You Got The Internet?

[Grench]

Check this sh$t out. Congress is really on a roll, aren't they?

http://www.infowars.net/index.html


Federally Funded Researchers Want To Scrap The Internet
Seeking further funding from Congress for "clean slate" projects
>Infowars.net | April 16, 2007
Steve Watson
Researchers funded by the federal government want to shut down the internet and start over, citing the fact that at the moment there are loopholes in the system whereby users cannot be tracked and traced all the time.

Time magazine has reported that several foundations and universities including Rutgers, Stanford, Princeton, Carnegie Mellon and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology are pursuing individual projects, along with the Defense Department, in order to wipe out the current internet and replace it with a new network which will satisfy big business and government:

One challenge in any reconstruction, though, will be balancing the interests of various constituencies. The first time around, researchers were able to toil away in their labs quietly. Industry is playing a bigger role this time, and law enforcement is bound to make its needs for wiretapping known.

There's no evidence they are meddling yet, but once any research looks promising, "a number of people (will) want to be in the drawing room," said Jonathan Zittrain, a law professor affiliated with Oxford and Harvard universities. "They'll be wearing coats and ties and spilling out of the venue."

The projects echo moves we have previously reported on to clamp down on internet neutrality and even to designate a new form of the internet known as Internet 2 .

This would be a faster, more streamlined elite equivalent of the internet available to users who were willing to pay more for a much improved service. providers may only allow streaming audio and video on your websites if you were eligible for Internet 2.

Of course, Internet 2 would be greatly regulated and only "appropriate content" would be accepted by an FCC or government bureau. Everything else would be relegated to the "slow lane" internet, the junkyard as it were. Our techie rulers are all too keen to make us believe that the internet as we know it is ";already dead" .

Google is just one of the major companies preparing for internet 2 by setting up hundreds of " server farms " through which eventually all our personal data - emails, documents, photographs, music, movies - will pass and reside.

However, experts state that the "clean slate" projects currently being undertaken go even further beyond projects like Internet2 and National LambdaRail, both of which focus primarily on next-generation needs for speed.

In tandem with broad data retention legislation currently being introduced worldwide, such "clean slate" projects may represent a considerable threat to the freedom of the internet as we know it. EU directives and US proposals for data retention may mean that any normal website or blog would have to fall into line with such new rules and suddenly total web regulation would become a reality.

In recent months, a chorus of propaganda intended to demonize the Internet and further lead it down a path of strict control has spewed forth from numerous establishment organs:

In a display of bi-partisanship, there have recently been calls for all out mandatory ISP snooping on all US citizens by both Democrats and Republicans alike.


Republican Senator John McCain recently tabled a proposal to introduce legislation that would fine blogs up to $300,000 for offensive statements, photos and videos posted by visitors on comment boards. It is well known that McCain has a distaste for his blogosphere critics, causing a definite conflict of interest where any proposal to restrict blogs on his part is concerned.


During an appearance with his wife Barbara on Fox News last November, George Bush senior slammed Internet bloggers for creating an "adversarial and ugly climate."


The White House's own recently de-classified strategy for "winning the war on terror" targets Internet conspiracy theories as a recruiting ground for terrorists and threatens to "diminish" their influence.


The Pentagon recently announced its effort to infiltrate the Internet and propagandize for the war on terror.


In a speech last October, Homeland Security director Michael Chertoff identified the web as a "terror training camp," through which "disaffected people living in the United States" are developing "radical ideologies and potentially violent skills." His solution is "intelligence fusion centers," staffed by Homeland Security personnel which will go into operation next year.


The U.S. Government wants to force bloggers and online grassroots activists to register and regularly report their activities to Congress. Criminal charges including a possible jail term of up to one year could be the punishment for non-compliance.


A landmark legal case on behalf of the Recording Industry Association of America and other global trade organizations seeks to criminalize all Internet file sharing of any kind as copyright infringement, effectively shutting down the world wide web - and their argument is supported by the U.S. government.


A landmark legal ruling in Sydney goes further than ever before in setting the trap door for the destruction of the Internet as we know it and the end of alternative news websites and blogs by creating the precedent that simply linking to other websites is breach of copyright and piracy.


The European Union, led by former Stalinist and potential future British Prime Minister John Reid, has also vowed to shut down "terrorists" who use the Internet to spread propaganda.


The EU data retention bill, passed last year after much controversy and with implementation tabled for late 2007, obliges telephone operators and internet service providers to store information on who called who and who emailed who for at least six months. Under this law, investigators in any EU country, and most bizarrely even in the US , can access EU citizens' data on phone calls, sms', emails and instant messaging services.


The EU also recently proposed legislation that would prevent users from uploading any form of video without a license.


The US government is also funding research into social networking sites and how to gather and store personal data published on them, according to the New Scientist magazine . "At the same time, US lawmakers are attempting to force the social networking sites themselves to control the amount and kind of information that people, particularly children, can put on the sites."
We are being led to believe that a vast army of maniac pedophiles or terrorists are on the loose and we must do away with all forms of privacy in order to stop them. This is akin to saying that blanket cctv prevents crime. As if to say "if we film everyone all the time, even innocent people, then no one will ever commit any crimes."

Increasingly we are seeing this in every aspect of our lives. Recording, tracking and retaining our data in the name of keeping us all safe. Everyone is now treated as guilty until proven innocent.

Make no mistake, the internet, one of the greatest outposts of free speech ever created is under constant attack by powerful people who cannot operate within a society where information flows freely and unhindered. Both American and European moves mimic stories we hear every week out of State Controlled Commu nist China, where the internet is strictly regulated and virtually exists as its own entity away from the rest of the web.

The Internet is freedom's best friend and the bane of control freaks. Its eradication is one of the short term goals of those that seek to centralize power and subjugate their populations under a surveillance panopticon prison, whether that be in Communist China, Neoconservative America or the Neofascist EU.


Regards,
Phil
Without Recourse

[aksis]

I was chatting with a friend of mine who sets up Internet back-bone high bandwidth connections for banks, small ISP's, large corporate networks, etc... he not only sets up the physcal connection (tech side), he is a major part of drafting up the contracts and the legal connection setup as well (legal side).

He was telling me that government (not sure which agency) requires Internet Service Providers (ISP's) to purchace/have avilable 2x (two times) the amount of bandwidth that the ISP uses. So for simplicity, if the ISP uses 40Mbps, they must contract and have avaliable 80Mbps and can only use 40Mbps.

This other 40Mbps of their bandwidth is compleatly desegnated for government use in the event that the FBI/HomeLandSecurity/??? wants to mirror all the traffic, to and from any given ISP, for monitering... in the name of "national security purposes" of course.

[Grench]

Originally Posted by aksis

I was chatting with a friend of mine who sets up Internet back-bone high bandwidth connections for banks, small ISP's, large corporate networks, etc... he not only sets up the physcal connection (tech side), he is a major part of drafting up the contracts and the legal connection setup as well (legal side).

He was telling me that government (not sure which agency) requires Internet Service Providers (ISP's) to purchace/have avilable 2x (two times) the amount of bandwidth that the ISP uses. So for simplicity, if the ISP uses 40Mbps, they must contract and have avaliable 80Mbps and can only use 40Mbps.

This other 40Mbps of their bandwidth is compleatly desegnated for government use in the event that the FBI/HomeLandSecurity/??? wants to mirror all the traffic, to and from any given ISP, for monitering... in the name of "national security purposes" of course.

Well, I believe I have the anwser for that! Look here: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0157_0429_ZS.html And if we take Pollock v. Farmers Loan and Trust Company and take the words "literally" then, we can say that, a sentence like, "... a threatened breach of trust in the misapplication or diversion of the funds of a corporation by illegal payments out of its capital or profits .." is saying something like, "if the general public by FAILING to STATE (goes back to our pal, Note Pad!) your exsitence or a 'claim' (i.e. assuming to be a 14th amendment citzen, contracting with foreginer's, and socially 'accepting' properganda [Look here: http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/ww2era.htm ] and also, under the FARA [foregin agents registration act]) in the commerical law form (i.e a corporation. how is a ANYONE OR A PEOPLE could they "confirm" that, they have or ARE A TRUE AFFIDAVIT OF 'BINDING' INFOMARTION for negtionable 'purpose's' to congress, a state, or a country? now, that sounds crazy, huh?) that, is in not perfected harmony or has been perfected by congress will be called into question (i.e more then likely murdered by nazi congressional contra's; or what you might call a americKKK soilder) by the court or by authority's un-known (i.e. **** cheney) to or for the courts..."

Now, take a breath-er and look at the rest: ".. Such a bill being filed by a stockholder.." How handle's the "bill's"? We do, right? So, I do have a right to die, huh? ".. to prevent a trust company from voluntarily making returns for the imposition and payment of a tax claimed ..." So, I "create" a tax claim and forefit it for municipal purpose's? Where did I sign?

So, if you can get where i'm going you'll see that, all your anwser's are RIGHT IN YA FACE.

Signed: Without Recourse,
Phil
Attached: Without Recourse