NETWORK NEUTRALITY: THE TWO WORDS THAT THE FCC HOPES YOU MISS ON PAGE 315 OUT OF 400 PAGES ...
What is network neutrality?
The basic concept of network neutrality is that all information packets – whether they relate to e-mail, audio, video, or other data – are to be treated equally; that is, no internet service provider can charge you more for certain data packets, charge you to send those data packets to clients they control, or prioritize the delivery of packets so that certain packet sources receive preferential treatment. Under this concept bits are bits.
How the concept will be perverted by the government …
The government is doing everything in its power to obtain the type of regulatory control over the internet that they exert over telephone companies and other regulated utilities. Buried on page 315 is everything you need to know about the government’s deception …
- The government is attempting to persuade the public that this type of regulation is not the same regulation that gave rise to telephone monopolies and those complex and confusing tariffs that give rise to mix-and-match plans that allow the companies to sell the same interconnectivity at different and more profitable price points. In essence profiting and competing on consumer confusion and deliberate chaos.
To this end, they have inserted language deliberately designed to mislead the public …
"Allow me to emphasize that word “modernized.” We have heard endless repetition of the talking point that “Title II is old-style, 1930’s monopoly regulation.” It’s a good sound bite, but it is misleading when used to describe the modernized version of Title II in this Order. Today’s Order will also use the significant powers in Section 706, not as a substitute but as a complement. This one-two punch applies both Title II, as well as Section 706, to protect broadband Internet access. It is the FCC using all of the tools in its toolbox to protect innovators and consumers.”
- They have also inserted innocuous language, two little words – “legal content” -- that explodes into creating a major bureaucracy, intrusive monitoring, and the potential for fines and imprisonment for violations of the rules and regulations promoted under this act. This will allow for the federalization of the detection and prosecution of copyright infringement whereas these investigatory efforts were the responsibility of the content providers who then could bring civil and criminal cases. Thank the Walt Disney Company and the Motion Picture Association of America for devices that have built-in tagging and tracking mechanisms; not to mention the perversion of the original copyright laws that allowed content to be placed into the public domain after a reasonable number of years. It is also possible that using this new "legal content" ploy, the Federal Elections Commission could also regulate political speech and claim that certain content would be prohibited prior to an election.
- What would a an administrative order be without a method to extend it beyond legislative intent and without public outcry. To this end, you will notice that there is mention of a “general conduct rule” that can be used to implement orders for political expediency; full well-knowing that any court challenge will potentially address legitimate grievances – and, by then, there will be nobody held responsible and accountable under the law.
- What would be administrative order that didn’t make an attempt to become “revenue neutral” by imposing new taxes and fees to support the newly-created bureaucracy and its operations. The taxes and fees being imposed on the internet service providers who will, in turn, pass them along to the consumer as they have done so many other real and bogus charges.
- And, let us not forget to notice the word "forbear" as used in the order. To forbear means to restrain from doing something – even though they are exerting a legal right to do “that something” in the future. Thus, at some time in the future, they can do everything they said they wouldn’t do in order to get this Order passed through the system. Since we are placing our trust in hyper-partisan political appointees, we are gambling on their integrity and allegiance to the citizens, taxpayers, and consumers rather than their political overlords. Not a bet any sane person would want to take.
Here is the page – 315 out of 400 – that contains all you need to know about the network neutrality order ...
There is little doubt in my mind that the Federal Communications Commission is presently controlled by progressive socialist democrats who need to exert maximum control over political speech prior to the 2016 election lest their unconstitutional and potentially criminal activities be so widely exposed as to cause a major disruption in the electoral process.
|
Federal Communications Commission FCC 15-24 The Open Internet Order reclassifies broadband Internet access as a telecommunications service” under Title II of the Communications Act while simultaneously foregoing utility-style, burdensome regulation that would harm investment. This modernized Title II will ensure the FCC can rely on the strongest legal foundation to preserve and protect an open Internet. Allow me to emphasize that word “modernized.” We have heard endless repetition of the talking point that “Title II is old-style, 1930’s monopoly regulation.” It’s a good sound bite, but it is misleading when used to describe the modernized version of Title II in this Order. Today’s Order will also use the significant powers in Section 706, not as a substitute but as a complement. This one-two punch applies both Title II, as well as Section 706, to protect broadband Internet access. It is the FCC using all of the tools in its toolbox to protect innovators and consumers. Building on this strong legal foundation, the Open Internet Order will:
These enforceable, bright-line rules assure the rights of Internet users to go where they want, when they want, and the rights of innovators to introduce new products without asking anyone’s permission. The Order also includes a general conduct rule that can be used to stop new and novel threats to the Internet. That means there will be basic ground rules and a referee on the field to enforce them. If an action hurts consumers, competition, or innovation, the FCC will have the authority to throw the flag. Under the Order we adopt today, open Internet protections would – for the first time – apply equally to both fixed and mobile networks. Mobile wireless networks account for 55 percent of Internet usage. We cannot have two sets of Internet protections – one fixed and one mobile – when the difference is increasingly anachronistic to consumers. Today’s Order also asserts jurisdiction over interconnection. The core principle is the Internet must remain open. We will protect this on the last mile and at the point of interconnection. We also ensure that network operators continue to have the incentives they need to invest in their networks. Let me be clear, the FCC will not impose “utility style” regulation. We forbear from sections of Title II that pose a meaningful threat to network investment, and over 700 provisions of the FCC’s rules. That means no rate regulation, no filing of tariffs, and no network unbundling. During the 22 years that wireless voice has been regulated under a light-touch Title II like we propose today, there has never been concern about the ability of wireless companies to price competitively, flexibly, or quickly, or their ability to achieve a return on their investment. The American people reasonably expect and deserve an Internet that is fast, fair, and open. Today they get what they deserve: strong, enforceable rules that will ensure the Internet remains open, now and in the future. 315 |
Bottom line …
There is no doubt in my mind that the Obama Administration, far from being the self-proclaimed “most transparent administration in history,” is morally bankrupt and totally corrupt and incompetent. And, given the behavior of the progressive socialist democrats in the “Fast and Furious” scandal, the bugging of reporters, the IRS scandal, Benghazi, and Hillary Clinton’s private email server, that there is nothing that these hyper-partisan socialists and communists will not do to subvert the upcoming 2016 election. Much in the same manner they attempted to cripple the legal fundraising activities of the conservatives who were denied tax exempt status; possibly throwing the race to the progressive socialist democrats when the GOP could not get its message out.
I do not trust President Obama and his cadre of progressive socialist democrats. These people have presented such a clear and present danger to America and all Americans with their divisive tactics, disregard for the Constitution and the rule of law, plus their potentially criminal actions – that democrats should never serve in office until they reform their party. That is not to give a pass to the GOP whose RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) are complicit in empowering the progressive socialist democrats.
It is time “We the People” speak out before they shut off dissenting political speech on the internet in violation of the First Amendment. And, might I remind you, it is the progressive socialist democrats that are trying to nullify the Second Amendment lest there be a severe penalty to be paid for governmental tyranny. Perhaps why they are looking at militias rather than communist agitators such as the Black Panthers or domestic Islamic terrorists.
Keep America and the internet free of government control.
-- steve
“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius “A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell “Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar “Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS