Barack Obama's Internet Kill Switch
What are the chances of a US Internet Kill Switch? Could it happen? Is it practical? The Foundation for the Advancement of Free-Market Thinking (FAFMT) and The Daily Bell are pleased to bring you a short video presentation titled, Internet Kill Switch.
The video features hard-to-believe yet true events unfolding right now in Washington D.C. to try and suppress the Internet's ability to support the freedom of the press. Will the power elite be victorious in squelching Internet freedom? We surely hope not and will continue to support freedom of the press and the Internet-spawned advance of liberty and free-market thinking. We hope you enjoy the video and look forward to reading your feedback. Click here to watch.
Viewers, as well, are invited to add their financial support to our Foundation's efforts to spread the word on this and other critical freedom issues. The time to act is now. Educational efforts like those being led by FAFMT via publishing efforts like the Daily Bell and outside free-market organizations it supports are critical to the expansion of freedom-awareness supported by sites and outlets on the World Wide Web.
Today there is substantive Internet freedom. But if Barack Obama and the power elite standing behind him get their way, the authoritarian nightmare planned for all citizens suppressed under the control of a New World Order will move closer reality.
In fact, just yesterday, there were news reports about the Obama administration is moving forward with an Internet ID plan for the US Internet-using public. The administration announced it would support programs created by the private market that would make Internet IDs available to those who wanted to use them.
There's "no reliable way to verify identity online" at the moment, US Commerce Secretary Gary Locke said, using malware and identity theft as justifications for funding such a program. "Passwords just won't cut it here." Of course, that's not the real reason to create an ID program. The real reason is to chill free speech. Anyone who believes such an ID system will remain voluntary also likely believes that Obama himself is a wide-eyed Democratic radical and not the corporatist political functionary he so obviously is.
There are international efforts afoot to rein-in the Internet. In "Is France Plotting to Kill the Free Internet?" tech writer Bobbie Johnson advises us to "Keep a weather eye on next month's G8 gathering of ministers and Web moguls—a potential oligarchy in the making." Johnson points out French President Nicolas Sarkozy is planning to use the gathering to advance his plans to further regulate the Internet.
Sarkozy, who has proposed taxes on Internet use and is dedicated to the creation of a "civilized" Internet, wants to use the G8 as a platform to put top politicians and top technologists in the same room together. According to Johnson, those Sarkozy hopes will include attendees Eric Schmidt of Google, Jack Ma of Alibaba, Jeff Bezos of Amazon, and Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg. "They'll be talking about the future of the Internet, and items up for discussion include copyright, piracy, privacy, security, and the cloud. It's not obvious whether this gaggle of ministers and moguls will agree on specific policies."
Again, none of this is actually aimed at benefitting Internet freedom. People like Sarkozy want to CONTROL this endlessly organic facility and reduce its ability to expose elite plans. It's making them crazy! In the 20th century, the Anglosphere elite moved rapidly toward its goal of centralized world governance. But 21st century technology has virtually stripped away the veil of secrecy behind which the elites operated and exposed their plans.
By exposing their plans and also the fear-based promotions that they use to drive middle classes into giving up power and wealth to internationalist institutions, the Internet has vastly complicated the elite's efforts at "finishing the job." It is the Internet and those intrepid reporters who place information on it that has revealed the extent, ambition and arrogance of elite plans. It is the Internet that has allowed people to perform the research and write the articles that have exposed the fraudulent central banking system and ways the mainstream media reinforces elite memes.
The elites would like nothing better than a methodology that allows them to turn off or "kill" parts of the Internet, especially in times of crisis, perhaps a manufactured one. The main target for the elites, of course, is not the Middle East or Europe but America. In a March 2011 article, "In Search Of The Internet Kill Switch" TechCrunch's John Orlin explored efforts at targeting the US for an Internet kill switch.
Orlin reports on Libya's Internet shutdown in early March and also Egypt's attempt to shut down its Internet while the revolution against Hosni Mubarak was underway. But that effort backfired and only angered protestors. "We couldn't condemn the action in other countries while at the same time plan it here?" Orlin asks. The answer: Yes, in fact, the US could do just such a thing.
He reminds us that Senators Joseph Lieberman, Susan Collins and Thomas Carper introduced the controversial "Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010.″ This bill included language to "authorize emergency measures to protect the nation's most critical infrastructure if a cyber vulnerability is being exploited or is about to be exploited." Press reports labeled the legislation the "kill switch" bill. Orlin adds the following:
When talking about an Internet kill switch, an image of a giant switch in the Oval Office, perhaps next to the "red telephone," used to shut down the entire Internet comes to mind. But that's fiction and gives the bill's sponsors cover to deny the bill contains a total kill switch ... While denying the bill authorized a presidential "kill switch" in a fact sheet, Lieberman told CNN, "Right now, China, the government, can disconnect parts of its Internet in a case of war. We need to have that here, too." Just because China does it is a laughable argument. It's also clear he wants a way to turn parts of the Internet off.
We've pointed out in the past that it is likely impossible to "turn off" such a vast system in the United States or throughout Europe. But it is certainly possible to bring the Internet further under control of elites that hope to turn it into a glorified TV-oriented "programming" network. Whether this happens is up to all of this. We take "human action" to determine our futures individually and together as regards such critical issues.
I would urge all who are concerned about Internet freedom to follow elite efforts at further controlling it and to help us spread awareness in order to combat 'Net censorship. Like the Gutenberg press before it, the Internet is a mechanism for spreading important information that can lead to vast social change – while ameliorating further authoritarian centralization within the context of a "new world order."
This is what Western Anglo-American elites in particular fear, as they are desperately trying to put the finishing touches on world government before the larger masses wake up to the full reality of the threat. To the elites, the Internet is a big mistake that emerged out of an unfortunate synthesis between a DARPA military-information network and the unexpected, non-government-initiated creation of the portable PC. To others, including myself, it is the world's great hope.
Posted by Bob on 04/17/11 12:36 AM
The 9/11 in 2001 is a now-day equivalent to the Reichstag burning in Berlin on 27 February 1933. It allowed to the Nazi leadership to take a complete control of Germany. Unfortunately, the 9/11 had the same objectives of transforming the USA into a totalitarian neo-fascist state. The ramifications will be the same, i.e., the next World War.
The League of Nations (LON) was an intergovernmental organization founded as a result of the Paris Peace Conference that ended World War I, and it was the precursor to the United Nations. It has been a unquestionable failure. It becomes obvious that the United Nations will have the same future.
The present worldwide financial crisis and the de-facto Western World financial & economic bankruptcy are events very similar to what took place in1930s.
May be I am paranoiac but I am more and more convinced that we are all passengers on a runaway train heading to a major worldwide military confrontation. I disagree that the PE is gaining power and influence. To the contrary, the present international events are more and more out-off control. The now-day PE is totally clueless of what to do.
Posted by Geoff Masen on 04/17/11 12:16 AM
Kunsthausmann, I laughed out loud at this piece, oS. Where does one get a keyboard that will convey sarcasm anyway?
I can't believe The Economist would try and address this issue at all. It looks like the first class cabin is beginning to question themselves as well. The "magazine management" if you will...
Have a great weekend
Posted by Kunsthausmann on 04/16/11 11:36 PM
Geoff Masen, there be humor in that article.
"It also helps to be on first-name terms with other globocrats."
"Davos is perhaps the glitziest of these globocratic gatherings."
"In 2003 Jack Straw, Britain's foreign secretary, had an informal meeting in his hotel suite with the
president of Iran,..."
"Globocrats failed to avert the crisis, but they rallied once it struck. Rich-country governments acted in concert to prop up banks with taxpayers' money"
And, finally, the big one, which was written at the very beginning:
" 'YOU can do nothing against a conspiracy theory,' sighs Etienne Davignon."
But of course Etienne knows that's just claptrap and probably smiled if he read that sarcastic remark about how "he presides over...an evil conspiracy bent on world domination." I'm not so sure about the editor, though. Sometimes I feel sorry for people who read The Economist with the belief that it warrants reverence as a principled advocate for liberty and laissez faire, not to mentioned on account of that high-minded rhetoric found at the bottom of its masthead.
Posted by Orion on 04/16/11 11:23 PM
As I said before "All" traffic is DNS driven over the last few years all including Web 2.0 along with your P2Ps VPNs(firewalls resolve DNS or Stop) internal and remote along with your layer 3 switches all rely on DNS and resolving IPs btw not my field of expertise just some training I needed to learn in a hurry for special projects.
the dial up which continued to work in the recent mid-east shut downs where due to international telephony numbers being hard wire and accessed through many COs (central offices) dialed up slow as molasses (most as slow as 9600 baud) but did the trick in getting out text as information besides the digital access was re-activated due to pressure from the UN and EU for/under humanitarian flag.
Analog is much more of a nightmare to control in a large scale both external and internal which is why the world has almost all been migrated to digital. SATCOM (Satellite communications) is a horse of another color as is Point to Point either IR or Line of site Wireless...... as is HAM and Morse code almost forgotten by most Civi's. funny visual "Clap on Clap off" hehehehe Orion out
Posted by Agent Weebley on 04/16/11 10:27 PM
But would the ATMs, the BitTorrentClients and VPNs continue to operate? I would say yes, because "utilities" are routed through the net. Would the WWW browser be the only "internet" routed through the switch?
Remember the Egyptian stockmarket had a 10% internet hum after they shut down their net?
Click to view link
If they shut the "internet" down in the USA, then would we be free of their brainwashing for a while? British libraries are now free of it, due to not being able to climb the paywalls and see Murdock's warped view from the top.
Finally, some peace . . . and love inside that Venus Hum.
Plus, there are some communication workarounds already . . . we're not as dumb as they look.
Oh, and those dang APTs will probably just turn the net back on again, since they will re-wire Obama's switches as 3-ways (with the Clapper II remote feature.)
Click to view link
Posted by Orion on 04/16/11 10:27 PM
I agree with the first comment referencing the "Tempest in a tea pot", BUT be aware that the way all internet traffic works is done by translation of IP addresses to names or names to IP addresses (numbers i.e 220.127.116.11 thedailybell swiss registered IP) that is done my many top end DNS (Domain Name Server) Servers without their conversion the traffic Internet and VoIP (VoIP is voice over IP or telephone over the internet in laments terms) would seize, The U.N has tried and is still trying to take control of these servers we (USA) have the root control of these and technically they could be shut down and in so doing shutting down the internet and IP communications on the civilian side, the Mil/Gov highway would continue to operate, I suggest get back to CBs (citizen band radio) or HAM so chain communications can continue across our (America) land. Orion out.
Posted by Geoff Masen on 04/16/11 09:01 PM
Perhaps you haven't heard: There is an elite but it's gonna be OK.
Click to view link
Posted by James Haney on 04/16/11 06:32 PM
Mr wild, First I want to say I am a Mr Public or man on the street. I have had a theory from the beginning of Obama's political campaign. This guy has to be a plant by clandestine American haters and hardly a day goes by that confirms my thinking. I'll say that I do get confused by reading all the pros and cons about Obama and politics in general.
I have always stuck with my original theory and nothing so far has diverted me from that thought. Sometimes I can not believe how America has lost face and respect throughout the world because in many cases due to poor leadership. Where are the good Americans to run the country? Has American became to hard to manage for the poor leaders America has chosen in recent elections. Has American Democracy became obsolete and fragmented and unable to work properly or is it just the people running the country do not know how to use American Democracy for Americans.
Posted by Zenbillionaire on 04/16/11 06:21 PM
I'd like to second William3's critique of the video, I had an identical response. I understand that you're trying for a "15 second synopsis" but I don't know if you can compress it that far without coming off as just another Chicken Little. It's a complicated and very important topic, it might deserve a more in depth treatment as a video. The article on the other hand was very good.
Posted by William3 on 04/16/11 06:06 PM
I like the idea of exposing Power Elite schemes using more video media.
My preference, however, would be that DB not to use scare tactics similar to those employed by other alternative news sites. This is countering PE fear mongering with more fear. This doesn't seem fitting for the "objective observer" image DB has built with its blog.
In Internet Kill Switch you almost portray Obama as another Hitler or Big Brother. Many Americans (not familiar with DB), I believe, will be turned off by this, even those displeased with Obama. Although accurate to me, I think this video is a bit abrupt as a intro into the issue.
I'm not a movie director, but for DB, fact-based comparisons of "PE view versus DB view" would give citizens more of an opportunity to assess and evaluate what is closest to the truth.
Bottom line -- do more video, but think more about how.
Posted by Zenbillionaire on 04/16/11 06:01 PM
"Though you're diving days are behind you, you obviously have a talent in computers that can compensate for your loss"
Hah! I'll take that as a compliment :)
In a former life I had the dubious honor of helping build the internet, but that was many, many years ago. My services in that arena are no longer required. I used to know one of the guys who invented BGP and most of the tirade above comes from my conversations with him. He was very adamant about keeping the net free.
Posted by Shilo on 04/16/11 05:17 PM
The strategy is so obvious it is laughable. First let it be known that there is a proposal for an internet kill switch (despite the fact that it is technically not feasible, and would be political and economic suicide). Next make speeches about the importance of freedom of the internet. But, all the time work behind the scenes on the kinds of controls well described today by Zenbillionaire. These are not easy to oppose, because so few have the technical understanding, and most will pay no attention to announcements beyond their ken. In all probability we will be routed.(Heh) But, of course alternative networks free from controls will spring up, and then you have a perfect virtual facsimile of what already goes on in the black economy.
Posted by Lyn on 04/16/11 04:51 PM
Though you're diving days are behind you, you obviously have a talent in computers that can compensate for your loss. (My apology for not responding back to your post on 4/12 regarding Ron Paul's Nanny State. I would like to have done so at the time especially in regards to your dialogue with Wayne. The care of a cancer-ridden stepfather leaves less time for reading than I would like, but I nevertheless appreciate your thoughts all the same. I really miss reading the articles and feedback everyday and it's hard to play catch up later, or worse, seem indifferent to what someone responds with by not answering at all. Maybe when I can return to California and my husband...
Posted by Geoff Masen on 04/16/11 04:07 PM
"It is most likely technically impossible for the government alone to come up with such a capability. The problem becomes those persons and/or businesses that will cooperate with the government to bring such an atrocity about. Maybe boycotts and embargoes against such parties can be effective to combat this in the future."
This happened in Egypt when Vodafone explained (in an apology no less) that it was essentially easier to comply with Mr. Mubarak and shut down than to deal with their equipment being shut down forcibly. Vodafone however was allegedly "forced" to send out pro-Mubarak messages, which is a testament to what little internal control these entities actually have. Mission statement indeed...
For all that wonder about who or what the elite are, I would suggest they become familiar with the members of the ICG, CFR and the Brookings Institution.
Click to view link
The ICG involves people like Mohamed ElBaradei, the former IAEA director who returned to Egypt in 2010 along with other State dpt.-trained youth leaders to perhaps orchestrate the most mechanical organic rebellion in history. George Soros is also a trustee and is actively funding NGOs that are taking part in the new post-revolution Egypt.
Click to view link
From the Brookings Institute we find some eerily prescient commentary on military options in Libya. The American leadership with its rigid intellect may have decided to go this route.
"This is also why there is a very considerable danger of escalation or mission creep from a NFZ. The imposition of a NFZ is not going to prevent Qaddafi's ground forces from continuing to kill people and, especially if the opposition is unable to hold off his counteroffensives, there could be tremendous pressure to turn the No-FLY Zone into a No-DRIVE Zone"to go after his tanks and other armored vehicles. That is a much, much more demanding mission for U.S. and NATO air forces. Moreover, we should remember that most of the killing is likely to be done by infantry"guys on foot with rifles. They are always the ones who inflict the most casualties in civil wars, and it is effectively impossible to prevent them from doing so with only air power. If you are serious about that, you need boots on the ground."
Complete report here:
Click to view link
Corporate support here:
Click to view link
The CFR may be most recently remembered for it's member, Feisel Rauf and his Cordoba House "center" that was to be in place too near the 911 ground zero some said. In actuality it was a hoax.
Click to view link
Corporate support here:
Click to view link
I hope some of you will have a chance to review these links and take some time to digest what is happening around us. In my opinion, and I have no right to it, we are able to better discern some of what we are told via the mainstream if we can allow ourselves to grasp the fact that things are not what most of us thought " or were taught. This can be a very enabling truth which is brought to bear, as DB so frequently points out, by the immense power of the internet.
Posted by MetaCynic on 04/16/11 02:09 PM
If it's malware on the internet that the government is really concerned about protecting us from, then how about doing its job and prosecuting those who release such harmful stuff? Fines and jail time will go further toward ridding the world of internet crimes than the equivalent of a policeman in every house. But, of course, as we've all repeatedly observed, protecting the public from genuine harm is never part of the government's job description. Witness the SEC's failure to pursue Bernie Madoff after being amply alerted to his machinations.
Amping up its power over us and extorting more money from us is government's real mission statement.
Posted by Lbeards on 04/16/11 01:52 PM
Any attempt to stop the free flow of information by our government would be the proverbial 'straw' and could very well set off the coming revolution, that sits patiently awaiting the crash that will come when the dollar becomes relegated to third world status. If the politicians want it early -that's the trigger. My bet is they want it later. The internet is safe ...for now!
Posted by Zenbillionaire on 04/16/11 01:22 PM
Killing the internet would be silly. I won't rule out the idea that big government can do silly things, but it wouldn't be in their best interest.
A more productive "defense" would be to take it over. For example, say The Daily Bell were to somehow be identified as undesirable by TPTB; I'm not saying this could happen, its just and example. Would it be better to shut down the entire internet to silence the Bell or simply take over the site? I think the answer is obvious, it would be easier and most importantly more effective to simply take over the site.
How would someone do that? It's really pretty simple. When you type Click to view link into the address bar of a web browser, the address is resolved through the Domain Name Server (DNS) that your computer is configured to use.
Typically that address is configured by your Internet Service Provided (ISP). You may be able to override the DNS you use and anyone interested in preserving free access to the net should familiarize themselves with that procedure. You should have several backup "trusted" DNS server pairs you can plug in if you think your ISP has been compromised.
DNS tables are important since you could be re-directed to an address that looks just like The Daily Bell, but has different content. How would you know? If you're a long time reader you might figure it out after awhile but maybe not. It depends completely on how good the fake is. The DB makes the job harder since you can't use their raw IP address (currently 18.104.22.168) to connect (HINT to DB: You should look into ways to change that).
There are efforts being made in the US to put all DNS resolution under the control of a central authority. This would be very bad and should be vigorously opposed.
After DNS, we need to pay attention to something called the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) since it's also under attack by regulators who would like to control it in order to "protect" the Internet from malicious people. To understand the significance of BGP you need to have an idea of how internet routing works and most importantly how "peering" works.
At the edges of every ISP's network there are "gateways" to the rest of the world. These gateways are simply other routers that belong to other ISPs and they're usually connected to each other using high speed fiber optic cable or by a satellite link. When two routers are connected, each "advertise" the network addresses that they can reach, or connect to. There's a protocol between these devices for exchanging routing tables, this is BGP. ISPs unilaterally decide whether or not to "trust" a router on an external network, this is called "peering"; when I trust a router to advertise true addresses, it is a "peer".
Certain authorities would like to take away the organic decision making process used by ISPs when they decide to trust a peer. They would rather have a centralized routing authority to certify the "trustworthyness" of a route. This needs to be resisted for both technical and political reasons. From a technical perspective it's bad because it creates a single point of failure in the network, though that criticism might be addressed by secure table exchange and route replication. The political problem is obvious; the entity that controls the routing tables controls who can speak and what you can listen to. Efforts to "fix" BGP should be resisted vehemently by anyone interested in protecting free speech.
The "Internet ID" campaign is a solution in search of a problem. Secure endpoint identification is available today and has been available for over 20 years. Anyone who wishes to have a verifiable, secure internet ID can obtain one from companies like VeriSign. There is no need to create a government issued Internet ID. None at all.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Thank you for such good insights.
Posted by Reegje on 04/16/11 01:08 PM
I cannot happen but take offense with what you say about the American public. I am not one myself but live in the States and I can tell you we are livid about Libya, livid about the Gestapo aka TSA. What you do not seem to understand, is that the American government has been hyjacked a long time ago by the globalists. And as such they completely ignore the will of the people as has shown with the bailout of 2008 (the financial coup) and the hidious healthcare bill. Sure the Americans need to wake up faster, but they do. I help!
Reply from The Daily Bell
It cannot be that such a culture is still a-slumber. The elites are pushing very hard though and thus it takes great effort in the other direction. The results may not therefore be entirely peaceful as the elites refuse to give a millimeter.
Posted by Mijama on 04/16/11 12:43 PM
There is already a workaround " Click to view link " a free online liberty course, that can be downloaded in its entirety at around 4MB and distributed on CDRs or flash drives, just in case the government tries to kill the internet.
Reply from The Daily Bell
We've mentioned this in the past. Thanks for the heads up and link!
Posted by Pat on 04/16/11 12:40 PM
Reading these posts gives hope, at least on this site, we've not been relegated to "brain donor" status. "We The People..." Powerful words, no?