Obama Surrendering Internet To Foreign Powers
February 3, 2010 by Andrew
Filed under Government
February2, 2010
Newsmax
By Bradley A. Blakeman
Without the ingenuity of America’s brightest minds and the investment of U.S. taxpayer dollars, there would be no Internet, as we now know it today.
Now, the Obama administration has moved quietly to cede control of the Web from the United States to foreign powers.
Some background: The Internet came into being because of the genius work of Americans Dr.Robert E. Kahn and Dr. Vinton G. Cerf. These men, while working for the Department of Defense in the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency in the early 1970s, conceived, designed, and implemented the idea of “open-architecture networking.”
This breakthrough in connectivity and networking was the birth of the Internet.
These two gentlemen had the vision and the brainpower to create a worldwide computer Internet communications network that forever changed the world and how we communicate in it.
They discovered that providing a person with a unique identifier (TCP/IP)that was able to be recognized and interact through a network of servers would allow users to communicate with others.
The servers woulduse a series of giant receivers to recognize the identifier and connect networks to networks, passing on information from computer to computer in a seamless real-time exchange of information. This new process of communication became know as the “information super highway,” aka, the Internet.
Now for the bad news: In an effort to show the world how inclusive, sharing, cooperative, and international America can be, the Obama administration set off on a plan to surrender control and key management of the Internet by the U.S. Department of Commerce and its agents.
The key to the control America has over the Internet is through the management of the Domain Name System (DNS) and the giant servers that service the Internet.
Domain names are managed through an entity named IANA, the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority. The IANA, which operates on behalf of the U.S. Department of Commerce, is responsible for the global coordination of the DNS, IP addressing, and other Internet protocol resources.
In short, without an IP Address or other essential Internet protocols, a person or entity would not have access to the Internet.
For years, the international community has been pressuring the United States
to surrender its control and management of the Internet. They want an international body such as the United Nations or even the International Telecommunications Union, (an entity that coordinates international telephone communications), to manage all aspects of the Internet in behalf of all nations.
The argument advanced for those seeking international control of the Internet is that the Internet has become such a powerful, pervasive, and a dependent form of international communications, that it would be dangerous and inequitable for any one nation to control and manage it.
Just this past spring, within months of Obama’s taking office, his administration, through the Department of Commerce, agreed to relinquish some control over IANA and their governance. The Obama administration has agreed to give greater representation to foreign companies and countries on IANA.
This amounts to one small step for internationalism and one giant leap for surrendering America’s control over an invention we have every right and responsibility to control and manage.
It is in America’s economic and national security interests not to relinquish any control. We are responsible for the control, operation, and functionality of one of the modern world’s greatest inventions and most powerful communications network.
What better country to protect the Internet than the United States?
We invented it, and we paid for the research and implementation that made it
possible. We are the freest, most tolerant nation on earth, we believe in the
fundamental right of free speech, and we practice a free market of commerce and ideas.
America has always been against censorship and has shared its invention with the world without fee or unreasonable or arbitrary restriction. The user fee to operate on the Internet is not one paid to the U.S. government; a consumer pays it to private Internet companies, who provide access to the Internet through servers for their subscribers.
Look no further than China’s recent move against Google to censor the
Internet, and you can envision what can happen when other nations less free
than the United States seek to control the Internet beyond even their own borders.
America needs to wake up. If we lose control over the management of the
Internet, we have given away one of our nation’s greatest assets with nothing
in return to show for it.
The Obama administration’s actions will set in motion a slow and complete takeover of the Internet by the United Nations or some other equally U.S.-hostile and unfriendly international body. And once it is gone, it will be gone forever.
The surrender of the Internet will spell disaster for our nation, financially, as well as for safety, security and our standing as a great power that values freedom and the free exchange of ideas and information.
As far as I am concerned, America is still the last best hope for a more
peaceful and prosperous world and our president should not be looking for
ways to weaken us. Rather, his job is to work to strengthen us and protect our nation’s greatest asset our people’s creativity and ingenuity.
Americans Want Government to Create Jobs and Tax Wealthy
December 11, 2009 by Andrew
Filed under Government
December 11, 2009
Bloomberg
By Mike Dorning and Catherine Dodge
Americans want their government to create jobs through spending on public works, investments in alternative energy or skills training for the jobless.
They also want the deficit to come down. And most are ready to hand the bill to the wealthy.
A Bloomberg National Poll conducted Dec. 3-7 shows two- thirds of Americans favor taxing the rich to reduce the deficit.
Even though almost 9 of 10 respondents also say they believe the middle class will have to make financial sacrifices to achieve that goal, only a little more than one-fourth support an increase in taxes on the middle class. Fewer still back cuts in entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare or a new national consumption tax.
These long-standing contradictions in voters’ attitudes toward taxes, spending and the deficit are intensified as the U.S. grapples with the most severe economic crisis in decades, says J. Ann Selzer, president of Selzer & Co., a Des Moines, Iowa-based firm that conducted the nationwide survey. The rich have become an especially inviting target as the combination of a bank bailout and big bonuses stoke resentments, she says.
“People are hurting,” Selzer says. “They want anything that can help and not hurt them more.”
“It’s hard enough just to get by,” says poll respondent Trevor Wofsey, 32, a postal carrier in Big Pine Key, Florida. “We’re being cut at every level: There are less hours at work and they want us to pay more into medical. Food is up, gas is up.”
Obama Jobs Initiative
The findings are in tune with the job-promotion initiatives President Barack Obama announced Dec. 8, as well as the administration’s assurances it will address the deficit, and proposals from some Democratic lawmakers to raise taxes on the wealthy.
The difficulty of reconciling public demands for government action on jobs while at the same time reducing the deficit is shaping up as a major political theme ahead of the 2010 midterm elections. Obama and Democrats in Congress confront an unemployment rate that was 10 percent for November and a deficit that is forecast to be more than $1 trillion over each of the next two years.
Buy Gold Without Dealer Markups
October 18, 2009
DailyWealth.com
By Brian Hunt
For the past few thousand years, gold has seen a lot of competitors try to become the “ultimate form of real money.” Folks have used everything from cigarettes to butter, stones, livestock, salt, and seashells to store their wealth and trade for goods.
But when crisis hits… when wars break out… when bank runs grip a nation… when it’s really time to just “grab the money and run,” humans keep coming back to gold as the ultimate form of money.
Gold beats the competition so easily for six reasons …
1) Gold is easily transported. Land is a good store of wealth, but you can’t take it with you if you have to get out of Dodge.
2) Gold is divisible. If I owe both Peter and Paul and I have just one piece of gold, I can split it in half.
3) Gold does not rust or crumble. As just mentioned, folks have used cattle as money, but cows don’t survive long in a locked vault.
4) Gold is consistent all over the world. I’ll accept the pure gold you mined in China just as easily as I’ll accept the pure gold you mined in South Africa.
5) Gold has intrinsic value. Gold has wonderful conductivity, it’s super malleable, and it doesn’t break down… so it has lots of industrial uses. Seashells lose big on this one.
6) Gold cannot be created by the government. People who saw their wealth disappear in the great inflation of the 1970s know that holding lots of paper money can be disastrous.
Most of the “requirements of money” were laid down by Aristotle over 2,000 years ago. The great investor Doug Casey is the world’s best at reminding us why gold is still the ultimate form of real money.
And now that America is inflating its money supply in an attempt to pay for all kinds of wars, mortgage bailouts, social programs, infrastructure buildouts, and green-energy boondoggles, it’s vital to own a chunk of real wealth.
To protect your wealth from the government, I recommend you buy physical gold. The problem is, physical gold is in short supply and prices are at ripoff levels. I called two dealers recently and both said they were out of stock. They told me they could get gold bullion for me, but I’d have to pay a large premium over the gold price to buy it… as much as 13%.
Would you give me $1 for 87 cents? Probably not. And you shouldn’t give it to a gold dealer either.
That’s why I’ve written this report, so I can show you several ways to eliminate big dealer markups and get more gold for your paper dollars. Let’s begin…
Click here to read the rest of this article.
The Kevin Trudeau Show: 09-16-09
Don’t miss this special edition of The Kevin Trudeau Show! Not only are we playing one interview with Kevin, but THREE!
1) Beyond The Left Right Paradigm w/ Jeremy Payne
Secret Societies
Government Conspiracies
Investments
2) Natural Solutions Radio w/ Dr. Eliezer Ben-Joseph
Kevin’s Research
Natural Cures
Universal Healthcare
FTC/FDA Battle
Misleading Organic Study
Power of the People
3) The Fairness Doctrine w/ Chuck Morse
Free Money Secrets
Home-Based Businesses
Artificial Sweeteners
Grass Fed Beef
Take Trudeau on the Go! Click here to download this show to your iPod, mp3 player, or PC through iTunes!
Click below to hear The Kevin Trudeau Show RIGHT NOW!!!
World Wealth Down 11 Percent, Fewer Millionaires
September 15, 2009
Reuters
By Joe Rauch
The 2008 global recession caused the first worldwide contraction in assets under management in nearly a decade, according to a study that found wealth dropped 11.7 percent to $92.4 trillion.
A return to 2007 levels of wealth will take six years, according to a Boston Consulting Group study that examined assets overseen by the asset management industry.
North America, particularly the United States, was the hardest hit region, reporting a 21.8 percent decline in wealth firms’ assets under management to $29.3 trillion, primarily because of the beating U.S. equities investments took in 2008.
Also hit hard were off-shore wealth centers, like Switzerland and the Caribbean, where assets declined to $6.7 trillion in 2008 from $7.3 trillion in 2007, an 8 percent drop.
The downturn has “shattered confidence in a way we have not seen in a long time,” said Bruce Holley, senior partner and managing director at BCG’s New York office.
The study forecasts that wealth management firms’ assets under management will not return to 2007 levels, $108.5 trillion, until 2013, a six-year rebound.
Europe posted a slightly higher $32.7 trillion of assets under management, edging out North America for the wealthiest region, though the total wealth in region dropped 5.8 percent.
Latin America was the only region to report a gain in assets under management, posting a 3 percent uptick from $2.4 trillion in 2007 to $2.5 trillion in 2008.
MILLIONAIRE … NOT
The economy’s retreat also pounded millionaires who made risky investments during the economic boom.
The number of millionaires worldwide shrank 17.8 percent to 9 million, the BCG study found.
Europe and North America were hardest hit in that regard, posting 22 percent declines. The United States still boasts 3.9 million millionaires, the highest population on the globe.
Singapore had the highest density of millionaires at 8.5 percent of the population. Other countries included Switzerland, at 6.6 percent, Kuwait, at 5.1 percent, United Arab Emirates, at 4.5 percent, and the United States, at 3.5 percent.
Click here for the full report from Reuters
Taxpayers Face Heavy Losses on Auto Bailout
September 9, 2009
My Way News
By Christopher S. Rugaber
Taxpayers face losses on a significant portion of the $81 billion in government aid provided to the auto industry, an oversight panel said in a report to be released Wednesday.
The Congressional Oversight Panel did not provide an estimate of the projected loss in its latest monthly report on the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program. But it said most of the $23 billion initially provided to General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC late last year is unlikely to be repaid.
“I think they drove a very hard bargain,” said Elizabeth Warren, the panel’s chairwoman and a law professor at Harvard University, referring to the Obama administration’s Treasury Department. “But it may not be enough.”
The prospect of recovering the government’s assistance to GM and Chrysler is heavily dependent on shares of the two companies rising to unprecedented levels, the report said. The government owns 10 percent of Chrysler and 61 percent of GM. The two companies are currently private but are expected to issue stock, in GM’s case by next year.
The shares “will have to appreciate sharply” for taxpayers to get their money back, the report said.
For example, GM’s market value would have to reach $67.6 billion, the report said, a “highly optimistic” estimate and more than the $57.2 billion GM was worth at the height of its share value in April 2008. And in the case of Chrysler, about $5.4 billion of the $14.3 billion provided to the company is “highly unlikely” to ever be repaid, the panel said.
Treasury Department officials have acknowledged that most of the $23 billion provided by the Bush administration is likely to be lost. But Meg Reilly, a department spokeswoman, said there is a “reasonably high probability of the return of most or all of the government funding” that was provided to assist GM and Chrysler with their restructurings.
Administration officials have previously said they want to maximize taxpayers’ return on the investment but want to dispose of the government’s ownership interests as soon as practicable.
“We are not trying to be Warren Buffett here. We are not trying to squeeze every last dollar out,” Steve Rattner, who led the administration’s auto task force, said before his departure in July. “We do want to do well for the taxpayers but the most important thing is to get the government out of the car business.”
Greg Martin, a spokesman for the new GM, said the company is “confident that we will repay our nation’s support because we are a company with less debt, a stronger balance sheet, a winning product portfolio and the right size to match today’s market realities.”
The Congressional Oversight Panel was created as part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP. It is designed to provide an additional layer of oversight, beyond the Special Inspector General for the TARP and regular audits by the Government Accountability Office.
The panel’s report recommends that the Treasury Department consider placing its auto company holdings into an independent trust, to avoid any “conflicts of interest.”
The report also recommends the department perform a legal analysis of its decision to provide TARP funds to GM and Chrysler, their financing arms and many auto parts suppliers. Some critics say the law creating TARP didn’t allow for such funding.
The panel’s members include Rep. Jeb Hensarling, a Texas Republican, who dissented from the report. Hensarling said the auto companies should never have received funding and criticized the government for picking “winners and losers.”
Other agencies have also projected large losses on the loans and investments provided to the industry. The Congressional Budget Office estimated in June that taxpayers would lose about $40 billion of the first $55 billion in aid.
Click here for the full report from My Way News
