Within the last couple of years several Internet Censorship bills have been introduced and many passed among different countries around the world. Some culturally strict countries set up rules early that ban certain media sites and other Internet content within the country. The last Internet Censorship bill introduced in the United States was on October 1st 2010 by Senator Patrick Leahy is. He also voted to fund imperial wars, regressive Obamacare, Wall Street-friendly financial reform, and other pro-business measures, including agribusiness-empowering bills, harming small farmers and consumers.
Take Note: The site Wikileaks.org has been down for several weeks.
Now Leahy is proposing an Internet censorship bill. On September 20 ( 9+2=11), he introduced S. 3804: Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA), “A bill to combat online infringement, and for other purposes.”
Two online blacklists will be created:
The bill doesn’t mandate, but “strongly suggests” that second category domains be blocked “as well as providing legal immunity for Internet intermediaries and DNS operators” that do it willingly at the behest of authorities. Without question, “tremendous pressure” will be applied to comply, the alternative perhaps being recrimination for refusing.
Web sites the Attorney General may choose to censor or block. And, most disturbing, domain names the Justice Department decides (without judicial review) are “dedicated to infringing activities.
Though fairly short, COICA may dangerously impair free expression, “current Internet architecture, copyright doctrine, foreign policy,” and more. In 2010, “efforts to re-write copyright law targeting ‘piracy’ online” have been shown “to have unintended consequences.”
Like other 2009 and 2010 bills, COICA “is a censorship bill that runs roughshod over freedom of speech on the Internet,” an outrageous First Amendment violation by “trying to define a site ‘dedicated to infringing activities,’ by blocking a whole domain,” not that one part alone if legally proved, rather than by government edict.
The 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) “already gives copyright owners legal tools to remove infringing material piece-by-piece.” It also lets them get injunctions requiring ISPs block infringing offshore sites. Misusing these provisions “have had a tremendously damaging impact on fair use and free expression.”
If enacted, Leahy’s COICA will take a giant leap, “streamlining and vastly expand(ing)” existing damage. It’ll let the Attorney General shut down domains, including their “blog posts, images, backups, and files.” As a result, “legitimate, protected speech will be taken down in the name of copyright enforcement,” and basic Internet infrastructure will be undermined.
Last April a long looming Internet Censorship bill passed the house of commons in the UK allowing the government powers to restrict and filter websites that is considered damaging for public consumption, or course vulnerable to definition.
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…
- Limits the speed or other capacity of the service provided to a subscriber
- Prevents a subscriber from using the service to gain access to particular material, or limits such use
- 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.
Merriam-Webster defines a police state as follows:
A political unit characterized by repressive government control of political, economic, and social life usually by an arbitrary exercise of power by police and especially secret police in place of regular operation of administrative and judicial organs of the government according to publicly known legal procedures.”
In other words: overt and covert hardline control, maintained by loss of personal freedoms, civil liberties, and constitutional protections though legislation, pervasive surveillance, lawless privacy intrusions, and midnight or pre-dawn arrests on whatever grounds authorities charge against which there’s no defense.
The ultimate goal is to create an internet-paradigm that corresponds to the corporate mainstream model, devoid of imagination or divergent points of view. They envision an internet that is increasingly restricted by the gluttonous influence of industry and its vast “tapestry of lies”. The internet is the modern-day marketplace of ideas, an invaluable resource for human curiosity and organized resistance. It provides a direct link between the explosive power of ideas and engaged citizen involvement. (aka; participatory democracy)
The New World Oder manipulators are laying the groundwork for privatizing the internet so the information-revolution can be transformed into an information-tyranny, extending to all areas of communications and serving the exclusive interests of a few well-heeled plutocrats.
Controlling dynamics will be presented and enacted by the world governments as the word draws near to the Activation of the New World Order. The western world experiences continual surveillance and undue security. Internet Censorship must be passed into law for the New World Order to trap the deluded successfully into their enslavement.