AMERICA; THE LORD GOD ALMIGHTY HAS A 'WORD' FOR YOU!!! LISTEN AND LEARN!!!

AMERICA: THE LORD GOD ALMIGHTY HAS A 'WORD' FOR YOU!!!  LISTEN AND LEARN!!!


THE LORD GOD REVEALS WHAT IS BEING NEGOTIATED IN SECRECY IN THE BACK ROOMS AND TO BE IMPLEMENTED SHORTLY IN AMERICA...........................

Just received this - prophesied by a known and respected prophet of God - NOT one of the self promoting money making well known ones .................

30 January 2015

Bob’s 30 January 2015 revelation from the Father/Holy Ghost (2nd Amendment, Treaty, Netanyahu, open pollinated seeds, etc.)

The Congress is going to give Obama “carte blanc” (meaning he can do as he pleases) authority to negotiate a treaty called the “TPP(?)”; which may mean Trans Pacific Pact? Provisions of this will set up a “North American Union”, i.e., US, Canada, and Mexico.

However, the main thrust of this is to negate the Second Amendment in the USA! The Lord said, “This will be the ‘second shot’ heard round the world”. [The first “first shot” having been that which started the Revolutionary War!] “This will mean war in the USA!”

“[Apparently] this treaty won’t even need ratification -- seeing how it’s to be written and knowing how “double minded” and crooked the legislative process is becoming; and how clandestinely our 'government' is behaving in these matters.] “This initiative is in progress now!”

Note: On 11 November 2014, a date which Bob warned us about last year, Obama was in China and “made a ‘deal’ with [Red] China”. I saw that news clip on 12 November 2014. (Did you see the pic in the news media - the enormous and long RED CARPET rolled out for Obama to walk on while in China?! Treated like ROYALTY - like the anti-Christ himself?!)

From Heaven: there is a move to “ban the selling and trading of open pollinated/heirloom seeds”. (Be alert and watching as wise folks know what this means. food control!)

From Heaven: Obama is making laws which, if passed, will allow him to continue his ‘rule’, even though he may no longer be in office."

"Furthermore, this Administration is sending a team to Israel to attempt to defeat Bibi Netanyahu in the political process now shaping up there. The Lord said, [my paraphrase]: “I SHALL DEAL WITH THESE PEOPLE!”

NOTE:  Regardless of whether you wish to believe this or not, and regardless of the propaganda and outright lies about Bibi Netanyahu, he was and is appointed by the Lord God Almighty Himself for this day and time. To speak against Netanyahu and Israel (and the 'jews' as is so often referred) is to speak against the Lord God Himself and will bring judgment upon that person's head.  

USA Today columnist calls for arrest and imprisonment of vaccine skeptics

truther 0

Now we finally come to the real agenda of the vaccine industry.
After vaccines have  been repeatedly documented by the Natural News Lab to contain neurotoxic chemicals such as mercury, formaldehyde and MSG; after vaccine shots have been repeatedly shown to kill people who take them; and after flu shots have been exhaustively shown to be based on no science whatsoever — with vaccine manufacturers openly admitting there are no clinical trials to show they even work — the rabid vaccine pushers are unveiling their end game: throw vaccine resistors in prison.

REST OF THIS STORY HERE:

http://www.pakalertpress.com/2015/01/30/usa-today-columnist-calls-for-
arrest-and-imprisonment-of-vaccine-skeptics/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_
medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+pakalert+%28Pak+Alert+Press%29

Fired Cop With History Of Brutality Gets Job Back (And A Raise)

Fired Cop With History Of Brutality Gets Job Back (And A Raise)

January 30, 2015 | By Guest Post | Tyranny & Police State, US News

By: Carey Wedler | The Anti Media -

Des Moines, Iowa police officer Cody Grimes, a fired police officer with a history of brutality and abuse, has had his job reinstated. He was fired in December of 2013 for domestic abuse that caused injury and fourth degree criminal mischief.

At the time, his superiors said he was fired because he

“violated the department’s policies on standards of conduct and obedience to laws and orders.”

During the domestic dispute, he

“choked his former girlfriend, threw her down the stairs of his Des Moines house and then threw her in his kitchen after she threatened to report him. That caused her to hit her head and hand.”

At his court date in May of 2014 (until which he was on paid leave), he plead guilty to the lesser charge of criminal mischief, avoiding jail time and paying $1,000 instead. Prosecutors dropped the domestic abuse charge but he was ordered to take a class on abuse.

Today, the Des Moines Civil Service Commission, as expected, reinstated his job, saying firing was too severe a punishment. Some would argue, however, that it was not severe enough. In addition to domestic abuse, Grimes had a history of professional abuse which the commission acknowledged as it gave him back his job. It openly stated he was fired previously for

“misconduct and prior discipline for excessive force.”

In 2010 he shot at a photojournalist from KCCI-TV and was put on paid leave for two weeks. He claims he thought the photojournalist was a suspect and no charges were filed. In 2011, he punched a restrained man so hard he broke bones in his face. It was John Twombly’s wedding day when he allegedly got in a fight that Grimes inserted himself into. Twombly was found not guilty on related charges and the other man’s charges were dropped. Grimes was cleared of any wrong doing in his department but Twombly was eventually awarded $75,000 from the city.

Grimes’ case in particular demonstrates a painful reality: there are always multiple avenues for the state to help police abuse citizens. Usually, police refuse to reprimand officers and charges are rarely pressed by the justice system or the city (the Department of Justice just declined to charge Darren Wilson with civil rights violations). Aside from Grimes, the city of Des Moines resinstated the job of another officer fired for excessive force, but he never took back his job because he was convicted by a federal jury of violating civil rights and obstructing justice.

In the case of Grimes, the police department (in a rare showing) attempted to deal with him but was overrun by the city itself–in spite of the fact that he cost it $75,000 in damages (and thousands more in paid leave).

This is not the only chunk of $75,000 the violent officer is costing the city. Now that he has is job back, he has received a raise. Whereas he used to make $68,500 a year, he now will earn $73,000.

Before he can have his job back, he will undergo a one to two week training to reacclimate. Sgt. Jason Halifax explained

“He will be required to complete some refresher training as is typical for officers who are gone for an extended time.”

There were no known conditions given for Grimes rehiring, meaning that if he commits another act of abuse, there is no guarantee he will be permanently fired.

New Bill Would Let Cops Enter Your Home without a Warrant and Kill Your Dog.....

 01/30/15        

Joshua Krause

In light of recent events, it’s become apparent that the public’s opinion of law enforcement is rapidly falling apart. Technology is partly to blame for giving the average citizen the ability to film police encounters at a moment’s notice, and post these videos on the internet for the world to see. There’s always been bad cops, but now their antics are being exposed now more than ever.

Of course, that’s not even the half of it. The police wouldn’t get any bad exposure if they weren’t caught doing terrible things in the first place. A cursory look through a Facebook group like Copblock will give you page after page of cops being stupid, trigger happy, petty, and negligent (and those are just the links gathered from the last 24 hours).

But I don’t think anything has sullied the reputation of American law enforcement more than their propensity for killing dogs. For most dog owners, their pets are members of the family. They treat them like their children. To walk onto someone’s property and shoot their dog, is like shooting their kid. And yet these cases are rarely, if ever, brought to court. It’s hard enough to convict a cop for murder. To the courts, reprimanding them for killing a dog would be laughable.

A recent bill being proposed in Mississipi may make it even more difficult to hold the police accountable for these crimes. Specifically, if that dog is a pit bull. If this legislation passes, then anyone in the State of Mississipi who owns a pit bull may have their homes searched by the police without a warrant.

Dubbed, the Mississippi Regulation of Dangerous Dogs Act, it also grants police permission to kill your dog if certain criteria are met. If the dog is not “under proper restraint when on the premises of its owner,” isn’t wearing any vaccination tags, and if the police have failed to peacefully subdue the dog, then they would have every right to shoot.

I think the first category is the most egregious. What exactly is their definition of “proper restraint?” And more importantly, what does this mean for dog owners who don’t keep their pets on a leash in their backyard? I mean, how many of you reading this are dog owners, who keep their dogs kenneled or leashed at all times? I’m sure some folks do, but unless your dog has a reputation for being violent or escaping, then doing so sounds kind of cruel. Leashes are for going on walks and kennels are for going to the vet or the dog park. They shouldn’t be necessary on your own property.

They’re basically saying that if you own a certain kind of dog, they have every right to enter your property, which practically guarantees that the police will have an encounter with your dog. And since most dog owners don’t keep their pets restrained at all times, it practically guarantees that your dog will be killed by the police. This bill should be called “The Mississipi Kill All Pit Bulls Act”, but obviously that wouldn’t go over to well with the public. So they’re hiding their intentions behind a facade of safety and benevolence.

And don’t get me started on the whole pit bull debate. I don’t believe for a second that a certain breed of dog is more prone to killing people than another breed. I’m sure there are certain breeds that are easier to train for that (like, I don’t know, maybe the German Sheperds the police use), but pit bulls don’t just attack people for no reason (at least no more than any other dog). My brother has owned a pit bull for about 5 years, and that dog has never attacked anyone. So to me, saying a domesticated dog breed is more likely to attack someone, is like saying Asians are good at math, or Africans or inferior.

When this flawed logic is applied to humans, we rightfully call it racism. When it’s applied to dogs, we start treating each breed like they’re separate species. We forget that all domesticated dogs are from the same species (Canis lupus familiaris), and their differences are marginal at best.

Granted, each breed has some slightly different genes, which makes them better suited for certain tasks, but we have the same thing with humans. Like people from Nepal who can live with less oxygen, or how Europeans are better at digesting dairy than Asians or Africans. But no sane person believes that certain human races are more prone to violence because of their genetics. This whole debate on the aggression of pit bulls is completely asinine.

So what we have here is a piece of legislation that is designed to violate the rights of law abiding citizens, gives police permission to kill their dogs without provocation, and is based on an argument that is more akin to an urban myth.

In my mind, this reveals the lynchpin of police state’s strategy to take away our rights. When they fail to take away our collective rights in one fell swoop, they will try to widdle them away by criminalizing every community, every opinion, and every activity, one at a time, until they’ve captured us all. Someday everyone will be a criminal, if they aren’t already.

And when that day comes, they’ll be at liberty to pick and choose who goes to jail, and who gets to enjoy the illusion of freedom and privacy. Welcome to the new America.

http://www.pakalertpress.com/2015/01/30/new-bill-would-let-cops-enter-your-home-without-a-warrant-and-kill-your-dog-see-more-at-httpwww-thedailysheeple-comnew-bill-would-let-cops-enter-your-home-without-warrant-and-kill-your-dog_0120/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+pakalert+%28Pak+Alert+Press%29

Some doctors won't see patients with anti-vaccine views

Some doctors won't see patients with anti-vaccine views

POSTER SAYS THIS IS REALLY GOOD NEWS .... YOU SHOULD BE HAPPY....AND NOW GO SEE A NATUROPATH AND DUMP THE MD'S THEY ARE TOTALLY WORTHLESS ...

Jan 29, 7:20 PM EST By ALICIA CHANG AP Science Writer

AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes Health Video This video player must be at least 300x168 pixels in order to operate. Buy AP Photo Reprints LOS ANGELES (AP) -- With California gripped by a measles outbreak, Dr. Charles Goodman posted a clear notice in his waiting room and on Facebook: His practice will no longer see children whose parents won't get them vaccinated. "Parents who choose not to give measles shots, they're not just putting their kids at risk, but they're also putting other kids at risk - especially kids in my waiting room," the Los Angeles pediatrician said. It's a sentiment echoed by a small number of doctors who in recent years have "fired" patients who continue to believe debunked research linking vaccines to autism. They hope the strategy will lead parents to change their minds; if that fails, they hope it will at least reduce the risk to other children in the office. The tough-love approach - which comes amid the nation's second-biggest measles outbreak in at least 15 years, with at least 98 cases reported since last month - raises questions about doctors' ethical responsibilities. Most of the measles cases have been traced directly or indirectly to Disneyland in Southern California. The American Academy of Pediatrics says doctors should bring up the importance of vaccinations during visits but should respect a parent's wishes unless there's a significant risk to the child. "In general, pediatricians should avoid discharging patients from their practices solely because a parent refuses to immunize his or her child," according to guidelines issued by the group. However, if the relationship between patient and doctor becomes unworkable, the pediatrics academy says, the doctor may want to encourage the vaccine refuser to go to another physician. Some mothers who have been dropped by their doctors feel "betrayed and upset," said Dotty Hagmier, founder of the support group Moms in Charge. She said these parents made up their minds about vaccines after "careful research and diligence to understand the risks versus the benefits for their own children's circumstances." Dropping patients who refuse vaccines has become a hot topic of discussion on SERMO, an online doctor hangout. Some doctors are adamant about not accepting patients who don't believe in vaccinations, with some saying they don't want to be responsible for someone's death from an illness that was preventable. Others warn that refusing treatment to such people will just send them into the arms of quacks. The measles-mumps-rubella vaccine, or MMR, is 97 percent effective at preventing measles, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Measles spreads easily through the air and in enclosed spaces. Symptoms include fever, runny nose, cough and a rash all over the body. In rare cases, particularly among babies, measles can be deadly. Infection can also cause pregnant women to miscarry or give birth prematurely. All states require children to get certain vaccinations to enroll in school. California is among 20 states that let parents opt out by obtaining personal belief waivers. Some people worry that vaccines cause developmental problems, despite scientific evidence disproving any link. Others object for religious or philosophical reasons. Nationally, childhood measles vaccination rates have held steady for years at above 90 percent. But there seem to be growing pockets of unvaccinated people in scattered communities, said Dr. Gregory Wallace of the CDC. In recent years, nearly all U.S. measles cases have been linked to travelers who caught the virus abroad and spread it in this country among unvaccinated people. Northern California's Marin County has a high rate of people claiming personal belief exemptions. In 2012, Dr. Nelson Branco and his partners at a Marin County practice started turning away toddlers whose parents refused to make sure they received the measles vaccine. Branco said 10 to 20 of his practice's 8,000 or so patients left after the change. Vaccines "can be spooky for parents," Branco said. But "in the end, we have the science. We have the experience that it's the right thing to do."

Vatican to offer haircuts, shaves as well as showers to Rome's homeless.....

ARE YOU SERIOUS....FIRST THEY STEAL THEIR MONEY THEN THEY GIVE THEM A SHAVE??  WHAT IS THAT SHOWER ALL ABOUT...

        01/29/15

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - The Vatican will offer homeless people in Rome not only showers but also haircuts and shaves when new facilities open next month, the head of Pope Francis' charity office said.

The Vatican announced last year that it would provide shower facilities in St Peter's Square for homeless people.
Bishop Konrad Krajewski told the Italian Catholic newspaper Avvenire on Thursday that it would also offer haircuts and shaves when the services start on Feb. 16 in an area under the colonnade of the square.
Krajewski, whose official title is the pope's almoner, said barbers and hairdressers would volunteer their services on Mondays, the day their shops are traditionally closed in Italy.
They had already donated chairs, hair-cutting instruments, and mirrors, the newspaper's website said.
Krajewski came up with the idea of building showers in St. Peter's Square last year after a homeless person told him that while it was relatively easy to find places to eat at Rome charities, it was difficult to find places to wash.
He immediately received the pope's backing for the shower project and then expanded it to include haircuts and shaves.

(Reporting By Philip Pullella; Editing by Susan Fenton)

BILL GATES HAS A WARNING FOR HUMANITY!

Bill Gates is worried about artificial intelligence too

Microsoft's co-founder and former CEO is the latest luminary from the world of technology and science to warn against the threat of smart machines.

• by Nick Statt
  @nickstatt
• 28 January 2015 8:55 pm GMT

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates joins entrepreneur Elon Musk and physicist Stephen Hawking with a warning about machine intelligence.

Bill Gates has a warning for humanity: Beware of artificial intelligence in the coming decades, before it's too late.
Microsoft's co-founder joins a list of science and industry notables, including famed physicist Stephen Hawking and Internet innovator Elon Musk, in calling out the potential threat from machines that can think for themselves. Gates shared his thoughts on AI on Wednesday in a Reddit "AskMeAnything" thread, a Q&A session conducted live on the social news site that has also featured President Barack Obama and World Wide Web founder Tim Berners-Lee.
"I am in the camp that is concerned about super intelligence," Gates said in response to a question about the existential threat posed by AI. "First, the machines will do a lot of jobs for us and not be super intelligent. That should be positive if we manage it well. A few decades after that, though, the intelligence is strong enough to be a concern."
Gates, who is co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, isn't the only one worried. Musk, the billionaire inventor and founder of SpaceX and CEO of electric car maker Tesla Motors, is not an expert in AI. But he did join a growing list of hundreds of researchers and professors in the field who signed an open letter earlier this month that proposed proper safeguards be put in place to research and develop such intelligence without humans losing control.
"I agree with Elon Musk and some others on this and don't understand why some people are not concerned," Gates said.

Fearing the worst

The reason they're worried is that AI isn't science fiction anymore. In stories and movies, AI is often presented as a good idea gone horribly wrong. In "The Matrix" movie trilogy, machines deem humanity a threat and enslave people in a virtual existence so they can feed off the electricity generated by the human body. When the Skynet computer system in "The Terminator" movie series becomes sentient, it wages a multiyear war using human-like robots designed to kill. HAL 9000, the socio-pathic supercomputer from "2001: A Space Odyssey," is now a cinematic icon -- HAL's robotic tone and malevolent quotes have become pop culture tropes.
Back in the real world, Apple's voice-based personal assistant Siri may seem a little dumb now, but AI is getting smarter as researchers develop ways to let machines teach themselves and mine the deep trove of data produced by our many connected gadgets. IBM's Watson supercomputer has moved on from besting Jeopardy contestants to conducting medical research and diagnosis, and researchers earlier this month detailed a new computer program that can beat anyone at poker. A need to worry? Of course not, but Gates and others are trying to imagine the worst.
Musk in October called AI development "summoning the demon," and has invested in the space to keep his eye on it. Hawking, writing for The Independent in May 2014, also expressed his concerns. "Whereas the short-term impact of AI depends on who controls it, the long-term impact depends on whether it can be controlled at all," Hawking wrote.

How to reduce your toxic heavy metal load simply and cheaply....

 Health and Nutrition, Mother Earth

Jan-29-2015

 

January 29, 2015

(NaturalNews) We’re bombarded with heavy metals from the chemicals in our environment that began in the 20th Century and proliferated exponentially since WWII.
Of those estimated 50,000 chemicals used by consumers, industry, and agriculture 300 have been tested by the EPA, with restrictions placed on only five. Mercury is in your mouth’s fillings and in the air from coal-burning power plants. Aluminum, cadmium and barium nanoparticles descend from chemtrails. Arsenic is in our foods.
You may have heard of chelation therapy, which is a bit expensive, a tad risky and requires a medically trained person to administer. But what if you can detox from heavy metals and other toxins at home alone cheaply?

Zeolite to the rescue

Unfortunately, zeolite’s reputation has been tarnished by multilevel marketing (MLM) companies that claim to have the best pricey liquid zeolite. The thing about liquid zeolites is that they are heavily processed from volcanic mineral rocks with extreme heat and acids.
Comparative testing has demonstrated that pure clinoptilolite rock mineral powder zeolites from volcanic mineral rocks are vastly superior to liquid zeolites for capturing and eliminating heavy metal molecules.
Zeolite has an unusual negatively charged nano-cage property. Each tiny particle has a negative charge to attract positively charged heavy metals out of tissues and blood.
But zeolite powder, actually a fine sand-like substance, does so without getting into the bloodstream. Instead, it coats the villi of the intestines. Villi are the tiny appendages of the intestinal inner linings that take the nutrients from digested food into the bloodstream.
That’s why the sandy zeolite should be taken away from food. The approximate five liters of blood in a human body circulates completely several times a day.
So the zeolite cages wait for the blood to come to them and trap the toxins. This passive toxin capture avoids the hazard of blowing out toxins from tissues that may overwhelm the liver and kidneys. The zeolite cages and their captured heavy metal particles are escorted out of the body via normal elimination pathways.
Adsorption is the process of electronically attracting and binding to the surface rather than absorbing like a sponge. So zeolite adsorbs and chelates heavy metals. This easily internalized adsorbing, chelating activity of zeolite is vital for optimum health in today’s toxic world.

More zeolite benefits

In addition to removing toxic heavy metals and other chemicals, zeolite tends to raise overall pH with higher alkalinity and remove other pathogens. Everyone knows that stagnant water attracts mosquito larvae.
It’s been established that low blood serum pH or acidity is the “stagnant water” that attracts pathogens to flourish as well as create the environment for an unusual type of cellular metabolism called cancer.
Zeolite also helps you eliminate radioactive particles. The Russians gave zeolite freely to children who were exposed to radiation from the Chernobyl reactor’s disastrous meltdown.
Some are concerned with zeolite’s technical description: a porous crystalline aluminosilicate. The aluminum in zeolite is bound with silica. Unbound, aluminum is toxic. Bound within a compound molecular structure, it’s beyond harmless. It removes unbound aluminum toxins from the body.
Beneficial minerals are not attracted to zeolites. So beneficial minerals will not be depleted from your body by zeolite. You can expect results with clinoptilolite mineral zeolite consuming one to three teaspoons a day mixed with juice or water or swallowed whole and chased with a liquid for a few weeks.
Experiment with whatever technique for consuming it works for you. A one-pound bag usually goes for $20 to $30 and can be ordered online.
Sources:
http://www.scientificamerican.com
http://www.integral-health-guide.com
http://www.etszeolite.com
http://www.globalhealingcenter.com
http://www.personal.utulsa.edu
Source: http://www.naturalnews.com/048441_zeolites_heavy_metals_detoxing.html##

Agenda 21: Modern Day Death Camps

KAREN HUDES UPDATE - CHRIS PONTE SHOW

                               
KAREN HUDES WHISTLEBLOWER ON THE CHRIS PONTE SHOW
 

         

Published on Jan 27, 2015

 

Karen Hudes describes state capture of the courts, the Congress, and the switch away from Federal Reserve Notes for Chris Ponte's Danbury, Connecticut public access TV show, pre-taped on 1/26/15, the day before a blizzard on the scheduled show time.

Video: Seattle Cop Goes Nuts, Pepper Sprays People Passing On Sidewalk

City sued as cops AGAIN violate federal law by wantonly spraying citizens

by Steve Watson | Infowars.com | January 29, 2015

---

A Seattle teacher has brought a lawsuit against the city of Seattle after he was pepper sprayed in the face by a police officer for no reason whatsoever while walking down the street.
Jesse Hagopian, a history teacher, was attending a peaceful march in Seattle on Martin Luther King Jr. day. He was leaving the event, while speaking with his mother on the phone, when he happened to be passing a police officer who was going nuts. The video shows how Hagopian caught a wash of pepper spray directly in the face.



 
The cop can be heard yelling “get back! Seattle Police Department,” as people, mostly uninterested and unengaged, walk by minding their own business.
Someone is heard responding “We have a right to walk on the sidewalk.”
“I felt the piercing pain shoot through my eye, my ear drum and my nostril, all over my cheek and face,” Hagopian told local reporters. “I yelled out. My mom was in distress as she heard me yell.”
“The pain that shot through my face only lasted so long,” Hagopian added, “but the painful memory is something that I don’t know when will leave me or my family.”



“(Jesse) was pepper sprayed irrationally by a police officer – no provocation and no reason,” said Hagopian’s attorney, James Bible. “We view this as a challenge to free speech.”
The Seattle Police Department claimed it has not seen the video, despite it being on YouTube, and that it could not comment on the incident.
Other videos that have surfaced from the day also show cops pepper spraying peaceful marchers, seemingly for no reason other than they were publicly gathering.


In an email statement, the Seattle Mayor Ed Murray said the incidents are under investigation.
“We have worked to create and implement a comprehensive and transparent police accountability system that will be the most robust in the nation,” Murray wrote, adding that “Under the accountability system that we’ve set up, the uses of force that occurred during the MLK protests are currently under review and being investigated.”
Seattle police have a history of eagerly reaching for pepper spray. During the Occupy protests, the police department came under scrutiny for wantonly spraying protesters including old Women, priests, pregnant women and blind people.
The substance is brutal, and can be deadly, which is why its use during peaceful protests is in fact outlawed.
As reported by The ACLU, “An Army study concluded that pepper spray’s active ingredient, “is capable of producing carcinogenic effects, sensitization, cardiovascular toxicity, as well as possible human fatalities.”
Police are generally not authorized to use pepper spray except in circumstances in which it is necessary to prevent physical injury to themselves or others. The videos presented above, clearly show that this was not the case.
—————————————————————-
Steve Watson is a London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.com, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham, and a Bachelor Of Arts Degree in Literature and Creative Writing from Nottingham Trent University.

URGENT! OBAMA'S INTERNET TAKEOVER ON THE LINE RIGHT NOW!!!

URGENT!  OBAMA'S INTERNET TAKEOVER
PLEASE CONSIDER SIGNING PETITION

From: Mike Lee <email@protectinternetfreedom.info>
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 3:18 PM
Subject: Obama's Internet takeover

Dear Friends,

Obamacare, the VA scandal, the IRS scandal--these are just a few examples of what happens when we give government huge power without oversight.

It's about to happen again--the Obama Administration is fighting for a government takeover of the Internet and the Federal Communications Commission is going to vote on it February 26th. That's why I am writing you today--I need your help to stop this.

President Obama came out a few weeks ago urging the FCC to vote to regulate the Internet the same way that it regulates public utilities under Title II. What this means is that, for the first time, billions of dollars in fees will be attached to Internet service just like they are to telephone service. You see, under Title II if someone wants to own a telephone company, there are fees baked into the law--fees companies pass on to customers.

Now, under this new regulatory regime, Internet service providers will be subject to these fees as well, and then pass them on to you, the consumer. This is essentially a massive tax increase on the middle class, being passed in the dead of night without the American public really being made aware of what is going on. 

The Internet is built on speed and dynamism.  It’s always changing.  There are always new and better ideas that are exploding onto the scene, and part of the reason for that is that innovators are not having to go ask Washington, DC for permission every time they want to do something new. 

What this really comes down to is a fundamental question:

 

Who do you want in charge of the direction of the Internet: people at dot-com startups that brought us game changing companies like Facebook, Google, Twitter, Amazon and Uber; or nameless, faceless, unelected bureaucrats in our nation’s capital?

There is another aspect of this that gets overlooked.  The Internet is an incredibly important force for freedom, for liberty, and the rights of free speech that we hold dear. It is an existential threat to tyrants in our nation as well as countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia and Russia who seek to keep information from their people.

We must preserve the high ground for the United States to stand up to these countries and tell them to keep the Internet free and preserve free speech on the Internet throughout the world. We cannot do that if we are regulating the Internet in a similar manner ourselves.

I am not accusing anyone of sinister motives here, but I am deeply concerned about the idea of any government bureaucrat having the power to tell companies what they can and cannot do. In the long term, this could have a chilling effect on political speech, in ways that today we could not even begin to imagine.

We do not have much time left to stop this gigantic government takeover of the Internet. The FCC is voting on February 26th and the Left is mobilizing to support their effort to do so. We cannot let the conversation be totally one-sided. The FCC needs to hear from us today--not tomorrow or next week or next month. Today.

Please join me and go sign the petition to keep the Internet free.

http://start.protectinternetfreedom.com/?utm_source=CC&utm_medium=Email&utm_term=TPIN& utm_content=v1&utm_campaign=OTakOvrIntrnt&signer=ML&theme=0

We must stand for liberty and preserve the Internet free of government interference.

Thank you for standing for Internet freedom.

Sincerely,

Senator Mike Lee
Republican-Utah

 **********************************************************************

http://start.protectinternetfreedom.com/?utm_source=CC&utm_medium=Email&utm_term=TPIN& utm_content=v1&utm_campaign=OTakOvrIntrnt&signer=ML&theme=0

THE PETITION

Dear Chairman Wheeler,

 

Internet use and online communication is the scourge of autocratic governments that deny basic freedoms to their people. Internet information has proven to be a spark that creates the fire of freedom in the most oppressive corners of the world.

The Internet is one of the most positive forces for improving the human condition the world has ever known. It is the hub of innovation for the economy in America and the world. It's a source of progress, democratic distribution of information, societal change, personal empowerment and technological innovation.

The attempt by the Obama Administration to control the Internet as a public utility takes power away from consumers, website developers and small business owners and puts it in the hands of Government. This will drive up costs, slow down innovation, and put unelected political appointees in charge of picking winners and losers.

And it will take away America's moral authority to argue that autocratic regimes have no right to assert control of the Internet in their own countries.

Mr. Wheeler, I am signing my name here today, asking that you and your colleagues vote NO on bringing the Internet under Federal Government control.

 

Sincerely,

Signer