The quaint idea that Internet service providers (ISPs) should treat all data that travels over their networks equally, fairly, without improper discrimination in favor of particular apps, sites or services, however it’s a Trojan horse and has the potential for taking the Internet and reducing it to utility status via a Title II argument. As Wikipedia defines explains: “internet service providers are unable to intentionally block, slow down or charge money for specific websites and online content.” In 2015, (now former) FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler introduced his and Obama’s rules that would permit ISP’s like AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast to block, slow, or restrict internet traffic by creating ‘fast lanes’ for those who can pay for preferential treatment which violates the principle of net neutrality requiring all ISP’s to treat all traffic equally. “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,” said FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai, while also slamming Wheeler’s refusal to publicly release the net neutrality plan ahead of its Feb. 26 vote. Unfortunately, the deep state used the push to maintain net neutrality as an opportunity for a trojan horse takeover of the internet that will eventually lead to government regulation and possibly UN control down the line. If not, why are those most known for taking our freedoms (the federal government, Youtube, Google, Facebook, Twitter, and other major corporations) the ones pushing the hardest for it while smaller ISP’s oppose it?
ISPs have used a method called “choking” to limit the speeds of streaming services and downloads. By identifying the addresses of the services that use large amounts of bandwidth and slowing down the connections to those services, they have made them practically unusable. Users have complained and the ISPs have ignored their complaints. Since many ISPs offer their own streaming services or cable or satellite television services, they view these services as competing with them and cutting into their revenues. So, they make it difficult to use those services. It is bad business and it inconveniences Internet users. But is government regulation the answer to the problem? Constitutionalists have noted that in this case the antidote is worse than the poison: granting government the ability to regulate the Internet will grant government control of the Internet.
In February 2015, FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai tweeted a picture of himself (right) holding the plan with a picture of President Obama in the background. His tweet read, “Here is President Obama’s 332-page plan to regulate the Internet. I wish the public could see what’s inside.” He also issued a press release listing several points that call the 332-page secret document into question. His release begins by setting the tone in clear, bold language: “The American people are being misled about President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet. Last week’s carefully stage-managed rollout was designed to downplay the plan’s massive intrusion into the Internet economy and to shield many critical details from the public. Indeed, Chairman Wheeler has made it clear that he will not release the document to the public even though federal law authorizes him to do so.” Pai then lays out, point by point, why Obama’s trojan horse plan bad news for all who value Internet freedom.
Obama’s so-called ‘net neutrality’ bill give no rights of freedom to ‘We the People’, only ISP’s, so it was a Trojan horse.
On Wednesday November 22 of 2017, the day before Thanksgiving, FCC Chairman Ajit V. Pai circulated to his fellow commissioners and made public a draft of new FCC orders to eliminate the “Net Neutrality” rules put in place under the Obama administration and on December 14th 2017 voted affirmatively to repeal it.
Almost as if in retaliation, Twitter has allowed users to post a startling number of hateful Tweets containing death threats against Pai and his family. “When it comes to a free and open Internet, Twitter is part of the problem,” Pai said, attacking the Internet edge company content provider for hiding behind net neutrality rules to implement an aggressive plan to censor conservatives and libertarians from the website.
In a desperate effort to save the Obama-era “Net Neutrality” rules, Soros-funded groups that favored censorship of conservative and libertarian views on the Internet ran a scare campaign before the FCC voted on Dec. 14. Perhaps most ironically, Antifa groups (shown to be paid provocateurs) protesting for a “free and open Internet” protested outside the FCC headquarters in Washington, D.C., on May 22, 2017, protesting Pai’s proposal to reverse “Net Neutrality” rules, while demanding the FCC must “Ban Drudge,” as well as Breitbart and Infowars.com. Color of Change, a Soros-funded organization that bills itself as “the nation’s largest online racial justice organization” charged Chairman Pai with racism.
“Chairman Pai’s plan to gut the FCC’s net neutrality rules will devastate Black communities,” Color of Change proclaimed on its website.
“Net neutrality is essential to protecting our free and open Internet, which has been crucial to today’s fights for civil rights and equality,” the Color of Change website continues. “Our ability to have our voices heard in this democracy depends on an open Internet because it allows voices and ideas to spread based on substance, rather than financial backing. Net neutrality ensures that the Internet is a place for innovation and opportunity for all, rather than just the wealthy few.”
Color of Change was among the Soros-funded groups that backed the campaign to drive Lou Dobbs from his hour-long program on CNN, as well as Glenn Beck from Fox News and Pat Buchanan from MSNBC, by pressuring advertisers to withdraw their financial support on ideological grounds.
On Feb. 26, 2015, the Washington Examiner reported Soros and the Ford Foundation donated $196 million to advocacy groups supporting the retention of the Obama-era “Net Neutrality” rules.
On July 13, 2017, Infowars.com reported that a coalition formed by George Soros, including Internet giants Google, Facebook, Amazon, as well as the salacious extreme-and-abusive-sex website PornHub, had flooded the FCC with thousands of “citizen comments,” coming from Russia, of all places, opposing the FCC’s planned repeal of the Obama-era “Net Neutrality” rules.
A study by Washington, D.C. information specialist Emprata demonstrated that more than 7.5 million comments opposing the repeal of “Net Neutrality” rules – the largest percentage of comments on any FCC topic, fully 36 percent of all FCC comments – “appear to have been generated by self-described” and “disposable” email domains attributed to FakeMailGenerator.com and with nearly identical language.”
Adjusting the 13 million total comments who opposed repealing “Net Neutrality” rules for “Bot-generated” fake comments, Emprata found the legitimate comments supporting Pai’s move to repeal “Net Neutrality” beat the legitimate comments wanting to keep the Obama-era rules by 61 percent favoring the repeal of Title II Internet governance, versus 38 percent wanting to maintain the “Net Neutrality” rules that would retain Title II governance of the Internet as a telecommunications utility.
In a speech given at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona held in March 2017, Pai cited studies proving previous Obama-era FCC Chair Tom Wheeler “made a bad bet” assuming “Net Neutrality” rules putting the Internet under Title II regulation would not discourage Internet investment. Pai demonstrated that under the Obama-era “Net Neutrality” rules, the Internet “experienced the first-ever decline in broadband investment outside of a recession,” with broadband investment remaining “lower today than it was when the FCC changed course in 2015.”
Compared to 2014, broadband investment from the 12 largest ISPs declined by 5.5% in 2016 alone.
Obama-era “Net Neutrality” allow Google, Facebook, Twitter censorship
Those arguing for the repeal of the Obama-era “Net Neutrality” rules argue Pai’s campaign to end Title II regulation of the Internet is a “noble cause” – a move that does not “kill net neutrality,” but rather reverses the unprecedented power grab of the Obama-era FCC in conjunction with the tech left forces in Silicon Valley, Soros’s Open Society Foundation, and the Ford Foundation.
Trump supporters backing Pai note the Internet’s growth, explosive innovation, and flow of free expression occurred free from public utility regulation. Ironically, since the 2015 rules were put in place, instances of blocking and censoring have only occurred at a rapid pace on platforms owned by Facebook, Google, and Twitter, which all lobbied hard for the 2015 “Net Neutrality” rules, which were carefully crafted so as to not touch those companies.
The implementation of these 2015 Obama-era “Net neutrality” regulations, which were heavily pushed by Google in hundreds of closed-door meetings at the Obama White House, carved out Google and the other Silicon Valley behemoths and secured their position as absolute information gatekeepers. Since these 2015 regulations passed, Internet giant portals like Google, Facebook, and Twitter have moved to become the judge, jury, and executioner of the contact we read on the Internet, under the guise of eliminating “fake news.”
Steven Crowder breaks down Net Neutrality and the ulterior motives behind big corporations like Google and Facebook supporting it!
(Below) Advocates say that Net Neutrality means guaranteeing free speech on the Internet. Without it, big telecoms could control what you see and how you see it. But what is the truth about Net Neutrality?
- 2:00 – Brief Technical Introduction
- 9:20 – Major Concerns
- 14:53 – Monopoly History
- 35:57 – ISP Foul Play
- 48:05 – Event Timeline
- 1:02:08 – FCC Corruption
- 1:09:36 – Conclusion
Sources: http://www.fdrurl.com/net-neutrality Freedomain Radio is 100% funded by viewers like you. Please support the show by signing up for a monthly subscription or making a one time donation at: http://www.fdrurl.com/donate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Z_nBhfpmk4
Network neutrality—the quaint idea that Internet service providers (ISPs) should treat all data that travels over their networks equally, fairly, without improper discrimination in favor of particular apps, sites or services—is a Trojan horse and has the potential for taking the Internet and reducing it to utility status via a Title II argument. Let us pray this never happens. Be very wary of benign and anodyne sounding legislation.
Sources:
Related History:
