WASHINGTON

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.

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:

ANCHORAGE

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:

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.

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

WASHINGTON

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:

“It’s been frustrating to read some of the misrepresentations of our bill in the cybersphere,” Collins said, arguing the new bill actually circumscribes the president’s existing authority and puts controls on its use. “I believe the substitute amendment we’re offering strengthens those protections even more.” Gautham Nagesh, The Hill

The problem with the bill is not that it supposedly “circumscribes the president’s existing authority” but that it gives him any authority at all. Instead of creating a new agency to make it easier for the President to control the Internet, Congress needs to repeal the provisions of the 1934 Communications Act that would give the President the excuse to seize it in the first place.

Senator Lieberman sounds even scarier as he tries to explain on CNN that Obama needs the same controls over the Internet that China has:

Obama is frustrated with any media he does not control, especially the Internet. The Internet may be the only force capable of stopping his mad quest to seize totalitarian control over the US. First the auto industry, then healthcare, this President will let nothing stand in his way. His response to the BP oil spill is illustrative.

One oil well in the Gulf fails and Obama shuts down all offshore drilling. He first delays response to protect his big time campaign contributor BP, then he seizes the opportunity to shut down an entire industry. Obama arbitrarily destroys the American oil business at the same time he is handing $2 billion to Soros-backed Petrobras in Brazil to drill even deeper. Talk about a man-made disaster!

Just like you don’t want Ferris Bueller and his friends anywhere near the keys to your Ferrari, you don’t want this President anywhere near the keys to the Internet. If the President is worried about cyber security he can strengthen government computer firewalls like responsible business are doing everywhere. There is no reason for him to control your access to the Internet which would make your PC valuable only as a boat anchor for Obama to throw into the Gulf.

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.

The ideas being batted around to save the industry share a common theme: They are designed to empower bureaucrats, not consumers. For instance, one proposal would, “Allow news organizations to agree jointly on a mechanism to require news aggregators and others to pay for the use of online content, perhaps through the use of copyright licenses.”

In other words, government policy would encourage a tax on websites like the Drudge Report, a must-read source for the news links of the day, so that the agency can redistribute the funds collected to various newspapers. Washington Times.

That the government is considering what amounts to the nationalization of media has raised the eyebrows of many journalists, including the LA Times:

That strident sound you hear are the alarms going off in minds and offices across the country: Government helping the press? Which press? How help? In return for what?

Well, two years ago who’d have thought the feds would own General Motors with major holdings in a bunch of banks and financial institutions, reshaped the healthcare industry, spent $787 billion on who-knows-what to create some jobs, have rewritten a package of new financial regulations to corral Wall Street and still not be securing the U.S.-Mexico border? Andrew Malcolm, LA Times

Mark Taspcott at the Washington Examiner wonders if journalists will wake up in time to save journalism from Obama’s FTC. Jeff Jarvis has an excellent analysis of the danger at the Buzz Machine.

This is all about power. It’s a lot easier for the government to control a few networks and newspapers than it is to control content providers like Drudge, American Daughter, Reality Check, the NIP, and the other watchdogs of the new media. King George didn’t like the colonialists’ newspapers, and neither does this administration. Our founding fathers didn’t tolerate this kind of nonsense and neither should we.

WASHINGTON

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:

“It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press. This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination of other communications policies.

“The purpose of free speech is warped to protect global corporations and block rules that would promote democratic governance.”  Seton Motley, Newsbusters

Next on the chopping block is surely the Internet. The natural evolution of communication is a force that defines American freedom of thought. During the first part of the 20th century newspapers dominated the marketplace of ideas. Along came radio whose listenership heavily outweighed newspaper readership. When the 50′s introduced television news it seemed to threaten the radio market. Radio made a resurgence with talk radio while network news has given way to cable news.

Now the Internet competes with traditional media. YouTube serves up more video content every day than all the television stations combined. Put all the blogs and Internet news outlets together and they dwarf the influence of traditional media.

The NIP has previously called attention to this administration’s clandestine attempt to control the Internet with the website SaveTheInternet.com. This site that purports to preserve freedom of expression wants to do anything but that. It is an attempt to give control of the Internet to the government who will then be able to regulate content.

The NIP is a good example of how even an inconspicuous web site can call attention to important issues that can help educate the public. Our 3,000 Twitter followers keep us posted of breaking events. When the Hadley CRU was broken into and the Climategate files were posted on a server in Russia, our Twitter followers tipped us off. We had the files posted on the NIP within hours of the leak, long before traditional media picked up on the story.

Hundreds of thousands have viewed our McChrystal Clock which called attention to the troops languishing while Obama dithered while making up his mind to send reinforcements to Afghanistan. Our Countdown to Take Back America Election Clock has already displayed the photos of those voting for the socialist takeover of American healthcare over 5 million times. This could only happen with a free and open Internet.

Keep Mark Lloyd and his FCC thugs away from the Internet, as a free and open Internet is the best way to preserve your First Amendment rights.

The Senate’s Committee on Environment and Public Works issued an urgent email late Monday claiming the DRUDGE REPORT is ‘responsible for the many viruses popping up throughout the Senate.’

The committee ordered hill staff: ‘Try to avoid’ the DRUDGE REPORT ‘for now’.

On Monday DRUDGE served over 29 million pages with NOT ONE email complaint received about ‘pop ups’, or the site serving ‘viruses’.

The site was seen 149,967 times since March 1st from users at senate.gov and 244,347 times at house.gov. [10,825 visits from the White House, eop.gov]  Drudge

The only virus that Senate employees risk by visiting the site is the virus of freedom of speech. Obviously the Senate wants its staff to be as insulated as possible from the opinions of the American public in order to facilitate ramming the Socialist healthcare agenda down the throats of the American people. Open wide and say, “Ahhh.”

Rodgers, a 25 year veteran of ABC Radio and a 15 year veteran at KSFO with his highly rated and profitable Lee Rodgers Show, was in the normal process of renegotiating his contract for renewal in July when he was fired last week. In a clear violation of his contract, Rodgers said that his leaving, “…was forced upon me, with no notice.”

Talk Show Host Lee Rodgers

ABC Radio is owned by Citadel Corporation and is in bankruptcy. Its move to terminate one of its highest rated and profitable hosts in a major metropolitan market seems counter-productive but is not unusual under Citadel’s current management. Earlier in the month Chicago sister station, WLS-AM 890 fired in mid-week the abrasive but entertaining libertarian, Mancow Muller, and his co-host, Pat Cassidy, for, as Muller put it, “no rhyme or reason.”

In an email sent to his fans, Rodgers wrote, “The top management of Citadel, led by a CEO named Farid Suleiman–widely regarded as the most incompetent executive in broadcasting–decided that I was making too much money after 25 years with ABC and fifteen as morning host on KSFO, taking no note of the fact that I’ve generated large sums of money for the company.”

Rodgers then went on to say, “I WILL tell you, in all candor, that thanks to Mr. Suleiman’s Citadel management, I could no longer proudly say that the company had never told me what to say or what not to say.  There was an obvious cave-in to some ultra-left and pro-Muslim groups, making it unlikely that I would have ever renewed my contract with the company, anyway.”

Rodgers’ co-host, Melanie Morgan, lost her slot in what ostensibly was a cost-cutting move on the part of KSFO in 2008. However, immediately before she was let go, Morgan was war reporting directly from Iraq and was one of the leading charity organizers in the nation for sending goodie packages to our frontline fighting men and women in the WOT. Morgan was pro-Bush and a major cheerleader on the Iraqi and Afghani fronts. Even though her husband, Jack Swanson, was then and still is the manager of KSFO, it was not enough to ensure that her contract was renewed.

Over the 15 years that Rodgers was morning host, he was famous for not suffering fools gladly and holding firmly to conservative principles. He repeatedly stated that the last, true President of the United States concerned with the actual welfare of America was Ronald Reagan and that the Islamic nation building conducted under President Bush II was a disastrous waste of American manpower and money. Rodgers advocated secure borders, reported on Islamic terrorism, cultural jihad and creeping sharia within the USA, and repeatedly hammered on the Obama Administration over its gross incompetence, corruption, conflicts of interest, bailouts and willful shredding of the Constitution.

Rodgers’ co-hosts, Melanie Morgan and Officer Vic (Tom Benner), followed his lead but Rodgers left them in the dust with his show preparation and research that was so extensive he operated on only four hours of sleep a day. Rodgers never accepted second-rate thinking from anyone including his guests and nationally syndicated conservative talk show host, Mark Levin, cut his radio teeth with Rodgers as a call-in debater when Levin was a patent attorney in the South Bay/Silicon Valley city of Sunnyvale.

Rodgers is not registered with the Republican Party and, unlike many other conservative radio talk show hosts, refuses to carry water for the GOP. Rodgers could easily translate into national syndication and would give Levin and Rush Limbaugh major competition for listeners.

Communists are masters at naming their governmental grabs for power just the opposite of what they really want to accomplish. The Great Leap Forward did just the opposite, ending in widespread famine and economic ruin that resulted in tens of millions of deaths. The Cultural Revolution stripped traditional culture, values, and education from China, and brought chaos to the formerly great nation.

SavetheInternet.com is a bogus website dedicated to the destruction of the very freedom you enjoy on the Internet. Sponsored by FreePress.net, another example of opposite-day nomenclature, SavetheInternet.com has the goal of taking the Internet out of private hands and putting it into the government’s.

The proponents of Net Neutrality supposedly want to preserve a free and open Internet. SavetheInternet.com asserts that Net Neutrality “prevents Internet providers from blocking, speeding up or slowing down Web content based on its source, ownership or destination.” However, the whole premise of Net Neutrality is bogus. The net is already neutral.

Since when have ISPs blocked anything on the Internet? Have you ever been blocked from a site? Not in this country, because the Internet is in the hands of private people just like you. It is not controlled by the government. In fact many people already think it is too open, and are offended by pornography and other questionable sites that are able to be seen by anyone with Internet access. However, that is the price we pay for freedom of speech.

If the government has its way the open and free Internet will be history. They tried to seize it in the 90′s by proclaiming “family values.” They used demands that the government “clean up the filth” on the Internet to try to gain control. That didn’t fly because Americans hold sacred their First Amendment rights. Not to be defeated, these savvy power-mongers bided their time until the time was ripe to put forth a new strategy. This go-around they lined up on the side of the libertarians with their assertions of keeping the Internet open. However once the government is in control, good-bye liberty.

We’ll say it again, when was the last time your ISP blocked YOU from ANY content? They haven’t of course because it is against their financial interest to do so. Here at the Institute we have Internet veterans that have been in the business since the very beginning. These folks have dedicated to the free and open Internet, it is their very life. They are typical of the professionals that dedicate their very lives to protecting your right to information.

Information is power, and this administration wants to stifle access to information. They would like nothing better than to be able to block you from accessing sites that provide alternative viewpoints to their big government agenda. This government is the very entity that seeks to block you and limit your access.

Are you are interested in liberty, in the freedom of speech, the right to assemble? Virtual assembly may now be more important than physical assembly. This is the first in a series of articles from the NIP that will expose these people for who they are. Your freedom is at stake. Tell others about this and urge your congressmen and senators to block the unelected FCC bureaucrats in their effort to seize control of  the Internet. If you are interested in your Internet freedom you can start here:

1. Send everyone you know a link to this page.
2. Leave a comment here showing that you understand what is at stake.