Archive

Archive for the ‘1st Amendment’ Category

Feds Creates Fake Social Media People to Influence Public Opinion

February 22nd, 2011 No comments

Big Sister is Watching YouWASHINGTON: This one is just plain spooky. We are used to politicians lying to us face-to-face. Now they want to lie behind fake personalities on social media web sites.

The Feds are populating social media sites with fake people to manipulate a false consensus on any issue that they deem important. Tired of having their real identities made public, they are hiring contractors to figure out ways to more easily create and manage fake identities. This is net neutrality on steroids.

The Persona Management Software project has clear parameters:

Software will allow 10 personas per user, replete with background , history, supporting details, and cyber presences that are technically, culturally and geographacilly consistent. Individual applications will enable an operator to exercise a number of different online persons from the same workstation and without fear of being discovered by sophisticated adversaries. Personas must be able to appear to originate in nearly any part of the world and can interact through conventional online services and social media platforms. The service includes a user friendly application environment to maximize the user’s situational awareness by displaying real-time local information.

News regarding this contract was part of the HBGary’s leaked emails and was brought to media attention by Sean Kerrigan of the Examiner:

Even the most restrictive and security conscious of persons can be exploited. Through the targeting and information reconnaissance phase, a person’s hometown and high school will be revealed. An adversary can create a classmates.com account at the same high school and year and find out people you went to high school with that do not have Facebook accounts, then create the account and send a friend request. Under the mutual friend decision, which is where most people can be exploited, an adversary can look at a targets friend list if it is exposed and find a targets most socially promiscuous friends, the ones that have over 300-500 friends, friend them to develop mutual friends before sending a friend request to the target. To that end friend’s accounts can be compromised and used to post malicious material to a targets wall. When choosing to participate in social media an individual is only as protected as his/her weakest friend.”

Once again we are finding out the truth from hackers. The NIP was one of the first to report the ClimateGate leaks and make the emails public. Recently we learned from Julian Assange’s WikiLeaks that the US gave British nuclear secrets to Russia. Now we find out that we are being manipulated on social media sites. We discover the real truth only from the web. No wonder Obama wants the Internet Kill Switch.

Maybe you could tell usk why the NIP gets more traffic from the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice than any other federal agencies.

Categories: 1st Amendment Tags:

The Death of the Internet at the Hands of the FCC

December 21st, 2010 No comments

WASHINGTON: The FCC seized the Internet today under the guise of “Net Neutrality.” The FCC’s attempt to seize the Internet in 2005 was struck down in 2008, and so now they are back at it again. The NIP has repeatedly warned about this seizure of a free and open conduit of information. We understand it is a complicated issue, but what it boils down to is that 3 democrats just seized the Internet today.

As always the reports and regulations are dumped on the American public after 11 PM and voted on within hours to prevent Americans from learning the truth. Of course, this is done during Christmas week when folks do not have time to check the news. You won’t have to worry about checking the news in the future, because under the hands of the FCC all news channels will eventually be controlled by the government. Someday your grandchildren, struggling to pay off our debt to the Chinese will ask you, “Where were you grandpa when our rights to free speech were stolen? Why didn’t you do something?”

Listen to FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell explain what just happened:

Radio Jock Fired After Urging Listeners to Fight Murkowski

November 1st, 2010 No comments

Lisa MurkowskiANCHORAGE: This spring Senator Lisa Murkowski agreed to step aside should she lose the Republican primary. Guess what? She lost, but then decided to run as a write-in candidate to sabotage the Republican winner.

Now radio personality Dan Fagan rallies voters to fight Murkowski by signing up themselves as write-in candidates. How does his radio station react? He gets fired.

A day after urging Alaskans to sign up as write-in candidates in the U.S. Senate race as an act of “civil disobedience,” a popular Anchorage talk show host was pulled from the air today.

KFQD 750 AM host Dan Fagan said he returned from lunch to learn that his 2 to 5 p.m. show had been canceled after a representative of Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s campaign called to complain. Fagan said he’s not fired and that the status of the show will be “re-evaluated” on Monday.

The caller said “that I should be punished for electioneering and that I may have violated electioneering laws,” Fagan said.

Listen to clip from yesterday’s show:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

The conservative radio host, a supporter of Republican nominee Joe Miller, rallied voters to register as write-in candidates to protest an order by the Alaska Supreme Court that allows election workers to show voters a list of write-in candidates.

The decision was expected to help Murkowski’s write-in bid by making it easier for people to get her name right at the voting booth. Fagan argues that it amounts to illegal electioneering on behalf of the state by promoting a candidate who failed to win a spot on the ballot in the primary elections. Anchorage Daily News

Lisa Murkowski needs stopped, and congratulations to Dan Fagan for standing up to her. Now it’s time for us to fight back on Fagan’s behalf. Call KFQD and flood their switchboards in protest of Fagan’s firing. Murkowski needs stopped and so does anyone supporting her. If you want to flood the studio line call 907-522-0750 (outside of Anchorage call 1-888-909-0750). Or flood their “News Hotline” at 907-275-2277.

Categories: 1st Amendment Tags:

Hatch Announces Opposition to Elena Kagan for SCOTUS

July 3rd, 2010 No comments

WASHINGTON: Yesterday Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) announced his opposition to Kagan’s appoint to the Supreme Court. We here at the NIP hope that other Senators will put personal interests aside and remember their oath of office. Hatch enumerates two main objections, lack of experience and a proclivity toward judicial activism. The NFL draft has tighter standards than this judicial process. It’s time to take it seriously.

Orrin Hatch Opposes Kagan as SCOTUS

I have carefully examined Solicitor General Elena Kagan’s record, actively participated in the entire Judiciary Committee hearing, and considered the views of supporters and opponents from Utah and across the country. Qualifications for judicial service include both legal experience and, more importantly, the appropriate judicial philosophy. The law must control the judge; the judge must not control the law. I have concluded that, based on evidence rather than blind faith, General Kagan regrettably does not meet this standard and that, therefore, I cannot support her appointment.

Supreme Court Justices who, like General Kagan, had no prior judicial experience did have an average of 21 years in private legal practice. General Kagan has two. The fact that her experience is instead academic and political only magnifies my emphasis on judicial philosophy as the most important qualification for judicial service.

Over nearly 25 years, General Kagan has endorsed, and praised those who endorse, an activist judicial philosophy. I was surprised when she encouraged us at the hearing simply to discard or ignore certain parts of her record. I am unable to do that. I also cannot ignore disturbing situations in which it appears that her personal or political views drove her legal views. She promoted the Clinton administration’s extreme position on abortion, including the barbaric practice of partial-birth abortion. As Dean of Harvard Law School, she blocked the access by military recruiters that federal law requires. And she took legal positions on important issues such as freedom of speech that could undermine the liberties of all Americans.

General Kagan is a good person, a skilled political lawyer, a brilliant scholar, and was a fine law school dean. I like her personally and I supported her to be Solicitor General. But applying the standard I have always used for judicial nominees, I cannot support her appointment to the Supreme Court.  Orrin Hatch

Categories: 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment Tags:

Senate Committee Approves Internet Kill Switch Bill

June 28th, 2010 No comments

Internet Kill Switch Bill Passes Senate CommitteeWASHINGTON: Coming to a computer near you, “Your PC becomes a boat anchor.” The NIP has been warning for some time about the administration’s attempt to seize control over the Internet. Last Thursday Senator Lieberman’s Committee on Homeland Security passed the doublespeak “Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010” which instead of protecting cyberspace nationalizes it.

A US Senate committee has approved a wide-ranging cybersecurity bill that some critics have suggested would give the US president the authority to shut down parts of the Internet during a cyberattack.

Senator Joe Lieberman and other bill sponsors have refuted the charges that the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act gives the president an Internet “kill switch.” Instead, the bill puts limits on the powers the president already has to cause “the closing of any facility or stations for wire communication” in a time of war, as described in the Communications Act of 1934, they said in a breakdown of the bill published on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee website. Grant Gross, TechWorld

The enables the President to seize the Internet and control it in any manner he wishes, without Congressional oversight for a period of 120 days, which could be further extended with Congressional permission. Traitorous Susan Collins (R-Maine), co-sponsor of the bill, says detractors like the NIP are just being inflamatory: Read more…

Categories: 1st Amendment, Videos Tags:

FTC Wants to Tax Drudge, Subsidize NY Times

June 8th, 2010 1 comment

Mark Lloyd, Minister of PropagandaWASHINGTON: This administration, fearful of the power that an open and free media has to disseminate truth, feels that it needs to bail out traditional newspapers and dinosaur networks to keep control of the flow of information. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) just released a major discussion draft that proposes bailouts for traditional media. The Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) “Diversity Czar” Mark Lloyd has called for the same takeover of media in the US that Chavez has instituted in Venezuela.

Stocks of Internet providers fell dramatically in early May as the FCC said it would move forward with net neutrality rules as the FCC is moving closer to seizing control of the Internet. Investors fear that increased federal regulations will present significant challenges to the viability of fledgeling new media. Verizon and other providers are alarmed that the FCC is trying to reclassify broadband to put it under their control:

CTIA and Verizon expressed alarm over FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s proposal to reclassify broadband under Title II of the Communications Act.

CTIA President and CEO Steve Largent said in a statement that he was “disappointed” with the announcement. “This complex, interdependent ecosystem is currently thriving to the benefit to all Americans,” he said. “Putting that success at risk is unnecessary and dangerous, particularly in today’s economic environment.” Maisie Ramsay, Wireless Week

It is the same principle as the EPA reclassifying carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas. Carbon dioxide is required by all plant life on the planet but the EPA has seized control over it in order to leverage power over every aspect of American life. Now the FTC wants to use the same ploy to control the Internet:

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is seeking ways to “reinvent” journalism, and that’s a cause for concern. According to a May 24 draft proposal, the agency thinks government should be at the center of a media overhaul. The bureaucracy sees it as a problem that the Internet has introduced a wealth of information options to consumers, forcing media companies to adapt and experiment to meet changing market needs. FTC’s policy staff fears this new reality…

With no faith that the market will work things out for the better, government thinks it must come to the rescue. Read more…

Categories: 1st Amendment Tags: , ,

The Case Against “Net Neutrality”

March 16th, 2010 1 comment

Mark Lloyd, Minister of PropagandaWASHINGTON: Comments by the FCC’s “Diversity Czar” Mark Lloyd reveal this administration’s attempt at seizing control of media in an attempt to shut down freedom of speech.

Lloyd called Chavez’s totalitarian regime “an incredible revolution, a democratic revolution,” when it really was anything but democratic. In the first video below he points out the Obama administration needs to learn from Chavez that the takeover of private media outlets is essential to shut down dissent to further the ends of an autocratic government. In the second he hints at his plan to shut down talk radio. Like much of this administration, Mark Lloyd is in fact a Saul Alinsky disciple:

In his [Lloyd’s] 2006 book entitled Prologue to a Farce: Communication and Democracy in America, he calls for an all-out “confrontational movement” against private media.  He wants leftist activists – through incessant political pressure – and the government – through the creation of a totally untenable operating environment of fees, fines and regulations – to work together to force the commercial broadcasters out, to be replaced by  public broadcasters.

And in his tome, Lloyd had this to say about the First Amendment: Read more…