Next Level BS #20: Alex Jones Gets It Wrong on Net Neutrality

Ok, Alex went crazy there and I'm not backing him, but maybe he is just fighting fire with fire. The elites use the media to lie to the public for support to go to war or to follow this and that, believe in this or that etc. He may feel he has to do the same to an extent to get people to despise that which they should despise, but just can't because they are brain trained by the media and cannot think clearly anymore. That said, Obama has quite a history of lies (which can be found in compact videos on Youtube, one after another for up to 20 minutes or so). He also has a history of declaring Congress as nothing more than ceremonial and forcing them and the Senate to sign bills he has created without even allowing them to read them in full.

That said,.....why the heck should we trust him now all of a sudden when he has lied about NOT reinstating the Patriot Act 2, lied about transparency, keeping your own doctor under Obamacare, the lie about his insurance being less expensive, creating executive orders to have people detained at the border for having "flu-like" symptoms, an Executive order that allows the military to detain anyone indefinitely and without representation, and if they are found not guilty, they can still keep them indefinitely....the list goes on. And now all of a sudden, he's the golden boy again and working to protect little ol' us.

Again, why should we trust his guy? What makes everyone think that he will not just create a bill, call it Net Neutrality and then not let congress read it....and after its passed, (because he and Hillary threatened congress last time), it will be an internet 100% owned by the government at our expense?

I remember a quote from years ago, "History is the best predictor of future events".

a reply to: theNLBS

Awaiting his response!

The guy is hysterical, but I suppose people like such things. However the net is pretty much controlled, its just depends on what you mean by controlled, but it will be more so as time goes on. That is pretty much the story of it, and of any other construct made by people, from government to the internet to whatever else that has ever been invented and created it will always be so. And well you know, if there is a buck to make, it will happen, were there is a profit there is a way, and every dog has its day.

That is what this alex jones really fears, and what they all fear, they see themselfs in what they have helped to create and come about whether it is government or corporations or anything else, they will always see themselfs in it all. And so they know were it will go if given half the chance, because then they would then have done onto self, what they have done on to others, and that scares them #less, so much so as to invent roundabout ways of obfuscating the truth of matters, it is the essence of politics now a days and off course definitely of propaganda, the number one rule there seems to be do onto others before they do onto you.

Its not governments or corporations that are the problem, its people that are the problem, and after all government and corporations are people, I think they even have a bill or law that says so, or at least for corporations so far only. But I am sure more such will follow. But ya! Net neutrality! Sounds pretty groovy. I mean how would people know that the net is neutral if somebody else does not tell them, or make a law saying that it is first? Generally when they make fancy sounding name to label on things, there is always a shtick, or at least in theory there is always something. But in truth, there is at the least a few hundred shticks.

a reply to: theNLBS

Alex is Jones is wrong? surely not.

Alex summed up net neutrality perfectly when he said "Blah blah blah Obama blah blah internet blah blah blah we're all being screwed."

Alex , Joe, Ted, Sceptic Overlord

You are all too late on Net Neutrality.
Porn Stars have told the world changing it means slower porn.....No one cares what any of you say now.
They all finally get it

Game Over

www.ibtimes.com...




ETA
This thread is featuring on ATS Live tonight!

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

Again, why should we trust his guy?

That's what I've been saying. I wouldn't put it past him for a bait and switch, just like if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor. We all know he's been lying but some people think suddenly he is going to be the good guy on this issue.

Oh Joe, Bush was for Net Neutrality? OH that must make it a good thing? Let's start with just because Bush is an R doesn't mean he is conservative. Everyone hated Bush because of the PATRIOT ACT? What makes you think that he is for free anything any more than "If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor Marxist Big Government nanny state PrezO"? These guys are all for the NWO which means Totalitarian One World Govt where the big guys control the rest of us. Yes, it is corporate run but it is govt run too, so fascist BIg Government Public-Private Partnerships. Why don't you google that too while you are at it. Both parties have been for Agenda 21, the plan to control all the world's resources including water rights(check out EPA's plan to control the ditch water in your own back yard) and Common Core Standards(see the Orwellian plan to track and data mine our children cradle to grave and store data in that shiny new giant data warehouse in Utah.
If you are really against the new surveillance police state, you won't necessarily be for more govt control.

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
If you are really against the new surveillance police state, you won't necessarily be for more govt control.

Ah… the classic non-sequitur.

Because I'm for net neutrality, the implication is that I must be "for" the police state. How ridiculous.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation has been fighting for Internet freedoms for nearly 25 years (disclaimer: I lobbied for such freedoms with their members in Washington in 2008). They are strongly for Title II reclassification and strongly opposed the FCC's alternative that right-wing pundits and big-money are working so hard to make a reality. This from the same non-profit organization leading the fight to keep government out of the Internet.

The reason for mentioning Bush's initial kick-start for the possibility of Title II Reclassification of broadband was not to imply, that "the other side" used to think it was a good thing. It was to drive home that this approach is not Obama's -- because too many people like you are swallowing, with great big giant gulps, the disinformation koolaide and lies being invented by those who would rather see big corporations ruin everything.

I'll be talking about this on ATS Live tonight.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

that "the other side" used to think it was a good thing. It was to drive home that this approach is not Obama's --

I know that is what you are trying to show, and I am trying to show that just because Bush was ok with it doesn't make it ok. I think Bush was just a Right Hegelian Big Govt guy and his admin did spend money and got us into two more wars. He did sign off on the PATRIOT ACT. He did start TSA which Prez O continued and even amped up with all the groping and those insane scanning machines. I'm sorry, you can talk about Title this and Title that but it's all just more govt control one way or the other.
Some people believe that more government fixes things and some people think less govt fixes things. The people who believe more govt fixes things usually are anti-corporation, just like the Occupy movement, which was funded one way or another by Tides/Soros and was principally a leftist style uprising against Wall Street, but lo and behold Mr. Soros is a Wall Street guy too and the biggest manipulator of them all, so forgive me if I don't appreciate that approach to things. Occupy called for the end of capitalism. So forgive me if I don't support that.
Which side of things do you think the current Occupier in Chief sits on? Methinks the left handed path.

p.s. We all know that Soros is the puppet-master behind the throne and acting on behalf of the robber barons Rothschilds Satanic family and that Soros is pushing Net Neutrality and that Occupier in chief does his bidding as well as that of radical Valerie Jarrett.
Antony Sutton told us that the industrialists and bankers financed the Bolsheviks and the Nazis.
And also while I am on the subject of corporate manipulation, said Occupier stood to gain 85 million dumping his shares of BP Oil on insider information conveniently before the supposed horrible corporate oil blow out of the ocean floor releasing methane and oil into the ocean to do its damage and not only did Occupier do nothing to help stop it, he allowed all that Corexit to be used to camouflage it and release more horrid toxins into nature, interfered with Gov Jindal's efforts at his own state's control, conveniently took money from BP Oil to distribute to victims, all while shutting down offshore drilling and pretending to be on the side of environmentalists....and all that while giving tax money to Petrobas, the nationalized Brazilian oil company. I will never ever ever trust anything that man does ever ever ever.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Here's the problem…
GOVERNMENT IS ALREADY CONTROLLING IT!
And one of three things is going to happen, very soon…

1) "Nothing," because of either delays in doing something, or the rare chance nothing is done.

2) New regulations/laws/legislation, being written by corporate interests, to implement the FCC's Hybrid Approach.

3) Reclassification of the Internet as a Title II utility under existing laws (the entire content-side of the Internet wants this)


In the case of 1 & 2, we're screwed. ISP's can slow down and otherwise alter the packets of sites that don't pay the fee for a fast-lane.

In the case of 3, the web stays open and free -- free as in freedom.


Everything you wrote about all the ills of the government doesn't matter. Seriously. Forget about it. Because one of th0se three things WILL happen, regardless of how much anyone talks about all the other related crap.

It's down to pick one. And the future depends on the right pick.

I enjoy ats and do not agree with the ad piracy that has been pointed to but i live out in the woods and i still have to dial up to aol to get here. i am connected at 26400bbs right now.lol other options are hughes net or verizon modems and such all of which are subject to near death by nn. there have been rules and such in the past forcing local phone companies to upgrade lines but were gotten around due to the number of customers in areas. how would any changes efect me other than forcing my options out of business.

Hughes net for example paid to get satellites in the air and they own or lease them so why should the gov. force new laws on them when rolling back previous court decisions would work just fine if the laws are upheld?

a reply to: deadeyedick

I think what the administration wants to do is after turning the Internet from a more privately run, loosely regulated industry to a more highly controlled, highly regulated public utility, once they do that then they will raise taxes to pay to have more broadband to areas like yours. That might sound like a really neat idea, but how would you like to have your taxes raised? I have a hint for everyone here, and that is when did your water bill ever go down? Mine went up in the 2 1/2 years I've been here, and the local city commission raised the cost to pay for a water treatment upgrade. The upgrade was necessary, but millions of dollars raised already for the upgrade were used to pay for the local unions....I have it on good authority from a former commissioner.....so that's that, a public utility will raise the cost to pay for more infrastructure, and they can throttle our speed if we don't pay up....

And by the way, a public utility is sounding a lot like federalized Internet, completely controlled by the Feds. I just can't wait till Big Brother tells me what I can and cannot do on the Internet.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

taxes raised on top of the billions of tax payer money that has already been givin to companies to do just that and all the current taxes that are collected for interstate tax on these lines. sure it is broken but more will not fix long term when enforcement of currect will work. mail carrier companies use a tiered system and that works.. standard delivery vrs overnite. yea it would be nice to give a letter to the p.o. and have it delivered overnite and pay the same rate but not all mail is priorty and a simple price system seems to sort all that out.

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

taxes raised on top of the billions of tax payer money that has already been givin to companies to do just that and all the current taxes that are collected for interstate tax on these lines. sure it is broken but more will not fix long term when enforcement of currect will work. mail carrier companies use a tiered system and that works.. standard delivery vrs overnite. yea it would be nice to give a letter to the p.o. and have it delivered overnite and pay the same rate but not all mail is priorty and a simple price system seems to sort all that out.

I agree.
and agree more

OH here is McChesney's plan for a free Interent(read:taxpayer subsidized so not really free, because admit it, someone has to pay for servives and network management) and I bêt their Marxist plan is to unionize all telecom workers and have them as federal employees.

“Net Neutrality” is nothing short of an effort to place yet another sector of our economy under federal control. But don’t take our word for it. Consider the words of Robert McChesney, founder of Free Press and the leading activist voice supporting “Net Neutrality:”
“What we want to have in the U.S., and in every society, is an Internet that is not private property, but a public utility. We want an Internet where you don’t have to have a password and that you don’t pay a penny to use. It is your right to use the Internet.”

cfif.org...

and everyone thinks that it's because Prez really wants us all to have fast Netflix downloads. (can I just lol at that ridiculous notion?)

No passwords really? Maybe just a federal Internet ID.....

McChesney is a typical anti-Capitalist
This Democracy Now article says it www.democracynow.org...

So it looks like it's a done deal and we have no say in it

On Sunday, Nov. 20, ‘Net Neutrality’ will take effect. Proponents have claimed that the regulation is necessary to insure neutrality of internet service; however, they are not being forthright in their depiction.
Many believe the ultimate goal of net neutrality is to eliminate all private internet service providers resulting in the US government ending up as the only internet provider left. And as the only provider, they would regulate who does and who doesn’t have access to the internet as well as regulate website content of all US based sites.

President of Less Government and editor-in-chief of StopNetRegualtion.org, Seton Motley explained it this way,

"The godfather of the media reform movement, a man by the name of Robert McChesney, said [net] neutrality does not commandeer control of the Internet," [Motley cites.] "'We're not at the point yet,' he actually uses that sentence, 'but the ultimate objective is to eradicate the media capitalists from the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control.'"

“At which point, they will be rationing bandwidth, just like ObamaCare will result in rationing of healthcare. And when that happens, if they're choosing websites that get bandwidth, and they're choosing between Daily Kos [and] MoveOn.org vs. National Review and American Spectator, who's the government going to choose?"


Read more at godfatherpolitics.com...

godfatherpolitics.com...

It's really a thinly veiled attempt to rid the Internet of all capitalist and free market influence.... not going to be so open and free I'm pretty sure.

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
So it looks like it's a done deal and we have no say in it

That absurd article is three years old, and full of outright lies.

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
cfif.org...
and everyone thinks that it's because Prez really wants us all to have fast Netflix downloads. (can I just lol at that ridiculous notion?)

A four year old article (full of distortion) referencing the flawed 2010 approach to Net Neutrality that was later challenged by Verizon and found to be not enforceable by the Supreme Court in 2013.

Alex Jones believes in Nut Neutrality.

This right-wing tea party fake conspiracy theorist is a shill for some right wing think tank Koch type sinister group

Who cares what he thinks.

He spouts typical right-wing, fake freedom (2nd amendment, hate the government across the line dogma of love the rich and hate paying taxes) even though his fat ass lives off the
Largess of this civilizations wealth and infrastructure just like ALL these fake, phoney right-wingers

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

A four year old article (full of distortion) referencing the flawed 2010 approach to Net Neutrality that was later challenged by Verizon and found to be not enforceable by the Supreme Court in 2013.

What is outdated about it? We have a Marxist who wants to eliminate the free market, not preserve it. The article expressly references the reclassification of the Internet by the FCC as a workaround Congress. You told me you want the Internet to be reclassified as a public utility. Unfortunately the only part of it which is outdated is the part where it was overturned by a court of law, which our attorney in chief does not respect.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

You've sided with the corporations as a result of believing disinformation and lies. That's too bad.