know so little about what legislation is being written? ... passed? ... and made law ...?

We are in quicksand up to our armpits and still we act like we are strolling on the beach. I fear the worst is coming soon, and despite Glen Becks continuing informative programing, it is changing few, and perhaps preparing some.

We must have gone soft in the head. Most people under 50 or 40 are simply paying no attention to the fundamental changes occurring in America. God help us all. We are nearing the brink of severe wake up times.

[shibumi]

"This link will take you to the rest of it. Please read it. Our ability to communicate with each other depends on it. Knowledge is power. "

You state on your FReeper page that you are Andrea Shea King, correct?

In your obvious (albeit unique) plea for hits, holding out the balance of your work, you have given us a poser.
<
You, as the original author, appear to be giving your work freely, here on this forum. You posting gives no indication of the actual location of your column, but a clicxk on the link leads the reader to "WorldNetDaily.com" a source which is listed as "excerpt and link only" on FreeRepuhblic's Copyright List.

The portion of your work which is posted, appears to be pushing the limit for an excerpt of 300 words, but that is an issue best decided by the Moderator. What is of great curiosity is this question:

If you sincerely believe that this is a crucial issue, one which must be shared openly and discussed freely, then why don't you just post your work, openly and freely, here on this forum, without involving a third party internet site that has demonstrated reservations about having its articles posted in full on FreeRepublic?

[righttackle44]

Think about it. Obama is in exactly the same position as Mubarek is. Could he shut down the internet? Yes. If he does, would that provide a huge public backlash? Yes. If that backlash should threaten the heart and soul of the government, would the U.S. military back him?

My son is a veteran Marine. He served in Ramadi when they were trying to blow him up with IEDs and mortars when he stood 96-hour watches on the roof of the government center. He is the gungest-ho of Marines. There is a 60 Minute program video showing his company under fire. They got one of his guys, and they are dragging him into the Iraqi equivalent of a backyard. His guys is bleeding. My son was somewhere outside that gate, ready to send as many insurgents to Allah as he could. And he could send plenty. He was his fire team’s SAW gunner. He was willing to turn Ramadi real estate into one big target.

Now, would my son, a I-don’t-think-Patton-was-so-tough United States Marine, turn his guns on his mom and me?

I think he would turn his guns around to protect us. I think most of our military’s men and women would do the same thing.

As I write, Fox News is saying Mubarek is stepping down. One reason is that his military won’t back him.

Obama is in the same position as Mubarek.

Please give some thought to your alarmist hysteria before you write.

[Captain Beyond]

Internet ping bump