The War Against the Internet

The U.S. House of Representatives has just passed the Hate Crimes Bill, making certain (presumed) thoughts at certain times illegal and punishable by extra severity. This passage occurred only days after the bill was released from committee. Obviously regulating thought is not a problem for this Democratic Congress.

So it should have no problem in voting to regulate the internet. According to Senator Jay Rockefeller, the internet is the number one hazard to America's security. He opines,

"It really almost makes you ask the question would it have been better if we had never invented the internet".

Spreading fear of a "cyber-Katrina" (a term invented by Sen. Olympia Snowe), the Left is pushing for federal control of the internet through Rockefeller's "Cybersecurity Act of 2009", (Senate Bills 773 and 778) which gives the feds the ability to, among other things, shut the internet down. Unwarranted hysteria is always useful in creating more government control (think Anthropogenic Global Warming).

Buried within the 51 page "working document" are some interesting issues. First is the designated power to designate and control private software configuration. Then there is the creation and control of a national software protocol. Glaringly, the following is designated: develop the technology to

"determine origin of a message transmitted over the internet".

And then this:

Sec. 18 (2): "may declare a cybersecurity emergency and
order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic
to and from any compromised Federal government
or United States critical infrastructure information
system or network".

Moreover, the bill is designed to accredit and accommodate non-profit operators (think Acorn or its minions).

Obama has charged in to battle against the internet from a different flank. His nominee for "regulatory czar" to head the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Cass Sunstein, advocates a "fairness doctrine" for the internet. According to Brad o'Leary and WND, Sunstein believes the internet is anti-democratic:

"Sunstein also has argued in his prolific literary works that the Internet is anti-democratic because of the way users can filter out information of their own choosing.

"A system of limitless individual choices, with respect to communications, is not necessarily in the interest of citizenship and self-government," he wrote. "Democratic efforts to reduce the resulting problems ought not be rejected in freedom's name."

Sunstein does favor internet filters for certain email, including language containing certain emotional aspects including anger. Such email would be rejected with theoretical override capabilities.

According to The American Conservative Union, Sunstein is also a radical animal rights activist, believing in strict gun control, making hunting illegal, giving animals the right to bring lawsuits via a human representative, and extensive regulation of the use of animals in entertainment, research and agriculture.

This is not too radical for Obama who already has two avowed communists on his payroll.

Think that this won't lead to complete filters on the internet? Consider that Australia has done just that, following in the footsteps of the Peoples Republic of Red China. The internet is indeed a threat; it threatens those who fear the harsh light of truth. Those are the ones who wish to throttle the communications paths. The first thing that all revolutionaries do is to seize state control of all avenues of communication. The MSM is already seized; talk radio and the internet are next.