Quick Post

The State Hates The Internet

New Topic
The State Hates The Internet
  • Had the regime underststood what the internet would mean– the destructon of official media and the proliferation of unofficial thinking, booming web commerce instead of brick and mortar stores, etc.–it never would have allowed it to come into existence. Given their typical mistake–they are always trying to catch up to the market–surely the smartest minds in the state stay up late thinking of how to wreck the internet in ways that will not undermine the state through public anger. Here is the latest scheme from beloved neocon Richard Posner. This government judge proposes outlawing linking without prior permission, to destroy Google news and other aggregators that necessarily have no government-approved gatekeepers, and all unapproved web media. In particular, Posner–a crazed IPnik (for the libertarian view, see here and here) as well–also wants to protect government#%92s beloved newspapers, as if any young person would then pick up one of these expensive, hand-staining pieces of federal propaganda. So what would happen if Posner got his way (impossible, I guess, given all the great hackers, etc.)? We#%92d all link to foreign sites only, which would then cover US goings-on even more fully, because they would want the traffic. The Washington Post, the New York Times, and all the rest of the CIA#%92s house organs would continue to decline until they are bailed out by some Obama stimulus, thus making clear what has long been the case, that they serve the state. (Thanks to David Kramer)

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/028827.html
  • that would be a way to controll what the masses can read and another
    attempt to control the thinking people. 
     
    George Carlin said  it best. 
     
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYIC0eZYEtI&feature=related
     
    warning adult language.
  • Slight shift but very similar is the proposed law that would require Christian radio stations to air equal amounts of time to opposing views.  Dictating what they can broadcast by making listeners hear the (for example) positive aspects of homosexuality when scripture teaches against it.  Or having programs from a faith that is diametrically opposed to Christianity.  It's bad, bad stuff.
  • light shift but very similar is the proposed law that would require Christian radio stations to air equal amounts of time to opposing views.  Dictating what they can broadcast by making listeners hear the (for example) positive aspects of homosexuality when scripture teaches against it.  Or having programs from a faith that is diametrically opposed to Christianity.  It's bad, bad stuff.


    You said it well. I is amazing to me how much the goverment is trying to control what I do in my own home. We are in some serious troubled times my friends.