Why Net Neutraliy means government control over the internet.Submitted by freemedialive.com on Fri, 05/14/2010 - 07:28
It seems many dailypaul'ers including the editor are for net neutrality laws, which will enable the government to take control of the internet.
Now I understand why my post on Internet regulation via "Net Neutrality" laws wasn't posted on the front page. Obviously, the dailypaul is for net neutrality. It's very disappointing to see the dailypaul advocating government regulation of the internet. It seems even the dailypaul can't see that big government is not a friend of liberty.
"Of course we need big government to regulate those evil corporations who might block the dailypaul from us." Well, why do you want the government to take control of the internet to regulate a problem that hasn't happened yet? Please can someone tell me when any major ISP blocked any website except for those displaying kiddie porn or some type of terrorist website? Once the government takes control, the dailypaul could easily be classified by the FCC and Homeland security to be a dangerous website.
I implore all Dailypaul'ers to demand my post or a comparable post against net neutrality be placed on the front page of the dailypaul.com. Check the Constitution where does it say the government has the right to regulate newspapers? Of course there wasn't an internet at that time, but the Constitution is clear that newspapers and pamphlets weren't to be regulated. Why do I say clear because of the first amendment. The internet is just a modern day newspaper that has millions of pages that can be viewed on a new contraption called a computer that can even play moving pictures on it's screen.
It seems everyone here has bought into the kind hand of the government regulating corporations in order to fix all the problems in the world, even problems that don't exist, such as an ISP charging a website some type of fee for people to view it's pages.
Can anyone see that they are being manipulated by the wording "net neutrality"? Has anyone heard of the book "1984". Just give it some cool sounding name such as the Patriot Act, the Fairness Doctrine or the War on Drugs and all of a sudden people just jump on board without thinking the issue through. The internet isn't suppose to be neutral and we don't need the government making it neutral. Neutral means banning or regulating websites that post too many untruths such as the dailypaul. Once your website posts too many untruths then the next step would be to permanently ban it. So, how will you tell your readers that your site was banned? Will you be able to complain to your evil ISP that you were so concerned about regulating? Of course not, it was the government that ordered dailypaul's webhosting provider to shutdown their website. Webhosting companies will only shutdown a website for nefarious activity such as spamming or promoting the download of spyware, but the government can shut a website for any reason it decides once a Net Neutrality law imposed by the FCC.
It's awful strange to see those for liberty advocating government control of the internet?