Comment

Comment by Sean Britannia on July 9, 2010 at 3:06pm

Academics, Politicians: Pending Global Treaty Threatens Free Internet, Fundamental Rights

Over 90 academics, practitioners and public interest organizations from six continents have collectively warned that a secretive global treaty, currently being negotiated by governments of the world’s largest economies would see tight controls placed on the internet and would threaten other fundamental rights and freedoms.

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) has received fleeting public attention, yet it has been quietly evolving for a number of years.

On it’s face ACTA is described as a countermeasure directed at the rise of counterfeit goods, medicines and pirated copyright protected material, including “piracy over the Internet”.

If officially ratified, however, ACTA would mark the formation of a major new global legal infrastructure with relation to standards on intellectual property rights enforcement.

It would also see the formation of an international governing body to oversee implementation of the agreement. That body would operate beyond the jurisdiction of national governments and even beyond that of the World Trade Organization (WTO), the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) or the United Nations.

ACTA would effectively challenge already defined national court precedents regarding consumer rights and “fair use” laws and could fundamentally alter or remove limitations altogether on the application of intellectual property laws.

The US, along with all the countries of the European Union as well as Japan, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and a handful of other countries, have been involved in the ACTA negotiations since 2006.

Leaked drafts of the agreement in 2008, 2009 and most recently in April 2010 have raised concern over the legal scope of the proposed treaty. The secrecy surrounding the negotiations has also prompted further worry over the draconian provisions within the agreement. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, along with other notable watchdog organisations, have called for more transparency on ACTA.

A group of international experts was convened last month by the Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property at The American University Washington College of Law to debate the proposed treaty. The group later released a communique that makes worrying reading.

“ACTA is the predictably deficient product of a deeply flawed process.” The statement reads. “What started as a relatively simple proposal to coordinate customs enforcement has transformed into a sweeping and complex new international intellectual property and internet regulation with grave consequences for the global economy and governments’ ability to promote and protect the public interest.”

The communique bullet points the following four key conclusions:

* Negotiators claim ACTA will not interfere with citizens’ fundamental rights and liberties; it will.
* They claim ACTA is consistent with the WTO Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS); it is not.
* They claim ACTA will not increase border searches or interfere with cross-border transit of legitimate generic medicines; it will.
* And they claim that ACTA does not require “graduated response” disconnections of people from the internet; however, the agreement strongly encourages such policies.

Those who endorsed the statement include professors from leading universities across the globe and several European members of parliament who have formed a working group on ACTA.

The group identified at least seven critical areas of global public policy in which ACTA is hostile to the public interest. They define these as:

“fundamental rights and freedoms; internet governance; access to medicines; scope and nature of intellectual property law; international trade; international law and institutions; and democratic process.”

With specific reference to internet governance, the group says ACTA would:

* Encourage internet service providers to police the activities of internet users by holding internet providers responsible for the actions of subscribers, conditioning safe harbors on adopting policing policies, and by requiring parties to encourage cooperation between service providers and rights holders;
* Encourage this surveillance, and the potential for punitive disconnections by private actors, without adequate court oversight or due process;
* Globalize ‘anti-circumvention’ provisions which threaten innovation, competition, free (freedom-respecting) software, open access business models, interoperability, the enjoyment of user rights, and user choice;

Internet law professor Michael Geist has previously spoken out against ACTA, noting that

“The provisions would pave the way for a globalized three-strikes and you’re out system,” referring to a proposal within the treaty to have internet service providers cut off service – without access to a trial or counsel – to anyone accused at least three times of illegally sharing copyrighted material.

Geist has also noted that “offenders” could even be imprisoned for sharing copyrighted material.

The three strikes policy mirrors that contained within the recently passed Digital Economy Bill in the UK, with similar provisions also outlined in Australian legislation, indicating that ACTA negotiations may also be driving national government policy on internet regulation proposals.

“The US government appears to be pushing for Three Strikes to be part of the new global IP enforcement regime which ACTA is intended to create…” Gwen Hinze at the Electronic Frontier Foundation has previously noted. “…despite the fact that it has been categorically rejected by the European Parliament and by national policymakers in several ACTA negotiating countries, and has never been proposed by US legislators,”.

The agreement would also force internet service providers to crack down on sites that offer file sharing and peer to peer software, even though those sites may be entirely legitimate. ACTA could even see popular Web sites like YouTube and Flickr shut down because of a provision in the treaty that would force them to monitor everything uploaded to the site for copyright violations.

The upshot is that all current and future innovations that allow knowledge and information to be distributed on a mass scale are directly threatened by ACTA simply because it presumes such technology will be used by a minority to distribute material that is deemed copyrighted.

ACTA represents another huge warship in an armada directing it’s guns at the free internet. We have previously highlighted countless similar legislative programs that have either been enacted or are working their way into law in the U.S., Australia, New Zealand, Britain, and many other European countries.

In addition, ACTA is so much more than an internet censorship bill, it covers physical goods and even medicines, while systematically re-writing previously established laws on trade and intellectual property.

Comment by Sean Britannia on July 8, 2010 at 6:06pm

Lieberman’s Internet ‘Kill Switch’ Bill Hits Roadblock


It appears that the effort to pass a cyber-security bill is going to get a bit more tough then expected.

Late last month, officials from Cisco, IBM and Oracle sent a letter to the main sponsors of the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act, S. 3480 — Senators Joe Lieberman (DI-Conn.) Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Tom Carper (D-Del.). The letter raised concerns about some provisions of the bill:

While well intentioned, it ultimately puts U.S. critical infrastructure at increased risk by threatening the intellectual property of American companies that create the IT that operates the vast majority of U.S. government and private-sector critical networks and systems. The unintended result may be a weakening of the domestic software and hardware industry to an extent that could, ironically, leave the U.S. more dependent upon foreign suppliers for their critical IT systems.

The letter goes on to raise specific concerns about detailed provisions of the bill. You can read the full copy of the letter here.

The Senators issued a forceful response — a letter addressed specifically to the heads of those companies — and it was posted right on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Web site. In the response, they refer to the concerns as “mischaracterizations” of the bill:

This legislation is informed by years of oversight by this Committee and is the result of more than a year of drafting. Our staff spent considerable time working with industry representatives – including representatives from your companies – and the bill, as reported, addresses many of the concerns your companies raised during that time…

Your input on this important legislation is important to our Committee, and both our staff and yours have invested considerable time in this process. While we find the mischaracterizations of our bill in your letter inaccurate and disappointing, we welcome further discussion and hope that we can engage in a constructive dialogue going forward.

Meanwhile, Politico’s Morning Tech is reporting that the House version of the bill is having some trouble.

Staff representing the Senate’s top players in the cybersecurity debate – Rockefeller, Snowe, Collins, Lieberman, Carper – will begin huddling this week over ways to merge the chamber’s top two proposals. But the path forward in the House is still unclear.

The lower chamber’s version of the Lieberman-Collins-Carper plan, spearheaded by Reps. Jane Harman and Pete King, is still pending consideration by a slew of committees that all share jurisdiction. And the committee closest to the action – the House Homeland Security panel – plans to introduce its own bill soon, pitched by Chairman Thompson. Meanwhile, a Senate Dem aide tells Morning Tech that it is unclear whether Rep. Jim Langevin, another cybersecurity leader, is writing his own comprehensive legislation. Stay tuned.

IT WILL BE THE HOUSE SCI/TECH COMMITTEE that will take the first stab at cybersecurity once both chambers return from recess next week. The Technology and Innovation Subcommittee announced late Tuesday it had invited industry leaders from EPIC, the Institute for Defense Analyses, the Council on Foreign Relations and Ponte Technologies to its scheduled July 15 hearing – and it promises additional witness announcements to come soon.

Comment by Sean Britannia on July 5, 2010 at 3:25pm

xquick: Search Engines Should Become Government Spies, Says EU Parliament
Ixquick and Startpage will fight "Big Brother" data retention clause in Declaration 29

June 28, 2010 03:33 AM Eastern Daylight Time

BRUSSELS & NEW YORK & ZEIST, Netherlands --(BUSINESS WIRE)--A draconian proposal to retain all Internet search traffic, known as "Written Declaration 29," was adopted by the European Parliament last week. Framed as a measure to crack down on paedophiles, the controversial Declaration calls on the EU to require that search engines store all search traffic for up to two years for possible analysis by authorities.

Search engine Ixquick (www.ixquick.com), widely regarded as the world's most private search engine, has built a strong privacy reputation by storing no search data on its users. The company believes it has been singled out by the data retention proposal, and it has vowed to strongly oppose the measure becoming law.

"Since Google, Yahoo, and Bing already retain users' search data, this proposal is clearly aimed at Ixquick and our English-language subsidiary Startpage (www.startpage.com)," said Robert Beens, CEO of Ixquick. "We have worked hard to create a privacy-friendly search engine that embodies the spirit of EU Privacy Protections, in line with the strict recommendations of the EU Article 29 Data Protection Working Party. This Declaration is evidence that the left hand of the EU does not know what the right hand is doing."

Mr. Beens fears that if the measure becomes law, it will vastly undermine the privacy of over 500 million law-abiding EU citizens. Storing everyone's search data, rather than restricting surveillance to known or suspected offenders, would give the government access to a rich trove of political, medical, professional, and personal data on virtually every person in Europe. And critics say it will do little to stop child pornography.

"Sex offenders exchange files through underground networks. They don't find this stuff through search engines," said Alex Hanff of Privacy International, an advocacy group that is launching a campaign against the measure. "I spent eight years helping law enforcement track down online sex offenders and never once did we see a case where search engine data was useful."

Ixquick will join the public campaign started by Privacy International to stop the provisions of Written Declaration 29 from becoming law.

"Privacy is a fundamental right and the basis of a free society. The phenomenal success of Ixquick and Startpage proves that people don't want to be watched by their governments," said Mr. Beens. "Spying on law-abiding citizens is not the way forward, and we will stand by our principles to protect the public's ability to search in privacy."

About Ixquick and Startpage

Ixquick is an international, award-winning search engine with an industry-leading privacy policy. Ixquick has been awarded the EU Privacy Seal by the independent certification authority Europrise. Further information can be found at www.ixquick.com and www.startpage.com.

For press inquiries, please contact:

EU Media Relations, Ixquick
Alex van Eesteren, +31-30-6971778
alex@ixquick.com

OR

U.S. Media Relations, Startpage
Dr. Katherine Albrecht
877-434-3100 (U.S. toll free)
+1-973-273-2125 (for International access)
kma@startpage.com

Comment by Sean Britannia on July 5, 2010 at 10:10am

http://www.prisonplanet.com/tsa-to-block-websites-with-controversia...

Comment by Sean Britannia on June 6, 2010 at 2:57am

Bilderberg Deadly threat to Freedom Of speech on the net

Note : the Bilderberg group are also deadly to humanity !

The Bilderbergers An organization holding a meeting in Spain features some of the world’s most influential politicians, bankers and even military chiefs. However, you will not know what they’re up to because the Bilderberg Group gets together under a veil of secrecy. Critics like We Are Change’s Luke Rudkowski say it’s making world changing decisions behind the world’s back.


" target="_blank">

Comment by Sean Britannia on June 6, 2010 at 2:48am

Microsoft founder Bill Gates was personally invited to the conference

Bilderberg were still intent on pushing it in pursuit of a carbon tax despite the fact that the whole move was massively eviscerated in the aftermath of the Climategate scandal.

Tucker quoted one Bilderberg member as all but admitting defeat on the mission to hoodwink the public into paying taxes in the name of fighting global warming.

“On climate change, we’re about whipped,” said one of the elitists in attendance.

However, Tucker said that the globalists were working on putting out more climate change propaganda “even as we speak”.

On the issue of the BP oil spill, the Bilderbergers made it clear that President Obama’s apparent “outrage” at BP and his threat of criminal procedures against the company was an little more than an act and that British Petroleum, who have been represented at Bilderberg meetings in the past by people like Peter Sutherland, former non-executive chairman of BP, were still “one of our brothers,” according to the elitists.

The future of oil prices are always an important topic to Bilderberg and the leaks Tucker and other investigators relayed from previous Bilderberg meetings were proven accurate when oil prices hit $150 a barrel in 2008, which was precisely what Bilderberg had called for.

“Gas prices are going to be nice and cheap this summer,” said Tucker, adding that they would start to rise again to the $4 a gallon level around November when artificial scarcity is created.

On the march towards anti-democratic global government, Bilderberg members stated that America must be “Europeanized” and turned into a giant socialist welfare state with health rationing and higher income taxes.

Tucker said hat Bilderberg were intent on mandating a bank tax paid directly to the IMF to fund global governance and a global treasury department under the IMF, and that this would then merely be passed on to the consumer.

In summary, Tucker said that this year’s conference was the most downbeat and pessimistic Bilderberg meeting in history, with massive exposure of their agenda acting as a roadblock to the ultimate goal of an authoritarian world government run by the elite, for the elite.

Comment by Sean Britannia on June 6, 2010 at 2:47am

The 2010 Bilderberg agenda has been revealed by veteran Bilderberg sleuth Jim Tucker and it paints a picture of crisis for the globalists, who are furious at the increased exposure their gatherings have received in recent years, as well as being dismayed at their failure to rescue both the euro and the failing carbon tax agenda, but more alarmingly according to Tucker, the majority of Bilderberg members are now in favor of military air strikes on Iran.

American Free Press muckraker Tucker has proven routinely accurate with the information he obtains from sources inside Bilderberg, which makes this year’s revelations all the more intriguing.

According to Tucker, Bilderberg luminaries are dismayed at the fact that “many important people” are not attending this year because, due to increasing exposure, invitees are “getting in trouble at home” and constituents are embarrassing them by asking irate questions such as “what are you doing with these monsters?”

“All these people are exposing us, we get all this mail and calls,” Tucker paraphrased Bilderberg members as complaining.

This dovetails with the revelations overheard by Guardian journalist Charlie Skelton at the Hotel Dolce Sitges before the meeting began when he heard conference organizers lamenting the fact that protest numbers are growing at Bilderberg events each year and that they represent a “threat” to Bilderberg’s agenda.

In addition, prominent Bilderberg Zbigniew Brzezinski, the man who warned recently that a “global political awakening” was threatening to derail the move towards global government, was expected to be in attendance at this year’s meeting.

Tucker named his source as an international financial consultant who personally knows Bilderberg members and has done business with them for the past 20 years.

Turning to Iran, Tucker said that many Bilderberg members, including Brzezinski, were in favor of U.S. air strikes on Iran and were “leaning towards war,” although 100 per cent of members were not supportive of an attack.

“Some of them in Europe are saying no we shouldn’t do it but most of them are in favor of American air strikes on Iran,” said Tucker, adding, “They’re tilting heavily towards green lighting a U.S. attack on Iran.”

An attack on Iran would provide a welcome distraction to the globalists’ failings in other areas and would also allow them to war profiteer, pointed out Tucker.

On the subject of the euro, Tucker said that the Bilderberg elitists were determined to save the single currency even as it collapsed to a new 4-year-low at $1.19 against the dollar yesterday afternoon. As we have highlighted, the globalists are panicking at the euro’s fall and the ECB keeps intervening to try and hasten its decline. If the euro were to cease to exist, it would all but derail the ultimate agenda for a global currency because the perceived stability of using one currency for a plethora of nations would be discredited.

“The euro is important because it’s part of their world government program, they’re very downbeat because they’ve fallen so far behind,” said Tucker, explaining that the globalists had planned by now to have the European Union, the American Union and the Asia-Pacific Union already up and running.

Comment by Sean Britannia on April 9, 2010 at 4:44am

Note : do not complain about the size of this post, it is very important!



Death Of The Internet: Unprecedented Censorship Bill Passes in UK
“Wash-up” process used to rush through draconian legislation as a pitiful handful of MPs attend debate
A draconian Internet censorship bill that has been long looming on the horizon finally passed the house of commons in the UK yesterday, legislating for government powers to restrict and filter any website that is deemed to be undesirable for public consumption.
The “Digital Economy Bill” was rushed through parliament in a late night session last night after a third reading.
In the wake of the announcement of a general election on May 6, the government has taken advantage of what is known as the “wash-up process”, allowing the legislative process to be speeded up between an election being called and Parliament being dissolved.
Only a pitiful handful of MPs (pictured below) were present to debate the bill, which was fully supported by the “opposition” Conservative party, and passed by 189 votes to 47 keeping the majority of its original clauses intact.
The bill will now go back to the House of Lords, where it originated, for a final formal approval.
The government removed a proposal in clause 18 of the bill, which openly stated that it could block any website, however it was replaced with an amendment to clause 8 of the bill which essentially legislates for the same powers.
The new clause allows the unelected secretary of state for business, currently Lord Mandelson, to order the blocking of “a location on the internet which the court is satisfied has been, is being or is likely to be used for or in connection with an activity that infringes copyright”.
Opposing MPs argued that the clause was too broad and open ended, arguing that the phrase “likely to be used” could be used to block websites without them ever having been used for “activity that infringes copyright”. Other MPs argued that under the bill, whistleblower websites, such as Wikileaks, could be targeted.
The legislation will also allow the Home Secretary to place “a technical obligation on internet service providers” to block whichever sites it wishes.
Under clause 11 of the proposed legislation “technical obligation” is defined as follows:
A “technical obligation”, in relation to an internet service provider, is an obligation for the provider to take a technical measure against particular subscribers to its service.
A “technical measure” is a measure that — (a) limits the speed or other capacity of the service provided to a subscriber; (b) prevents a subscriber from using the service to gain access to particular material, or limits such use; (c) suspends the service provided to a subscriber; or (d) limits the service provided to a subscriber in another way.
In other words, the government will have the power to force ISPs to downgrade and even block your internet access to certain websites or altogether if it wishes.

The legislation is part of an amplified effort by the government to seize more power over the internet and those who use it.
For months now unelected “Secretary of State” Lord Mandelson has overseen government efforts to challenge the independence of the of UK’s internet infrastructure.
The Digital Economy Bill will also see users’ broadband access cut off indefinitely, in addition to a fine of up to £50,000 without evidence or trial, if they download copyrighted music and films. The plan has been identified as “potentially illegal” by experts.
The legislation would impose a duty on ISPs to effectively spy on all their customers by keeping records of the websites they have visited and the material they have downloaded. ISPs who refuse to cooperate could be fined £250,000.
As Journalist and copyright law expert Cory Doctrow has noted, the bill also gives the Secretary of State the power to make up as many new penalties and enforcement systems as he likes, without Parliamentary oversight or debate.
This could include the authority to appoint private militias, who will have the power to kick you off the internet, spy on your use of the network, demand the removal of files in addition to the blocking of websites.
Mandelson and his successors will have the power to invent any penalty, including jail time, for any digital transgression he deems Britons to be guilty of.
Despite being named the Digital Economy Bill, the legislation contains nothing that will actually stimulate the economy and is largely based on shifting control over the internet into government hands, allowing unaccountable bureaucrats to arbitrarily hide information from the public should they wish to do so.
Mandelson began the onslaught on the free internet in the UK after spending a luxury two week holiday at Nat Rothschild’s Corfu mansion with multi-millionaire record company executive David Geffen.
Over 20,000 members of the public have written to their MPs in the last week to lobby against the bill being rushed through, however, their concerns have fallen on deaf ears and the government has been allowed to deal a devastating blow to the last real vestige of free speech in this country.
The Wider Agenda Of Internet Control
The Digital Economy Bill is intrinsically linked to long term plans by the UK government to carry out an unprecedented extension of state powers by claiming the authority to monitor all emails, phone calls and internet activity nationwide.
IN 2008, the government announced its intention to create a massive central database, gathering details on every text sent, e-mail sent, phone call made and website visited by everyone in the UK.
The programme, known as the “Interception Modernisation Programme”, would allow spy chiefs at GCHQ, the government’s secret eavesdropping agency, the centre for Signal Intelligence (SIGINT) activities (pictured above), to effectively place a “live tap” on every electronic communication in Britain in the name of preventing terrorism.
Following outcry over the announcement, the government suggested that it was scaling down the plans, with then Home Secretary Jacqui Smith stating that there were “absolutely no plans for a single central store” of communications data.
However, as the “climbdown” was celebrated by civil liberties advocates and the plan was “replaced” by new laws requiring ISPs to store details of emails and internet telephony for just 12 months, fresh details emerged indicating the government was implementing a big brother spy system that far outstrips the original public announcement.
The London Times published leaked details of a secret mass internet surveillance project known as “Mastering the Internet” (MTI).
Costing hundreds of millions in public funds, the system is already being implemented by GCHQ with the aid of American defence giant Lockheed Martin and British IT firm Detica, which has close ties to the intelligence agencies.
A group of over 300 internet service providers and telecommunications firms has attempted to fight back over the radical plans, describing the proposals as an unwarranted invasion of people’s privacy.
Currently, any interception of a communication in Britain must be authorised by a warrant signed by the home secretary or a minister of equivalent rank. Only individuals who are the subject of police or security service investigations may be subject to surveillance.
If the GCHQ’s MTI project is completed, black-box probes would be placed at critical traffic junctions with internet service providers and telephone companies, allowing eavesdroppers to instantly monitor the communications of every person in the country without the need for a warrant.
Even if you believe GCHQ’s denial that it has any plans to create a huge monitoring system, the current law under the RIPA (the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act) allows hundreds of government agencies access to the records of every internet provider in the country.
In publicly announced proposals to extend these powers, firms will be asked to collect and store even more vast amounts of data, including from social networking sites such as Facebook.
If the plans go ahead, every internet user will be given a unique ID code and all their data will be stored in one place. Government agencies such as the police and security services will have access to the data should they request it with respect to criminal or terrorist investigations.
This is clearly the next step in an incremental program to implement an already exposed full scale big brother spy system designed to completely obliterate privacy, a fundamental right under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Death Of The Internet In Europe, Australia, New Zealand and the U.S.
Similar efforts to place restrictions on the internet are unfolding in Australia where the government is implementing a mandatory and wide-ranging internet filter modeled on that of the Communist Chinese government.
Australian communication minister Stephen Conroy said the government would be the final arbiter on what sites would be blacklisted under “refused classification.”
The official justification for the filter is to block child pornography, however, as the watchdog group Electronic Frontiers Australia has pointed out, the law will also allow the government to block any website it desires while the pornographers can relatively easily skirt around the filters.
Earlier this year, the Wikileaks website published a leaked secret list of sites slated to be blocked by Australia’s state-sponsored parental filter.
The list revealed that blacklisted sites included “online poker sites, YouTube links, regular gay and straight porn sites, Wikipedia entries, euthanasia sites, websites of fringe religions such as satanic sites, fetish sites, Christian sites, the website of a tour operator and even a Queensland dentist.”
The filter will even block web-based games deemed unsuitable for anyone over the age of fifteen, according to the Australian government.
In neighbouring New Zealand, the government has quietly implemented an internet filter and is urging the leading ISPs in the country to adopt the measure, in a move that would give the authorities the power to restrict whichever websites they see fit.
The New Zealand Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) reportedly turned on the internet filter on February 1st without making any announcement, prompting critics to charge that the measure had been activated in stealth.
It was no coincidence that around the same time the government’s Internet filter went live, Infowars began receiving notification from readers in New Zealand that their access to Alex Jones’ flagship websites Infowars.com and Prisonplanet.com had been suddenly blocked.
The broad attack on the free internet is not only restricted to the UK, New Zealand and Australia.
The European Union, Finland, Denmark, Germany and other countries in Europe have all proposed blocking or limiting access to the internet and using filters like those used in Iran, Syria, China, and other repressive regimes.
In 2008 in the U.S., The Motion Picture Association of America asked president Obama to introduce laws that would allow the federal government to effectively spy on the entire Internet, establishing a system where being accused of copyright infringement would result in loss of your Internet connection.
In 2009 the Cybersecurity Act was introduced, proposing to allow the federal government to tap into any digital aspect of every citizen’s information without a warrant. Banking, business and medical records would be wide open to inspection, as well as personal instant message and e mail communications.
The legislation, introduced by Senators John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) in April, gives the president the ability to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any “critical” information network “in the interest of national security.” The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president, according to a Mother Jones report.
During a hearing on the bill, Senator John Rockefeller betrayed the true intent behind the legislation when he stated, “Would it have been better if we’d have never invented the Internet,” while fearmongering about cyber attacks on the U.S. government and how the country could be shut down.
Watch the clip below.

The Obama White House has also sought a private contractor to “crawl and archive” data such as comments, tag lines, e-mail, audio and video from any place online where the White House “maintains a presence” – for a period of up to eight years.
Obama has also proposed scaling back a long-standing ban on tracking how people use government Internet sites with “cookies” and other technologies.
Recent disclosures under the Freedom Of Information Act also reveal that the federal government has several contracts with social media outlets such as Youtube (Google), Facebook, Myspace and Flickr (Yahoo) that waive rules on monitoring users and permit companies to track visitors to government web sites for advertising purposes.
The U.S. military also has some $30 Billion invested in it’s own mastering the internet projects.
We have extensively covered efforts to scrap the internet as we know it and move toward a greatly restricted “internet 2″ system. All of the above represents stepping stones toward the realisation of that agenda.

Death Of The Internet: Censorship Bill Passes in UK

“Wash-up” process used to rush through draconian legislation
http://bnp.org.uk/groups/stop-internet-censorship

Mandelson began the onslaught on the free internet in the UK after spending a luxury two week holiday at Nat Rothschild’s mansion with record boss David Geffen,

Over 20,000 members of the public have written to their MPs i however, their concerns have fallen on deaf ears and the government has been allowed to deal a devastating blow to the last real vestige of free speech in this country.

Comment by Sean Britannia on March 19, 2010 at 12:20pm

http://www.facebook.com/?ref=home#!/profile.php?id=772385093&ref=ts

Hi Paul,

Please pass on this information to others also look for, Melissa Short a friend of mine on face-book from Australia she is taking a petition to the Australian government to overturn their block. Find her groups on face book and show all your friends as I am sure me you and others will be doing the same thing here if Builderberger Lord Peter Mandelson gets his way with his digital economy bill to be in line with all the other country's they control.

The loss of freedom of speech Internet may be the causes of the uprising against the elite Criminals that rule and fool us all.

Kindest Regards

Sean.

Comment by Paul on March 19, 2010 at 9:15am

That is very scary. Freedom of information & open soource communities are valuable resources. I am angainst Big Brother telling me what I can and cannot access or provide to others when it comes to information. I think I need to invite others here to support this group.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page