Articles
Digital Despotism

DIGITAL DESPOTISM

Today the big news is still the missing plane and the theories that a foreign government has presented that could have been presented in the beginning. The other news is that our president questions an election in a democratic country and, in order to condemn the election and how we didn’t get our way, he decides that the course of action is to prevent two dozen Russians from eating steak and caviar in the United States.

Welcome to the distractions that would be the script of comedy if they weren’t so sadly real that people would step out of their trance and watch how the war for globalism just got more complex and, even though leaders fight over land masses and people’s, they also have paved the way towards globalist control of what we invented and have given to the world.

Over the weekend, I was still hearing numerous talk shows continue the discussion on the missing Malaysian flight. My Facebook was flooded with more theories and ideas and many other e-mails stating that my theory was wrong and that the mainstream media is correct in basically telling people what they already suspected.

Instead of reporting in the beginning that perhaps the pilots were under suspicion or that some other crazy was on the plane, they milked the story so that no one would pay attention to the details on the Crimea’ election where 95% percent of the people voted to join with Russia. How Obama and his cast of idiots have once again shown their hypocritical colors by denouncing a vote that was cast in a democratic nation. It was a vote that did not favor the European Union, or the meddling of the United States and their apparent siding with Neo-Nazi radicals.

Now the sanctions are about to begin, and the consequences may include the entire controlled demolition of our economy. We will also be watching the controlled demolition of the Internet as well. all because Internet control was finally handed over to foreign interests.

While you weren’t paying attention, as The Inquisitr reported:, “Over the weekend the Obama administration announced that the federal government will not renew a management contract with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers when the existing one expires next year. The decision appears to follow a proposal by the European Union to establish a “clear timeline” to take the company and the Internet duties it performs global.

So the European Union fails to get Crimea and Ukraine—but gets the Internet? Is there any question as to what is happening with globalist encroachment?

There seems to be this open conspiracy to destroy the United States and its people by giving them bad choices and having them choose without being informed. The messenger that delivers that uncomfortable news is often ridiculed and, in extreme cases, censored.

There are citizen journalists that work hard to report what they see as truth and are part of the people’s press on the Internet. They may see their last days as the Internet changes hands. After the Internet, podcasts are controlled, there may be an effort to go after radio shows that have both an on-air and Internet presence.

Shows like mine survive only because listeners specifically listen or tell their various stations that the show needs to remain on the air.

I know that when free speech is officially declared dead, there may not be any shows like mine left—and soon state media will be in charge of informing you, and a global net web venture will curtail free speech and will eventually decide what is seen on the internet as well.

People who say they oppose censorship often only oppose it when it impinges on their own right to free speech–they’re not so quick on defending free speech when they disagree with the free speech of others.

Governments are equally disturbed by trends where the public discourse is not in their favor. Freedom of speech and freedom of the press is dying a very slow death and those who utilize their right to free speech and press are either “suicided” or have their characters destroyed in the corporately controlled press. Paranoid governments resort to despotism in order to seize control of the press – and all communications – in order to censor what they feel puts them in a bad light.

It has been documented and discussed ad nauseam that the Internet has been compromised by the NSA and other agencies. “The NSA,as even the Wall Street Journal points out, “possesses only limited legal authority to spy on U.S. citizens.

However, the clutching powers of the NSA and the government have been able to allocate funds in order to build a monolithic security apparatus that spies on America’s Internet communications and “has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic.

The NSA claims that most of the communications that are flagged are ones that deal in foreign intelligence. It is said that all that is monitored is between foreign nationals and United States citizens. This, of course, is a buffer to state that no American that is posting on Facebook will have dossier made about what they talk about in social media.

The president has appeared on late night talk shows saying that there in no real domestic spying happening in the United States.

However, the Wall Street Journal reported that:

“The NSA’s filtering, carried out with telecom companies, is designed to look for communications that either originate or end abroad, or are entirely foreign but happen to be passing through the U.S. But officials say the system’s broad reach makes it more likely that purely domestic communications will be incidentally intercepted and collected in the hunt for foreign ones.”

The Internet has become a playground for surveillance and we do know how other countries handle their Internet traffic, especially traffic that they do not agree with.

The Internet has shown to be a powerful tool in opposing government tyranny. Despotic governments however have resorted to powerful counterattacks by severing their respective countries from any global internet capabilities. Now that the Internet will be possibly under the control of the E.U., the U.N., Russia or China – who knows what will happen?

The concerns that are being expressed are that censorship and free speech issues will become a problem online since countries like Russia and China garners a portion of the international overseer role of the World Wide Web.

A statement about the loss of Internet control by the “Americans for Limited Government” reads:

Congress needs to prevent the Obama administration from giving away U.S. control over the Internet to any international body. Perhaps this latest egregious action by the Obama administration in their quest to deconstruct the United States will finally wake Congress up to their power of the purse responsibility as a co-equal partner in government.

The evolution of this handover by the Obama administration is merely a formality in a sense, because there are many Internet authorities believe that ICANN really has had no real control of anything since 1998.

President Obama has never been a fan of free speech or the “people’s press.” That is why he was so proficient in telling us that there is no NSA spy apparatus on the Internet. When he was told to reevaluate the NSA spying system he said he wouldn’t be held responsible if it created a reason for a terror attack. Now, in a similar fashion, he decides to make the first move in trying to destroy it by handing it over to foreign interests.

When the Internet finally dies, he will have plausible deniability in saying that he had nothing to do with it.

Remember, during the Ides of March, Obama became Brutus as he decided to put his knife in the Internet.

There has always been the debate over whether or not the Internet and its control has always fallen under the category of the global phone system which is administered by the world’s oldest international treaty organization, the International Telecommunication Union, founded in 1865.

They are now an arm of the United Nations that is responsible for issues that concern information and communication technologies. Many governments feel that, like the phone network, the Internet should be administered under a multilateral treaty.

ICANN has always favored the United States because of its private sector approach. The internet has remained relatively stable and free of any tampering or censorship. Many critics believe that this is about to change, as many countries involved in the treaty believe in kill switch technologies that can black out or block material that governments cite as seditious.

As our good friends at the Council on Foreign Relations write in the article ‘Who Will Control The Internet?‘:

Everyone understands that the Internet is crucial for the functioning of modern economies, societies, and even governments, and everyone has an interest in seeing that it is secure and reliable. But at the same time, many governments are bothered that such a vital resource exists outside their control and, even worse, that it is under the thumb of an already dominant United States.

Now they have gotten their wish. We invent the Internet, we allow the Internet to flourish under the cornerstone of constitutional law, and now it is surrendered to globalist authority.

Is this indicative of the steps being taken to secure the New World Order?

Well the timing of the handover is very telling as the International Telecommunication Union has been planning to reform Internet policies and guidelines.

Some are speculating that much of the new guidelines include strict rules and regulations with regard to internet content and whether or not it would be necessary to begin repressive filtering of some of the Internet content.

The problem that Internet users face is the ambiguity of what the European Union and the United Nations are demanding with regard to regulation concerning content.

The ambiguity here is in the broad legalese that is used in order to already assert that the ITU has already been governing the internet for years and thus there should be no problem with the official handling of internet affairs which includes the policing of content online.

The argument that has been used in the justification of globalist control of the Internet is that telecommunications is anything defined as “any transmission, emission or reception of signs, signals, writing, images and sounds or intelligence of any nature by wire, radio, optical or other electromagnetic systems.

So telecom treaties provided by the United Nations are most definitely reasons to just hand over all of the oversight to the United Nations, something that the United States has been fighting against for nearly 30 years?

Google is now warning that Internet decisions will be made in dark rooms by unnamed political figures and that the influence will damage the free flow of Internet communications and commerce.

The move could insure that the United Nations would have control over cyber security, data privacy, technical standards and the web address system.

It is a very bad sign that the United State has relinquished its power of the Internet. It means that we no longer have the power to fight off the throes of the globalist agenda. We no longer have the luxury of being trusted to handle the keys to the Internet, and with that lack of trust; we just surrendered one of the most powerful communication and commerce tools ever invented.

Now, I am not telling you all this to instill panic and I promise you that there will be no immediate consequences after we handover the reins of power next year. I can promise that web addresses will continue to go where they already go.

I am telling people about this because it is baby steps towards a more perfect digital despotism where, once again, a few power brokers will decide just who gets a domain name, an address, and the ability to communicate online.

We have been the country that has been most dependent on the Internet and most likely to be the most devastated if our new landlords decide to charge rent or choose not to renew a lease that we have had online for many years.