Posted on 01/03/2015 6:48:50 PM PST by BenLurkin
Late last year, Obama asked the Federal Communications Commission to create a new set of rules to make sure everyone has access to the Internet and that phone and cable companies would not be allowed "to act as a gatekeeper, restricting what you can do or see online."
(Excerpt) Read more at thestate.com ...
How does this help the Chinese...
The benefit that comes from government meddling flows to cronies of the legislators.
When the internet pauses during maximum load, all the electrons come streaming out, circle around, and stream back in the way they came, then the packets start moving again?
Obama will do whatever he wants. Nobody in congress has, or will stop him. That much is clear.
Yes they do...
Nut-job Conspiracy Theory Ping!
To get onto The Nut-job Conspiracy Theory Ping List you must threaten to report me to the Mods if I don't add you to the list...
O is a dictator no doubt about that. DC is spineless and a bunch of wussies who prefer power to principle.
I just can’t stomach Alex.....His message so often contains half truths, deliberate deception, and outright nonsense that I have a hard time getting past the messenger
Control being the key issue, I think.
It was by threatening FCC annihilation of the “news media”/”news talk” that the Obama puppetmasters got the entire system to mock those who pointed out Obama’s usurpation of the White House.
The people who didn’t care that they were Alinsky-ed by the newsmakers are on the net. The regime wants to do to us what they did to the “trusted news media” (cough). I suspect they’ve actually already been doing it for a while now, but if the FCC was totally in charge of the internet they could do it more effectively.
When they’re done, they can literally alter history without anybody to point out what they did. Anybody capable of even considering that reality can be silenced by fiat decree. Just like the IRS, NSA, etc have been doing...
The mark of the beast. Those who won’t accept the mark of the beast will not be able to buy or sell...
Yes....but far too many won’t care because it will be presented favorable to the public. They’ll be in the a receptive state of mind as deception will be widely employed and believed.
We can see the public being primed for this already.....a clear example of this is the liberal progressive mind....they cannot see their own foolish thinking for what it is.
Source?
The reason I'm skeptical is that FCC revocation of a broadcast license is a lengthy--and very transparent-- process, involving public hearings and review in the federal courts. I don't think the FCC has revoked a TV license in the last 50 years. And the FCC has no jurisdiction at all over cable TV networks.
The source is the news network heads, as they explained to their on-air personalities why those personalities’ careers and potentially their lives would be over if they allowed Obama’s ineligibility or Muslim leanings to be brought up on air. What the media heads said was reported to Doug Hagmann by multiple people who attended the meetings where the statements were made. One of the on-air personalities gave Hagmann a signed statement describing what had happened. It happened at least twice - once in October 2008 and again shortly after the election.
I don’t believe it was a threat of FCC annihilation either though, because Bush was still in office then and if any of the media heads had gone public with either the threats or Obama’s ineligibility they could potentially have kept Obama from being elected and rendered the threat impotent. I believe there was a bigger threat that was made to the media heads and the media heads only TOLD the on-air personalities that the threat was FCC annihilation. I believe the real threat was another Islamist run on the bank, like the one made in Sept of 2008 to give Obama the lead in the polls - a terrorist financial attack that our intel sources in the Middle East were saying was imminent and which George Soros reportedly asked both Hillary and Obama if they were on-board with.
I believe that threat of another run on the bank is what silenced GW Bush, Dick Cheney, John Roberts, etc. (Bush was saying that if TARP didn’t get passed it would be the end of the world as we know it, so somebody seriously scared the crap out of him!) I’ve written elsewhere about some of the other reasons I believe this was the case, but if your point about the way the FCC operates is correct, then it supports my theory that there was actually a much tougher threat and the media heads made up a cover story about the FCC to hide the real threat. In any event, the media heard that they were NOT to let the eligibility issue be reported, and they obeyed, LOCK, STOCK, and BARREL.
And if there were any questions amongst the more independent news sources by the time Arpaio’s press conference rolled around, there was the Breitbart death and the Limbaugh death threat - both on the same day as that press conference. And the “news” sources (the few that reported at all) all followed a script on how they reported about that news conference. They gave no evidence that Arpaio mentioned, said that Arpaio was being investigated by Holder’s DOJ for corruption, and claimed that Obama had presented his long-form birth certificate at a press conference (confusing the issue by not noting that it’s that very claimed BC that Arpaio found probable cause of being a forgery and fraud.)
IOW, as much as the media might laugh at the suggestion that those 2 events were meant to silence them.... their silence speaks louder than words. They obeyed the message they claimed was never sent...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.